Equality act (BB not displayed) win against PPC |
Equality act (BB not displayed) win against PPC |
Fri, 26 Nov 2021 - 09:25
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,200 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
A BB holder was issued with a PCN just 83 seconds after parking despite showing the VCS attendant his BB but not displaying it while he read the signs.
https://www.itv.com/news/central/2021-11-23...just-83-seconds This post has been edited by The Rookie: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 - 09:26 -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Advertisement |
Fri, 26 Nov 2021 - 09:25
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Fri, 26 Nov 2021 - 09:35
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
Judge must have bin really upset with VCS if the report on costs is right.
If it is, fair play to him and a deserved kick in the wallet for VCS End of the day, it is not only about the BB, disabled or display. Reasonable time to read and digest contractual terms on the sign comes into it. So much wrong and does seem to typify the PPC industry |
|
|
Fri, 26 Nov 2021 - 10:46
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,200 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Total award was £1000 made up of costs and a GDPR/EA counter claim. (I've had direct contact since posting with the defendant in the case).
The BPA CoP contradicts itself of course as it gives a 5 minute grace for QUOTE The driver must have the chance to consider the Terms and Conditions before entering into the ‘parking contract’ with you But also says QUOTE Unauthorised motorists will not be entitled to the minimum time period of 5 minutes for a consideration period in spaces designated for specific users e.g Blue Badge holders Thus creating a de-facto 'forbidding' situation as their own CoP says that to rely on a contractual basis they must allow you time to agree the contract yet denies you that time under certain circumstances. -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Fri, 26 Nov 2021 - 12:06
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
Devil's advocate on the CoP discrepancy.
In a way it is understandable and even sensible. This is part of the parking area within Midland Way. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.9559969,-...6384!8i8192 Disabled bays seem clearly marked and right outside Subway, Greggs and Dominos. The sort of places where chancers will use an empty disabled bay rather then park legitimately and walk. Then claim CoP and 5 minutes grace to "read" the contract terms. If the bay is clearly marked, then displaying a BB (if held) should be second nature and for that part of any terms, does not need 5 minutes. Which is not defending VCS in the slightest, the moment it became clear that a BB was available and legitimately held, any parking charge should have been dropped..... but that makes them no money and is not their modus operandi |
|
|
Fri, 26 Nov 2021 - 13:07
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Which is not defending VCS in the slightest, the moment it became clear that a BB was available and legitimately held, any parking charge should have been dropped..... but that makes them no money and is not their modus operandi Well not on this occasion, as it made them -£1,000. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 26 Nov 2021 - 16:42
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,200 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Sorry, the EA is clear that you don’t need a BB to be entitled to use the disabled bays.
If everyone charged for doing so fought back hard they would actually start to comply with the law perhaps. -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Sun, 28 Nov 2021 - 22:53
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,306 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
Sorry, the EA is clear that you don’t need a BB to be entitled to use the disabled bays. No it doesn't. In fact it is the exact opposite. The Equality Act requires people to take reasonable adjustments so that disabled people are not discriminated against. It is not reasonable for a parking attendant to be psychic and know someone has a non-apparent disability if they don't display a blue badge. It is reasonable and arguably required to provide enforcement where spaces are regularly blocked by non-disabled people meaning disabled people cannot use them. Where VCS fell down was on the fact that it was reasonable for them to cancel the ticket once it was apparent the motorist was entitled to use the space. Honestly as someone who is disabled this "the Equality Act gives me the right to be a demanding muppet" is highly annoying Daily Mail fodder. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Nov 2021 - 23:13
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 7,235 Joined: 5 Jan 2007 From: England Member No.: 9,919 |
Total award was £1000 made up of costs and a GDPR/EA counter claim. (I've had direct contact since posting with the defendant in the case). The BPA CoP contradicts itself of course as it gives a 5 minute grace for QUOTE The driver must have the chance to consider the Terms and Conditions before entering into the ‘parking contract’ with you But also says QUOTE Unauthorised motorists will not be entitled to the minimum time period of 5 minutes for a consideration period in spaces designated for specific users e.g Blue Badge holders Thus creating a de-facto 'forbidding' situation as their own CoP says that to rely on a contractual basis they must allow you time to agree the contract yet denies you that time under certain circumstances. but surely being a blue badge holder then makes the driver authoritied |
|
|
Mon, 29 Nov 2021 - 15:21
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,200 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Sorry, the EA is clear that you don’t need a BB to be entitled to use the disabled bays. No it doesn't. In fact it is the exact opposite. The Equality Act requires people to take reasonable adjustments so that disabled people are not discriminated against. It is not reasonable for a parking attendant to be psychic and know someone has a non-apparent disability if they don't display a blue badge. It is reasonable and arguably required to provide enforcement where spaces are regularly blocked by non-disabled people meaning disabled people cannot use them. Where VCS fell down was on the fact that it was reasonable for them to cancel the ticket once it was apparent the motorist was entitled to use the space. Honestly as someone who is disabled this "the Equality Act gives me the right to be a demanding muppet" is highly annoying Daily Mail fodder. The parking attendant has no need to be psychic, the company should just cancel when they have the evidence someone with protected characteristics was in the car, a perfectly reasonable adjustment, as you then agree. Although in this instant case the attendant seemed to be fully aware and then decide to issue the ticket anyway, either an a-hole or badly trained or both. I have no issue charging those without an SC for parking, and don’t contribute to threads helping those people, and I didn’t say they should be allowed off so suggest you get a ladder….. I don’t think the EA gives them that right, and that wasn’t the case here, but under the EA VCS should both train its attendants properly AND/OR cancel as above. The judge with all the facts seems to agree with me. This post has been edited by The Rookie: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 - 16:08 -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Saturday, 30th March 2024 - 00:41 |