I think whether there is any legal weight in that depends on who "advertised" it and where. Signs by UKCPM at the car park you saw before you parked are a different matter from the hospital's out-of-date website or leaflets which don't take account of the switch from pay & display to ANPR.
And even if it was signs which misled you, there's the question what more and different information you saw before you went into the hospital that told you different since you patently did so without paying and displaying.
I know for a fact that parking tickets are often cancelled in our local hos pital when, say, someone has attended A&E in a hurry. I really don't believ e there are never extenuating circumstances
My friend at the hospital was able to take some photos of the payment machine and T&C's sign beside it and right across the middle in red (but the same size text as most of the rest) ...
"Parking must be paid within 15 mins of entry"
So, that potentially means they consider I hadn't made payment *at all* because I did so as I do at the other hospitals we visit and that was just as we leave. ;-(
Oh well, at least that explains *why*, now it's just a matter of seeing if I can get some discount on the 3 PCN's I got for making an assumption (and not checking the T&C's). ;-(
On the first visit with the new system we did actually pay when we got there because we didn't realise anything had changed since we were there last. When we didn't get a ticket, we asked at reception (because it was chucking it down and we didn't want to be late for our appointment) and that's when he mentioned the 'new system' and there being no ticket given.
I think I asked if you could therefore pay at any time before you leave (as per the other hospitals we use) and I believe he said 'I think so'.
Ho hum ... you live and learn ... ;-(
So, the last thought is do you think there would be any discount as it was obvious I had made a mistake (3 times) and won't ever do so again. There was *never* the intention not to pay (as I did, in all three cases), all be it after their instructions suggested etc?
Whist I understand 'it's the rules' etc ... I wonder *why* they insist payment is made within 15 minutes? I mean, the ANPR has your entrance and exit times and so as long as you pay the outstanding fee *before* you exit ... (as you do for fuel and most food).
Happened to a fiend when his daughter borrowed his car and of course being in a hurry put in her own car reg. He was able to get the fine rescinded but of course he did know the exact number for them to check.
Sorry, I've no knowledge of the company. And your guess based on the sector's reputation is as good as mine. But I think you stand a better chance if you can combine it with another argument.
The only slight chance I can see is if the signs were not sufficiently clear about the need to pay in advance. I say that as "pay and register" alone doesn't tell users *when* they have to do so. It covers also systems where users register for an account and can then pay in advance, or when leaving, or later that day. But I've no idea if a large firm like CPM is likely to have made a mistake on such a basic point.
I suspect they would say it's because people are more likely to forget to pay when leaving after medical procedures, long waits, upsetting news etc. And argue that if people then pay more than they would for time actually used that is a minor, incidental effect;)
Ahah. How clear was that warning as you left the carpark on foot?
We ran into one of those in Oxford park & ride where out of three payment machines only one was actually working with a huge queue. One of those nasty ones where you have to type in the registration number so very slow. It took more than fifteen minutes to buy the parking ticket!
Fortunately there was a paper receipt and we photographed the huge queue waiting and the defunct machines. Parking company backed down.
Worth trying the argument that the signage does not clearly warn motorists that they *MUST* pay within the first 15 minutes. I reckon that clause is completely unreasonable if the carpark is ANPR based and you pay before you leave the controlled area. If it was still a pay and display on dashboard ticket system then it would make sense.
Barrier failure can be a serious nuisance if you go in on a magic pass and cannot exit on it at the end because the "out" barrier is broken.
The carpark still believes you are inside and you end up with daft situations next morning where the carpark is physically half empty but "full" according to the entry system barrier lockout. I expect they lose a lot of the magic parking tokens that way. Along with the lifts they seem to be prone to breaking down at long weekends.
It also means you can't get back in without taking yet another carpark token since the system thinks you are still inside.
We jogged from the car parking area (because it was raining the first time) straight at the payment machine and was therefore was already past the sign (albeit that the sign was beside and to the right of the payment machine and we then went left). The car park is right in front of the main entrance. The guy on reception didn't counter my thought that *because* it was now ANPR (and therefore no Traffic Wardens), it should be ok to pay at any time before you leave (typically 'as' you leave'), just as we do at other hospitals.
Only right etc.
Unfortunately I would say it does, but in and amongst all the other blurb that doesn't really need reading (like you must pay, that you should park between the lines and in a proper bay yada yada).
TBH, I don't think I've ever read any of these T&C's (so my fault etc) because outside the obvious, there really shouldn't be any need to, outside knowing it is a 'Pay and Display' or whatever.
Like, if you get a ticket (to park) on it it says on the ticket what you are supposed to do with it (display it on the inside of the windscreen or take it with you to validate as you leave etc etc).
At the other hospital we use more regularly you drive in and park. You take your appointment and as you leave, outside the car park there is a machine and it invites you to enter your registration and when you do, it tells you what you owe. Very easy, very reasonable.
That would be my plea now, *why* is it like that and is it reasonable, given it *could* easily be 'Pay for the duration of your stay before you leave' (or even up to 24hrs later on some ANPR hospital car parks).
PALS at the Hospital has now replied to my email, suggesting I contact UKCPM directly and attached a scan of a leaflet they (apparently) have re the new parking rules and it states:
'We operate an ANPR system which will identify any vehicle as it enters and leaves the hospital car park, the driver of the vehicle has up to 15 mins to pay for parking which must cover the duration of the stay. The ANPR cameras will identify anyone who has not paid sufficiently to cover their stay.'
So that opens up another question and potential issue in that it would read to me like you aren't allowed to 'top up' payment if your stay turns out longer than you expected?
formatting link
So, this would mean people would tend to overpay for their stay and so their practices frighten people into paying more than they should?
I'm not sure who publishes said leaflet as it could be the Hospital and they may not have defined it properly?
It does say you can pay by phone with 'Just Park' and that 'RingGo is no longer operational on that site'.
It would, and I wouldn't be looking at £180's worth of PCN. ;-(
Cheers, T i m
p.s. It seems there are all sorts of other 'traps' that can catch out the unwary (and often when their minds are on something else (more important)):
As I have since mentioned elsewhere, I think they would be considered so, if you were looking for and to read them. ;-(
I'm not sure if they are a big firm as such from stuff I've found online (but that might be wrong or out of date of course).
Ok, that makes sense ... but it's often the same at the beginning re getting 'signed in' for an appointment (where you then may have a wait and could go and pay for your parking).
This is from the leaflet that PALS sent me:
'We operate an ANPR system which will identify any vehicle as it enters and leaves the hospital car park, the driver of the vehicle has up to 15 mins to pay for parking which must cover the duration of the stay. The ANPR cameras will identify anyone who has not paid sufficiently to cover their stay.'
So, it doesn't look like you are able to top up either and so *would* be forced into overestimating the duration of your stay and paying more?
As opposed to forcing people to always overpay since that can't be sure how long they will be waiting in the hospital.
Worth asking in u.l.moderated if these payment terms inside 15 minutes could be considered to be in breach of the unfair contract terms act in an ANPR carpark. It is clearly designed to force people to overpay and penalise those who do not pay within 15 minutes of entering the carpark.
I've had a run-in myself with the 15 minute to buy a ticket rule in a busy Oxford park & ride carpark with 2 out of 3 ticket machines broken.
It makes some sense to require ticket purchase within 15 minutes in a pay and display carpark, but it makes no sense at all in an ANPR monitored system where no physical ticket is issued.
Clearly though you did breach their T&C's so you could still try pointing out to them that you did pay before leaving and so they were not deprived of any revenue due to them.
If there are no notices when leaving the carpark to the effect of "have you paid (and not displayed)" then I think you might stand a chance.
Failing that I reckon so long as you are sure you really did pay before leaving then involving as many big guns as you can find (local MP, PALS etc) and making a huge stink about it is your last resort.
A tax on hospital visits going to a private car parking company will generate a lot of bad headlines if you play your cards right.
And what are you supposed to do if I read the guidance correctly and it turns out you stay there longer than even you over-estimated? Do you have to drive out and in again to reset their system? What if you were driven there by a learner on L plates and are now out cold somewhere?
Ok, that may be more up their street as I don't think I got any replies to my first question (it might have been too vague etc).
So it would appear.
Quite, and for no technical reason that I can think of.
Quite.
This is when we come down to principals / 'the sprit' versus 'the law / rules'.
I had no intention of not paying (even if I thought I could get away with it).
I did pay on all 3 occasions (although one I overstayed by 60 seconds .. and would happily pay the extra £2 for the extra hour if requested, plus even a small 'handling charge').
I don't consider the 'fine' of £60-100 (x 3 potentially) 'appropriate or proportional' to the 'offence' I committed. The issue being that I did pay and before I left the site but simply didn't do so within their (potentially arbitrary) conditions. What if they had the maximum time to pay set to 30 minutes and then I would have one less PCN but had done the exact same thing? Reading the leaflet again it may be mixed up within 'The grace period':
"Visitors have a 15 minute grace period, this allows them to drop off passengers or alternatively pay a minimum fee of 1 hour."
So, if you haven't left the car park before the 15 minutes are up OR paid you are deemed to be staying and not paying. There is no technical reason I can think of that would mean those two scenarios would need to be merged.
Start Trigger on entry. (Note time and take photo) Trigger on exit. (Note time and take photo) Did they leave within 15 minutes? Yes. No charge or PCN. Goto end. Did they pay in full before they left. Yes. No PCN, Goto end. No. Issue PCN. End
And I'm only a hardware tech, not a programmer. ;-)
Because that would give you the thought that that was an option Martin?
Then it comes down to considering the time and effort involved versus just paying ... ;-(
True ... just I don't normally play cards ... ;-)
As I replied to PALS earlier, I would be happy(er) to take the smack on the wrist if the money was going to the Hospital (and I might still suggest some changes to their system, trying to keep it real etc) but I really do resent giving such cash to someone who most might consider weren't playing ball.
Their role is to rake the responsibility of the whole parking management thing off of the hospital (no issues with that) but to do so that is no more draconian than necessary to be able to apply said management fairly and reasonably.
Being able to pay as you leave is far more pertinent (or even after you leave and within 24 hours say) is far more appropriate to managing that sort of car park than what they are doing right now.
Especially so if there is no provision to 'top up' a payment because circumstances outside your control or reasonable guesstimation.
Like, my wife's next procedure requires 'About 2 hours'. So, if we allow even 1 hour to get to the right place and back (and put 3 hours on the meter) and it does take the two hours, what if they are running
90 minutes late?
Do you load the meter till closing time, just in case?
However, I've used the multi-story car park at Queens Hospital in Romford on numerous occasions and the 'FULL' warnings on the entry barriers do seem to accurately represent the capacity of the car park when you eventually get inside but the Lincoln one is a very large open air affair and, unless the message come up on the barrier machines themselves, there is no trace of 'FULL' warning signs.
I've only used that car park four times and that is the second time the barrier has been open - the first time there wasn't even anybody working on it!
I've still got the tickets in the car but, of course, they have now both been long expired so it would be no use going back to re-insert them to restore the status quo!
Many years ago, a friend of mine told me that, as a teenager, he used to go down to the local multi-storey and have fund waving a dustbin lid over the ground in front of the IN barrier. After a while, the car park 'filled up'.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.