On 28 July, 10:49, James Harris wrote:

No new points here. I just thought I should copy this to uk.d-i-y as a
warning to anyone else who uses B&Q car parks. And presumably other
DIY stores and other businesses have such parking fines (displayed not
clearly enough).

To those on uk.d-i-y see uk.legal for the rest of the discussion.

I see there have been other queries in this newsgroup about "charges"
for overstaying one's welcome in a firm's car park so I'll try to
avoid going over old questions.

*--- Basic info ---
Sat 10 July 2010 - parked in B&Q car park for (according to the notice
I received in the post from ParkingEye) 2 hours 56 minutes. They
apparently have time limit of 2 hours 30 minutes. I didn't notice any
signs but presume there are some and that they are clearly displayed.

My whole time was spent in the B&Q store. I know that might make me
look rather sad [:-(] but I was looking for ideas as well as products.
I'd have been there longer if their cafe had had anything I wanted!
Anyway, the point is that I used their car park solely to use their
store.

I bought a few items and, according to the times on receipt and
parking charge notice, left the car park 4 minutes after paying for
them.
*--- End of basic info ---

My questions.

1. Have I entered into some form of contract with B&Q by using their
car park (to shop in their store)? The car park has no barriers. It's
just drive in and drive out. I hadn't even noticed any cameras.

2. ParkingEye ramp-up the charges: £50 if paid within 14 days (of them
sending the notice), then £80, then £110. Then they mention, "the
first of many additional charges will me made" if these payments are
not made. Is this allowable legally or is it just an attempt to panic
the vast majority of people who do not have legal experience into
paying up? I would have thought a fine should be a fixed amount and
people should at least be given longer to decide whether to accept the
fine or to take advice from a solicitor or Citizens' Advice.

3. I didn't get their first letter straight away as I was away for a
long weekend but I wrote to ParkingEye the day I opened their letter,
21 July. I explained I'd been only in the B&Q store, suggested they
check CCTV recordings, enclosed a copy of the receipt and said that if
they were not going to drop the charge they should reply quickly
enough to give me time to take advice before the charge increased.
I've had no reply but have had another warning that the charge is to
increase in 4 days (2 days from when the letter reached me, i.e.
today). This seems grossly unreasonable to me. From a legal point of
view would these timescales be considered reasonable?

4. Again on timescales I might have been on a summer holiday when the
first 14-day notice came through. Does ParkingEye's approach count as
harassment?

5. Finally, not a legal question per se but a practical one: what
points should I include in a complaint to the store manager and/or the
head office?

James

James Harris wrote:
On 28 July, 10:49, James Harris wrote:

No new points here. I just thought I should copy this to uk.d-i-y as a
warning to anyone else who uses B&Q car parks. And presumably other
DIY stores and other businesses have such parking fines (displayed not
clearly enough).

To those on uk.d-i-y see uk.legal for the rest of the discussion.


I visited a B&Q car park a few days ago. The warning signs were reasonably
conspicuous but I probably wouldn't have taken the trouble to read them if I
hadn't been aware of this discussion. Apart from a time limit (which I think
was 2 hours) there is also a rule about not returning within 4 hours.

A customer who complains about a charge days or weeks later and says "but I
was shopping in the store the whole time" is not likely to get much
sympathy, I shouldn't think. After all, that's what he's bound to say even
if he went to a different store or to a football match nearby.

"The Todal" wrote in message
...
James Harris wrote:
On 28 July, 10:49, James Harris wrote:

No new points here. I just thought I should copy this to uk.d-i-y as a
warning to anyone else who uses B&Q car parks. And presumably other
DIY stores and other businesses have such parking fines (displayed not
clearly enough).

To those on uk.d-i-y see uk.legal for the rest of the discussion.


I visited a B&Q car park a few days ago. The warning signs were reasonably
conspicuous but I probably wouldn't have taken the trouble to read them if
I hadn't been aware of this discussion. Apart from a time limit (which I
think was 2 hours) there is also a rule about not returning within 4
hours.

A customer who complains about a charge days or weeks later and says "but
I was shopping in the store the whole time" is not likely to get much
sympathy, I shouldn't think. After all, that's what he's bound to say even
if he went to a different store or to a football match nearby.

You're overlooking video evidence?

On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 03:32:49 -0700 (PDT), James Harris wrote:

On 28 July, 10:49, James Harris wrote:

No new points here. I just thought I should copy this to uk.d-i-y as a
warning to anyone else who uses B&Q car parks. And presumably other
DIY stores and other businesses have such parking fines (displayed not
clearly enough).

All these so-called fines should be ignored. Don't waste your time communicating with these scammers
Nothing will come of it except a few threatening letters.

See http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=46975 for further info,
and http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...html?t=2214803
for examples of the letters you are likely to receive before they give up.

In message , The Todal
writes
James Harris wrote:
On 28 July, 10:49, James Harris wrote:

No new points here. I just thought I should copy this to uk.d-i-y as a
warning to anyone else who uses B&Q car parks. And presumably other
DIY stores and other businesses have such parking fines (displayed not
clearly enough).

To those on uk.d-i-y see uk.legal for the rest of the discussion.


I visited a B&Q car park a few days ago. The warning signs were reasonably
conspicuous but I probably wouldn't have taken the trouble to read them if I
hadn't been aware of this discussion. Apart from a time limit (which I think
was 2 hours) there is also a rule about not returning within 4 hours.

A customer who complains about a charge days or weeks later and says "but I
was shopping in the store the whole time" is not likely to get much
sympathy, I shouldn't think. After all, that's what he's bound to say even
if he went to a different store or to a football match nearby.

There's a local 'retail park' with a carpark common to all the shops.
There's a PC World, a Marks & Spencer, an Argos, a Wickes, a Comet, a
large pet shop, a furniture shop, a burger joint and (one or two other
establishments. If you were doing some serious shopping, you could
easily spend most of the day there. I've got a feeling that the parking
time limit is 2 hours. Next time I visit, I suppose I'd better check.
--
Ian

In article ,
The Todal wrote:
I visited a B&Q car park a few days ago. The warning signs were
reasonably conspicuous but I probably wouldn't have taken the trouble
to read them if I hadn't been aware of this discussion. Apart from a
time limit (which I think was 2 hours) there is also a rule about not
returning within 4 hours.

Oh dear. I'll often visit a B&Q looking for something, then drive to the
Homebase nearby, to compare price, then back to the B&Q to buy. Or the
other way round. The stores are not 4 hours drive apart...

--
*Don't worry; it only seems kinky the first time.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
The Todal wrote:
I visited a B&Q car park a few days ago. The warning signs were
reasonably conspicuous but I probably wouldn't have taken the trouble
to read them if I hadn't been aware of this discussion. Apart from a
time limit (which I think was 2 hours) there is also a rule about not
returning within 4 hours.

Oh dear. I'll often visit a B&Q looking for something, then drive to the
Homebase nearby, to compare price, then back to the B&Q to buy. Or the
other way round. The stores are not 4 hours drive apart...

I haven't been aware of such 'no return' rules at such emporia. However,
one Morrisons I know of does charge you a £1 pay & display for a stay of
1.5 hours, and refunds the £1 with your purchases. However, it also says
'No return within 3(?) hours'. I suppose it's just too bad if you want
to nip back because you forgot to buy your fags!
--
Ian

On Aug 4, 11:50*am, "The Todal" wrote:
there is also a rule about not returning within 4 hours.

So I buy something, go home, find it does not fit, return & get
*fined*?

Oh, they better not leave any industrial plant around...

On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 07:30:54 -0700 (PDT), "js.b1" wrote:

On Aug 4, 11:50*am, "The Todal" wrote:
there is also a rule about not returning within 4 hours.

So I buy something, go home, find it does not fit, return & get
*fined*?

That's a good one. Or better if it was faulty. I'd love to see them try to
defend charging someone for exercising their statutory right to return faulty
goods!

Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'

On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:57:57 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
The Todal wrote:
I visited a B&Q car park a few days ago. The warning signs were
reasonably conspicuous but I probably wouldn't have taken the trouble
to read them if I hadn't been aware of this discussion. Apart from a
time limit (which I think was 2 hours) there is also a rule about not
returning within 4 hours.

Oh dear. I'll often visit a B&Q looking for something, then drive to the
Homebase nearby, to compare price, then back to the B&Q to buy. Or the
other way round. The stores are not 4 hours drive apart...

Right across the road from each other in fact, right?

In article , The Peeler
wrote:
On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:57:57 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
The Todal wrote:
I visited a B&Q car park a few days ago. The warning signs were
reasonably conspicuous but I probably wouldn't have taken the trouble
to read them if I hadn't been aware of this discussion. Apart from a
time limit (which I think was 2 hours) there is also a rule about not
returning within 4 hours.

Oh dear. I'll often visit a B&Q looking for something, then drive to the
Homebase nearby, to compare price, then back to the B&Q to buy. Or the
other way round. The stores are not 4 hours drive apart...

Right across the road from each other in fact, right?

;-)

But before anyone goes on about saving the planet by walking I'm always
going to buy something too bulky to carry...

--
*A journey of a thousand sites begins with a single click *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 4 Aug, 18:09, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article , The Peeler

wrote:
On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:57:57 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article ,
The Todal wrote:
I visited a B&Q car park a few days ago. The warning signs were
reasonably conspicuous but I probably wouldn't have taken the trouble
to read them if I hadn't been aware of this discussion. Apart from a
time limit (which I think was 2 hours) there is also a rule about not
returning within 4 hours.

Oh dear. I'll often visit a B&Q looking for something, then drive to the
Homebase nearby, to compare price, then back to the B&Q to buy. Or the
other way round. The stores are not 4 hours drive apart...
Right across the road from each other in fact, right?

;-)

But before anyone goes on about saving the planet by walking I'm always
going to buy something too bulky to carry...

mmm yeah yeah ;)
shurely one should do these "reccy trips" by bicycle, ideally with
lurid outer garments on?

Cheersh
Jim K

Read the following sites and follow the advice.

http://www.pne-online.net/forum/showthread.php?t=50077
http://www.abergavenny-chronicle-tod...6&showcomall=y
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...2247271&page=2

When in the past I've received such nastygrams I've replied
referring the appellants to

"The Reply Given in Arkell v Pressdram (1971)"

:::::::::::::::::
Solicitor (Goodman Derrick & Co.):
We act for Mr Arkell who is Retail Credit Manager of Granada TV
Rental Ltd. His attention has been drawn to an article appearing in
the issue of Private Eye dated 9th April 1971 on page 4. The
statements made about Mr Arkell are entirely untrue and clearly
highly defamatory. We are therefore instructed to require from you
immediately your proposals for dealing with the matter. Mr Arkell's
first concern is that there should be a full retraction at the
earliest possible date in Private Eye and he will also want his
costs paid. His attitude to damages will be governed by the nature
of your reply.

Private Eye:

We acknowledge your letter of 29th April referring to Mr J. Arkell.
We note that Mr Arkell's attitude to damages will be governed by the
nature of our reply and would therefore be grateful if you would
inform us what his attitude to damages would be, were he to learn
that the nature of our reply is as follows: **** off.

[No further reply] 

On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 10:48:00 -0400, Mike Ross
wrote:

On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 07:30:54 -0700 (PDT), "js.b1" wrote:

On Aug 4, 11:50*am, "The Todal" wrote:
there is also a rule about not returning within 4 hours.

So I buy something, go home, find it does not fit, return & get
*fined*?

That's a good one. Or better if it was faulty. I'd love to see them try to
defend charging someone for exercising their statutory right to return faulty
goods!


You have no statutory right to park for free or to disregard any
parking signs just because you are returning goods.

It would be bad publicity for them, but so are most of these cases.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Experience: a name everyone gives to his mistakes.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Alex Heney wrote:

You have no statutory right to park for free or to disregard any
parking signs just because you are returning goods.

No, but I think the sale of goods act says that the retailer must pay for
the cost of returning faulty goods, I imagine this could include the fees
you have to pay for using their car park.

--
Mike Clarke

"Mike Harrison" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 03:32:49 -0700 (PDT), James Harris
wrote:

On 28 July, 10:49, James Harris wrote:

No new points here. I just thought I should copy this to uk.d-i-y as a
warning to anyone else who uses B&Q car parks. And presumably other
DIY stores and other businesses have such parking fines (displayed not
clearly enough).

All these so-called fines should be ignored. Don't waste your time
communicating with these scammers
Nothing will come of it except a few threatening letters.

See http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=46975 for further info,
and http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...html?t=2214803
for examples of the letters you are likely to receive before they give
up.


IMO these companies are only one step above the 'car clampers' operating in
my area and throughout the rest of England. They are illegal in Scotland!
The only difference is that the clampers make it impossible to move your car
until you pay their extortionate fees while the more 'hi-tec' companies send
you bullying letters, threatening all sorts of penalties which they cannot
legally enforce. Both of these use the same scam of putting up notices
which most people don't even notice in the normal run of events. Take the
advice of previous posters and ignore them!

On 05/08/2010 01:09, Wesley wrote:
"Mike wrote in message
...
On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 03:32:49 -0700 (PDT), James Harris
wrote:

On 28 July, 10:49, James wrote:

No new points here. I just thought I should copy this to uk.d-i-y as a
warning to anyone else who uses B&Q car parks. And presumably other
DIY stores and other businesses have such parking fines (displayed not
clearly enough).

All these so-called fines should be ignored. Don't waste your time
communicating with these scammers
Nothing will come of it except a few threatening letters.

See http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=46975 for further info,
and http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...html?t=2214803
for examples of the letters you are likely to receive before they give
up.


IMO these companies are only one step above the 'car clampers' operating in
my area and throughout the rest of England. They are illegal in Scotland!
The only difference is that the clampers make it impossible to move your car
until you pay their extortionate fees while the more 'hi-tec' companies send
you bullying letters, threatening all sorts of penalties which they cannot
legally enforce. Both of these use the same scam of putting up notices
which most people don't even notice in the normal run of events. Take the
advice of previous posters and ignore them!


One imagines things might be changing. It wouldn't be the growth
industry it appears to be without some cases going their way. Or perhaps
the technology has become cheap enough to make it a viable business,
even if they only scare the odd punter into sending them money.

On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 10:03:14 +0100, stuart noble wrote:

On 05/08/2010 01:09, Wesley wrote:
"Mike wrote in message
...
On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 03:32:49 -0700 (PDT), James Harris
wrote:

On 28 July, 10:49, James wrote:

No new points here. I just thought I should copy this to uk.d-i-y as a
warning to anyone else who uses B&Q car parks. And presumably other
DIY stores and other businesses have such parking fines (displayed not
clearly enough).

All these so-called fines should be ignored. Don't waste your time
communicating with these scammers
Nothing will come of it except a few threatening letters.

See http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=46975 for further info,
and http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...html?t=2214803
for examples of the letters you are likely to receive before they give
up.


IMO these companies are only one step above the 'car clampers' operating in
my area and throughout the rest of England. They are illegal in Scotland!
The only difference is that the clampers make it impossible to move your car
until you pay their extortionate fees while the more 'hi-tec' companies send
you bullying letters, threatening all sorts of penalties which they cannot
legally enforce. Both of these use the same scam of putting up notices
which most people don't even notice in the normal run of events. Take the
advice of previous posters and ignore them!


One imagines things might be changing. It wouldn't be the growth
industry it appears to be without some cases going their way. Or perhaps
the technology has become cheap enough to make it a viable business,
even if they only scare the odd punter into sending them money.

I've noticed that ANPR is being increasingly used, so labour costs are minimal - They only need a
few percent hit rate of gullible mugs to pay up to make the scam viable.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Oh dear. I'll often visit a B&Q looking for something, then drive to the
Homebase nearby, to compare price, then back to the B&Q to buy.

You want to get one of they phones with t'internet on. Then you don't
need to traipse round the countryside to find that the price in front of
you is no more extortionate than any of the others.

Pete

In article ,
Pete Verdon d wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Oh dear. I'll often visit a B&Q looking for something, then drive to
the Homebase nearby, to compare price, then back to the B&Q to buy.

You want to get one of they phones with t'internet on. Then you don't
need to traipse round the countryside to find that the price in front of
you is no more extortionate than any of the others.

You reckon Homebase charge the same prices in all of their stores?
I've got news for you...

--
*When blondes have more fun, do they know it?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.