Latest news with #PCN
Daily Mirror
4 days ago
- Automotive
- Daily Mirror
Aldi, Asda, Sainsbury's and Morrisons 'age limit' rule for drivers
Parent and child bays are fitted in most supermarket car parks, but many don't display clear signs explaining who can and cannot use the prime spaces, and experts have issued a warning Motorists have been warned about a straightforward "age limit" regulation in supermarket car parks, which impacts major UK retailers such as Aldi, Asda, Sainsbury's and Morrisons. Parent and child spaces are installed in most supermarket car parks, providing additional room for families to navigate and pack their cars. These spots are typically positioned near the entrance, offering users convenient access to the store without lengthy walks. Nevertheless, the regulations are frequently unclear, with numerous shops failing to display obvious signage clarifying who is permitted to use these coveted spaces. It comes after UK drivers were warned over 'avoiding' road instead of having to follow new rule. Specialists are now cautioning that drivers could face penalties if they violate the lesser-known "age limit" regulation, reports the Express. Professionals at EMG Motor Group stated that the rules were "fairly simple" to grasp, with spaces only accessible to parents or guardians accompanying a child under 12 into the store. The threshold is established at 12 because this is when children no longer need car seats or restraints while in the passenger seat. While there is no strict legislation, motorists could face a substantial £100 penalty in the event of a disastrous conclusion to their shopping excursion. Specialists at EMG Motor Group clarified: "No, there is no law against parking in a parent and child parking space without a child under 12 with you, but you are risking a PCN (Parking Charge Notice), the same as if you incorrectly used a disabled parking bay." The reason behind the strict enforcement of parking rules in certain car parks, often leading to fines of up to £100, is that they are typically under private ownership, such as those belonging to supermarkets, which operate under their Accredited Trade Association (ATA) status. "This is because the car parks are usually owned privately, for example, by supermarkets, and so they enforce rules allowed by their Accredited Trade Association (ATA) status," they said. For motorists puzzled by the regulations of a specific car park, it's advisable to get clarity from the related store or venue to avoid the risk of receiving a hefty fine. The experts added: "If you're confused as to the rules in a particular car park, it's worth checking with the store or destination that you're parking at, so that you don't risk a fine, which could be up to £100, being slapped on your windscreen." Yet, ambiguity remains over whether pregnant women are entitled to use parent-child parking bays, which offer additional space. Officials at the RAC have clarified the intended use of these bays: "Parent and child bays are reserved for parents or guardians with one or more children under 12 years old." However, the eligibility of expectant mothers to utilise these spaces is not well-defined, prompting the RAC to suggest that the best course of action is to inquire directly with individual store managers about their specific policies. "It's unclear whether pregnant women can use the spaces and probably best to ask an individual store manager what their rules are," they shared.
Leader Live
25-07-2025
- Leader Live
Flintshire County Council warn residents about text scam
Flintshire County Council say they've received reports of a scam in which residents are being sent texts about Penalty Charge Notices. The local authority has confirmed that they do not contact people about parking fines over text, and instead it would be in the post. Residents have been warned not to click on the link in the texts, which reportedly leads to a fake website. MOST READ: Council issue list of roads set to be reverted to 30mph in Flintshire next month Why Wrexham chippy offering free chips to kids all summer has had to change rules Actor and author set to appear at event in Flintshire next week A spokesperson for Flintshire County Council said: "We have received reports of a scam where people are sent a text about paying for a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN), which takes you to a fake website. "We do NOT contact people by text about parking fines. "If you have received a PCN, you will receive all correspondence by post. If you are unsure, visit our website."
Daily Mail
12-07-2025
- Automotive
- Daily Mail
TONY HETHERINGTON: I was hit with £100 fine while queuing to leave a car park
Tony Hetherington is Financial Mail on Sunday's ace investigator, fighting readers corners, revealing the truth that lies behind closed doors and winning victories for those who have been left out-of-pocket. Find out how to contact him below. P.T writes: We attended an event at the theatre in Nottingham and parked in the Euro Car Parks facility on Upper Parliament Street. Instructions on the payment machine said to pay on exit. At the end of the evening I queued at the machine, typed in my car registration, and was asked to pay £7.20, which I did. Some days later, however, I received a Parking Charge Notice (PCN), demanding £100. Tony Hetherington replies: According to the PCN, your car spent three hours and 12 minutes in the car park, but your £7.20 only paid for three hours. The explanation was simple. When the theatre performance ended, lots of people wanted to exit the car park at the same time, resulting in a queue. And this was made worse because of roadworks that restricted the flow of traffic outside the car park. You appealed against the £100 penalty, but Euro Car Parks (ECP) rejected your explanation. However, its rejection letter is nonsense! It says: 'Signage is clear – drivers must purchase a valid pay and display ticket for the full duration of their stay.' Absurdly, ECP backed up its demand by sending you a photo of the signage – which does not say that drivers must purchase a valid pay and display ticket. It says: 'Payment to be made at the end of your stay. To pay at the pay machine, please enter full vehicle registration via the key pad.' In short, you obeyed the instructions. You did what you were told to do. You paid the fee that ECP's machine demanded. ECP then ignored its own instructions and demanded £100 from you for doing exactly what it told you to do. And when you appealed, it issued what must be an automated reply turning you down. I say it must be automated because it is hard to believe that any human being would consider your appeal and then believe that the rejection letter and photo you received made an atom of sense. ECP's rejection explained that it belongs to POPLA, the Parking on Private Land Appeals organisation used by car park operators. Sneakily, though, using POPLA is a gamble. ECP said it would settle for £60 if you paid up immediately, but if you went to POPLA and lost, then ECP demanded the whole £100. I am sure lots of drivers pay up to be sure of saving £40, rather than gamble on an industry organisation upholding an appeal, but you decided you would see whether POPLA saw sense where ECP could not. And you also contacted me. I then contacted ECP. I asked, what was the correct procedure in the circumstances you described? Should you have left your car blocking the exit queue and gone back to the machine? If so, how could you get the machine to recalculate the fee for the extra minutes? And, I asked, how many other motorists in the same queue were also penalised that night? As well as putting all these questions to ECP, I put them to Barry Tucker, the multi-millionaire lawyer who is the boss of the money machine that is ECP. The company's most recent accounts show a profit for 2023 of over £12 million, so it is no surprise that he owns an £8 million home in north London. Neither Mr Tucker nor ECP offered any comment, any explanation or any answers. But you suddenly received an email, telling you that ECP 'has reviewed your appeal and chosen to cancel the parking charge'. No one can reasonably object to paying a fee to park, but when parking firms set out to fleece the public they should be held to account instead of being paid off like some racketeer. Successive governments have promised a fairer deal for drivers, but none have delivered on their promises. Shame on them. EE is out of line J.G writes: I terminated my account with EE in July last year and returned all the kit – the broadband hub, TV box and mini hubs. But I continue to receive bills. Despite numerous calls and emails to the company, which remain unanswered, its latest demand is for £1,085. Tony Hetherington replies: You cancelled your EE account and not long after that you moved house. On June 3 EE sent an email, saying: 'You haven't paid your final broadband bill of £1,085 yet. Please arrange for this to be paid as soon as possible.' If you still did not pay, there would be late payment charges and you could find yourself listed as a bad payer in credit agency records. I asked EE to comment, and a day later a senior staff member contacted you. He told you that all charges were being scrapped, and a cheque for £45 was on its way to you to make up for the poor service. EE explained there had been a problem internally which meant that the charges had been applied by mistake.
AsiaOne
03-07-2025
- AsiaOne
Cyclists won't be unfairly targeted on pedestrian-only paths: Baey Yam Keng, Singapore News
Enforcement of the new pedestrian-only paths will be "reasonable", Minister of State for Transport Baey Yam Keng assured in a Facebook post on Wednesday (July 2). Beginning on Tuesday, cyclists as well as motorised and non-motorised personal mobility device (PMD) users will face severe penalties for using pedestrian-only paths. First-time offenders can be fined up to $2,000 or jailed for up to three months, or both. Following that, some cyclists have voiced their concerns, arguing that the penalties are only applied to cyclists and mobility device users while pedestrians can still traverse both pathways legally. On Facebook group Singapore Park Connector Network (PCN) Cyclist, some users have expressed their displeasure towards the new regulation. "Not going [to] fine pedestrians but only cyclists?" One user questioned. "Why not ask the pedestrian to jaywalk on the road, and cars must give way, if not fine the driver?" There were also concerns about how cyclists should navigate overtaking slower parties or pedestrians on the cycling path. Asked a user: "If I overtake them and ride on the pedestrian-only path, will I also get fined?" Another complained: "Pedestrians are allowed to walk on the cycling path (and are) only encouraged not to. If cyclists cycle on the pedestrian path, cyclists would be fined or jailed. Double standards!" Enforcement officers to consider 'ground situation': Baey In his Facebook post, Baey said he understands that cyclists are concerned about this change, and worried about being targeted and fined. "I want to reassure everyone that our enforcement approach will be reasonable, and enforcement officers will consider the ground situation," Baey stated, providing examples of extenuating circumstances such as cyclists veering off to avoid obstacles or overtaking slower path users. Explaining the rationale behind this regulation, he shared that pedestrians, especially the elderly and young children, are the most vulnerable users of these paths. And users of active mobility devices (including bicycles) travelling at faster speeds should always keep a lookout for users, particularly pedestrians who travel at lower speeds while using the paths. He stressed that the priority for enforcement is against errant cyclists who speed or ride in reckless manners that pose danger to others. The regulation, while important, is only one part of keeping users safe, Baey said. "We need to cultivate a culture of gracious path sharing, and protect the safety of the most vulnerable, especially with our ageing population." [[nid:718327]] khooyihang@
Glasgow Times
02-07-2025
- Glasgow Times
Glasgow City Council cyber incident still not resolved
Early in the morning of Thursday, June 19, the council's ICT supplier CGI discovered malicious activity on servers managed by a third-party supplier. The local authority said an investigation into the incident was continuing, alongside Police Scotland, the Scottish Cyber Coordination Centre (SC3) and the National Cyber Security Centre. They are still unable to say whether residents' data has been stolen, but have contacted the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) on the presumption that it has. No council financial systems have been affected in the attack, they said, and they were able to say that no details of bank accounts or credit/debit cards processed by those systems have been compromised. The affected systems include the council's planning portal, making online access to planning applications is unavailable. They are unable to take online payments for penalty charge notices, and drivers are also unable to submit online appeals. And citizens are unable to book revenue and benefits callback appointments online. READ MORE: Warning as data at risk as Glasgow City Council hit by cyber attack The cyber attack, and work to secure the council's systems in the wake of it, have also left people unable to access birth, death and marriage certificates; comments and complaints; FOI requests; planning enforcement; public procession applications; the Glasgow Film Office location library; the council's bin collection calendar; taxi complaint forms; the diary of council meetings; and forms to organise commercial bulk uplifts. Security specialists reviewing the incident have confirmed that it was not caused by email, and the council has urged residents to be particularly cautious about any contact claiming to be from them. Residents have also been targeted by scam messaging asking recipients to pay outstanding parking fines online. At this stage, the council can't totally discount that this scam involves stolen data but they are confident that it doesn't, with early indications suggesting it is far more likely to be the work of either opportunistic criminals, trying to exploit the disruption to normal online services, or a more widespread scam. The local authority has been reassuring customers that it doesn't use text messages to chase payment of parking fines and parking penalties can be paid by calling the number displayed on the PCN. READ MORE: Send us photos of your June newborn to appear in Glasgow Times A spokesman for the council said: 'We are aware of what appear to be scam text messages, directing recipients to pay outstanding parking fines online. 'The suspicious messages do not mention Glasgow, or any other location – however, we do know they have been received by at least some people in the city and elsewhere in the city region. 'The city council is currently being impacted by a cyber security incident, which has forced us to take some of our digital and online customer services offline – including the payment of parking penalties. 'We are investigating as a matter of urgency and details of the suspicious messages have been shared with police and national cyber security teams that are assisting us. 'We will never call, email or message you asking for banking details – and, if you do need to pay a parking penalty, you can do so by calling the number displayed on the PCN.' The council urges those contacted by someone claiming to have their data to contact Police Scotland on 101.
