I saw a post on here a while back, ref a parking fine from a private parking firm at a supermarket.
I was just wondering if there’s a update available?
I live down in Cambridge, my wife is disabled and a blue badge holder. She parked at Tesco in a disabled parking bay, and the parking firm are claiming she did not display a badge.
However the photo proof only shows the rear of the car.
Tesco say nowt to do with them and contact parking firm for more photos. But I have it in the back of my mind if I contact them then fine is being accepted and then enforceable?
Any advice? Any personal experience?
Many thanks for reading and any genuine advice appreciated!

If they have not taken a photo of the dash clearly not displaying the blue badge then they have not got evidence.

I would ask them to send you any other photos taken of the car. If they do not respond then ignore them. If they respond with no further photos then i would state they lack any proof and therefore you wont be paying the fine. If they respond with photos but this delay has increased the fine i would pay the original fine and state the original letter did not contain sufficient evidence

If the worst comes to the worst and the parking company take you to court, they have to prove you/ your wife, is in the wrong. It doesnt sound like they can do that.

Thanks Inchy, they were my thoughts too but was concerned by making contact that it’s a admission of fault?

They have to get a picture of the dashboard proving that there’s no blue badge or the badge is displayed incorrectly

All windows checked - some badge holders have it on their sun visor for example
Badge not shown
Driver not seen
Picture of the dash/front windscreen

That’s the minimum requirement

If they can’t prove there was no blue badge on display in the front of the vehicle upon request then it will get cancelled on appeal by anyone

This will get cancelled if you appeal.

Do not ignore though, I did that and finally got a court summons after 5 years of letters. Not good for your mental health when it’s rattling around in your thoughts when you can’t sleep.

[quote=GodIsADeeJay81 post_id=2220751 time=1700302920 user_id=4229
...If they can’t prove there was no blue badge on display in the front of the vehicle it will get cancelled on appeal...
[/quote]

This.

As a secondary heads-up - for anyone in a similar situation: Parking firms do NOT issue 'fines', they just like to imply that is what they are; what they actually issue are 'invoices'. In just the same way that it is the sellers responsibility to prove that the widget which bought online was delivered, rather than you to prove that it wasn't; it is the parking company's responsibility to prove that your car was parked illegally, not yours to prove that it wasn't.

Question. Did she display the badge?

Simple really you don't need to go around the houses to explain - the onus is on them to prove their case if they can't you don't have a case to answer.

Tom,

To answer your question, no contacting them is not an admission of guilt and in fact is encouraged as quickly as possible if you dispute that they have issues the ticket correctly.

I would write to them immediately, as your wife if she’s insured to drive the car else as yourself, stating that you are a blue badge holder (provide a photo) and that your re collection is that the blue badge was displayed correctly. Say that they have only provided a picture of the rear of the car and ask for similar photos from other angles of the car, specifically the dash.

Also ask for them to “stop the clock” in any early payment period they may have in their terms pending their provision of the evidence.

If they provide it, I’d pay asap the minimum amount and write it off as a lesson learned. If they don’t you can follow an appeal process and no evidence will = appeal successful. My wife once challenged one successfully.

beddie wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 18, 2023 12:22 pm

Question. Did she display the badge?

Doesn’t matter
To prove a contravention occurred, the parking firm must have proof that there was no blue badge on display, or if it was, it was displayed incorrectly

Without that proof, they can’t prove the contravention occurred or enforce the fine

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 18, 2023 1:02 pm

Doesn’t matter
To prove a contravention occurred, the parking firm must have proof that there was no blue badge on display, or if it was, it was displayed incorrectly

Without that proof, they can’t prove the contravention occurred or enforce the fine

I know that! I wanted to know if she’d actually displayed it.

beddie wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 18, 2023 1:06 pm

I know that! I wanted to know if she’d actually displayed it.

Probably not if they’ve given them a ticket

Inchy wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 18, 2023 10:01 am

If they have not taken a photo of the dash clearly not displaying the blue badge then they have not got evidence.

I would ask them to send you any other photos taken of the car. If they do not respond then ignore them. If they respond with no further photos then i would state they lack any proof and therefore you wont be paying the fine. If they respond with photos but this delay has increased the fine i would pay the original fine and state the original letter did not contain sufficient evidence

If the worst comes to the worst and the parking company take you to court, they have to prove you/ your wife, is in the wrong. It doesnt sound like they can do that.

Great post Inchy. Some very sound advice there.

Hi Beddie
From memory she believes she did display it. But they have not provided a pic to prove she didn’t.
In her defence when I’m with her in the car she always displays it. I posted on a site down here and the number of people who are saying similar thing, not just about disabled parking, but also being a few minutes over the time, tyre being on white lines of parking bay. Seems to me they are on the make

Many thanks to you all for your replies. I will let you know how it goes

TomtheClaret wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 18, 2023 1:55 pm

Hi Beddie
From memory she believes she did display it. But they have not provided a pic to prove she didn’t.
In her defence when I’m with her in the car she always displays it. I posted on a site down here and the number of people who are saying similar thing, not just about disabled parking, but also being a few minutes over the time, tyre being on white lines of parking bay. Seems to me they are on the make

Many thanks to you all for your replies. I will let you know how it goes

Yes I agree then. Ask them for a picture of the dash where you believe the disc was displayed. When you send that request ask for an acknowledgment or in the old days it was a letter by recorded delivery. If you don’t they can deny having ever received your request. Good luck.

What’s unusual about this is normally you have to show your disabled badge in a council car park, and you will get a ticket if you don’t. But usually in my experience you don’t have to show your badge in a supermarket car park. I’ve seen loads of people park in disabled bays without having a badge, and I’ve seen loads of people parking in parent and child places without children.

I assume this car park is part of a larger parking complex. They should have a notice up which is clearly states the rules. Usually for supermarkets it’s ‘3 hour limits’ and with pay and display it’s ‘you must clearly display your ticket etc’

But I’ve never seen one that states you must clearly display your disabled badge on a private or supermarket carpark.

It’s worth checking what the notice actually states. If it states you should clearly display your ticket on the dashboard, and you haven’t, and they have a picture of that, then you should pay the fine.
If it just states you should clearly display your badge, but doesn’t mention the dashboard, then you could argue you displayed it on the front driver seat (hopefully they haven’t taken a picture of the seat) because you leave your window slightly ajar to keep the car cool and didn’t want the wind to blow it off.


It’s worth mentioning if they have you bang to rights with the evidence it’s best just paying. Gone are the days where you could just ignore the problem. It can turn into a very expensive mistake. But if you’re not guilty, or you are guilty but they don’t have proof, contest it!

Horizon Parking? I'm currently corresponding with them about overstaying my welcome in the Tesco Car Park in Guildford. Parked up at 3pm on a Sunday and took the grand kids to the circus next door. Left at 615 over 2 hours after the store closed. Point being, the time restrictions apply even when the store is closed, or so they say. We'll see.

Mondsley wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 18, 2023 3:10 pm

Horizon Parking? I'm currently corresponding with them about overstaying my welcome in the Tesco Car Park in Guildford. Parked up at 3pm on a Sunday and took the grand kids to the circus next door. Left at 615 over 2 hours after the store closed. Point being, the time restrictions apply even when the store is closed, or so they say. We'll see.

I know that the advice now is not to ignore, but you’re pretty safe ignoring letters from Horizon Parking or any other pseudonyms they like to use.

They’re jokers and very, very rarely prosecute.

Yes it’s Horizon. And it’s only Tesco on site. Officially that is, people also us it for a couple of shops nearby. From what I can gather locally, a lot of this has to do with amount of folk parking here and going to the Abbey stadium half a mile away. But like I said earlier seem to be jumping on everything.

TomtheClaret wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 18, 2023 4:15 pm

Yes it’s Horizon. And it’s only Tesco on site. Officially that is, people also us it for a couple of shops nearby. From what I can gather locally, a lot of this has to do with amount of folk parking here and going to the Abbey stadium half a mile away. But like I said earlier seem to be jumping on everything.

Best of luck with your appeal. You've had some good advice from other posters. If they can't provide a picture proving the blue badge was not displayed you should be OK. And thanks Burnley FC. But as I am akin to Unlucky Alf from the Fast Show I'd be one of the rarely prosecuted!!

There’s a chap on Facebook (I know, I know… but apparently he is totally legit) who claims a guaranteed win for £15 against Horizon. The only caveat is that the notice can’t be issued under the guise of the Protection of Freedoms Act.

I’ve posted the link to the group below. Have a search for ‘Horizon’ and see what you think.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/fightyo ... 623766219/

Doubt they would have issued the parking fine if she had actually displayed it? Much as I sympathise with you it’s the same as us non disabled people who get tickets. You either gamble on not paying it or get the summons.

Many thanks to all for your replies! They have cancelled the fine. They provided a photo of front windscreen. There is a huge sun shadow across the photo, a automated camera was taking. But there is a darker outline against dashboard shape and rough size of the badge.
The fine was actually "Failure to display correctly" rather than "Failure to display" seems their technology could not pick up the badge itself because of the shadow!

TomtheClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 2:30 pm

Many thanks to all for your replies! They have cancelled the fine. They provided a photo of front windscreen. There is a huge sun shadow across the photo, a automated camera was taking. But there is a darker outline against dashboard shape and rough size of the badge.
The fine was actually "Failure to display correctly" rather than "Failure to display" seems their technology could not pick up the badge itself because of the shadow!

Alls well that ends well

TomtheClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 2:30 pm

Many thanks to all for your replies! They have cancelled the fine. They provided a photo of front windscreen. There is a huge sun shadow across the photo, a automated camera was taking. But there is a darker outline against dashboard shape and rough size of the badge.
The fine was actually "Failure to display correctly" rather than "Failure to display" seems their technology could not pick up the badge itself because of the shadow!

Good stuff! Nothing worse than having to give money away.

TomtheClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 2:30 pm

Many thanks to all for your replies! They have cancelled the fine. They provided a photo of front windscreen. There is a huge sun shadow across the photo, a automated camera was taking. But there is a darker outline against dashboard shape and rough size of the badge.
The fine was actually "Failure to display correctly" rather than "Failure to display" seems their technology could not pick up the badge itself because of the shadow!

There should be a compensation scheme for malicious and/or careless demands for money. If they had evidence that you had displayed the badge correctly but chose not to look at it or include it (and the failure to inclide that photo suggests it was deliberate) then they should be penalised.

TomtheClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 2:30 pm

Many thanks to all for your replies! They have cancelled the fine. They provided a photo of front windscreen. There is a huge sun shadow across the photo, a automated camera was taking. But there is a darker outline against dashboard shape and rough size of the badge.
The fine was actually "Failure to display correctly" rather than "Failure to display" seems their technology could not pick up the badge itself because of the shadow!

Good to hear.

Crazy they send these things out without even checking them!

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 4:49 pm

Good to hear.

Crazy they send these things out without even checking them!

Automated system etc sends it out

People are generally going to pay up without contesting it

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 4:51 pm

Automated system etc sends it out

People are generally going to pay up without contesting it

Which is completely wrong. Particularly in the case of disabled parking imo.

dsr wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 4:31 pm

There should be a compensation scheme for malicious and/or careless demands for money. If they had evidence that you had displayed the badge correctly but chose not to look at it or include it (and the failure to inclide that photo suggests it was deliberate) then they should be penalised.

It's an attempt to gain a financial advantage by menace. Now part of the wider interpretation of "fraud".

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 7:48 pm

Which is completely wrong. Particularly in the case of disabled parking imo.

Happens a lot

I’m in the process of appealing a ticket my missus got a few weeks ago
The local council aren’t giving me the information I’ve asked for so I’ll take it to the national appeal board and get it cancelled

timshorts wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 8:33 pm

It's an attempt to gain a financial advantage by menace. Now part of the wider interpretation of "fraud".

I was going to reply something similar. You really need to push that angle. My question to them would be at which point was there human intervention because if there was why was the photo at the front not sent in the first instance. I’d ensure the regulator gets chapter and verse. They should not be allowed to get away with this.