Free Traffic Legal Advice

General discussion => The Flame Pit => Topic started by: unzippy on January 30, 2025, 03:39:01 pm

Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: andy_foster on February 05, 2025, 06:26:57 pm
There is a limit to how much utter bollox I can tolerate in a pointless thread to rant about a hypothetical issue that may or may not arise. That was exceeded at least a page ago.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: prophet01 on February 05, 2025, 06:14:26 pm
A fact is a fact.

The arguement wouldn't be witha judge in the first instance, it would be with the company who might just capitulate.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: DWMB2 on February 05, 2025, 05:57:32 pm
Trying to argue to a judge that you don't owe any money because you didn't breach the "terms" of parking, on the basis that the sign only mentioned "conditions" would certainly be an optimistic* strategy.

*other words may be more suitable, but may not pass the forum's strong language filter.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: prophet01 on February 05, 2025, 05:47:46 pm
The sign specifies three "conditions" of parking.

It then goes on to state the penalty for breaching the "terms" of parking.

The sign does not specify any "terms" of parking.

Suficient ambiguity to argue any attempted penalty imposition for failing to comply with unspecified "terms"

The phrase "Terms & Conditions" springs to mind.

Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: NewJudge on February 04, 2025, 05:43:57 pm
The sign says "Customer Parking Only".

To be a customer I'm sure you agree that you need to enter the shop as a minimum.

So, enter the shop and buy something if you want to. If they haven't got what you want, or you don't see anything you fancy, or you've just gone in for five minutes to get out of the cold (in which case your status as a customer could be challenged but I doubt anyone will bother), and you cannot enter your VRM because you haven't got a receipt, see a member of staff and I'm sure they will help you out. Either that or pick up one of the many receipts that will be lying on the floor by the self-serve checkouts (some retailers provide a bin to put them in so you might be able to take one from there).

The parking conditions make no requirement to make a purchase. You have assumed that you must but you don't. Lidl's will make arrangements for you to enter your VRM if you are unable to.

Job Done!  8)

PS - I would argue that the parking is free even if you have to make a purchase. Most Sainsbury's work on that principle. You pay to park (maximum 2 hours) and get a refund as you checkout (Minimum £5 spend in my local branch). You have to spend a fiver, but when you do the parking is free.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: mickR on February 04, 2025, 04:28:18 pm
Quote from: unzippy on February 04, 2025, 09:04:56 am
Quote from: mickR on February 03, 2025, 09:33:04 pm
Quote from: unzippy on February 03, 2025, 08:09:39 pm
Quote from: mickR on February 02, 2025, 10:05:57 pm

and what did the store manager say when you queried it with them?
you did didn't you?

Dunno if it was the store manager but the person I asked said that they had a 10m in grace period before being charged.  I replied that the sign said there was a 90 minute period before being charged.  ;D
NO. ... about your issue with having to provide a receipt to enter your VRM.

Shrugged and looked blank.  So I went and bought a pint of milk so that I could get my 'Free Parking'.
so what did you pay for?
the milk or the parking?
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: stamfordman on February 04, 2025, 04:03:33 pm
Who makes up the rules as they go along?

(https://i.ibb.co/qFRd8wSp/free.webp)
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: baroudeur on February 04, 2025, 11:29:32 am
Quote from: DWMB2 on February 04, 2025, 09:33:56 am

I'm conscious we're now 32 replies in, and it's still not clear whether the shop are happy to provide a receipt to use the terminal for people who visit without making a purchase - if they are, much of this debate would probably be moot.

As a Lidl customer in many of their stores my experience is that if one does not make a purchase for any reason the cashier will provide a "receipt" to use at the terminal to log the vehicle registration.  Usually there are many receipts around the terminals which can be used if no is purchase made.

The purpose of using these "registration" terminals is to discourage parking by those who do not use the store. At my local Lidl it is common to see people park and then leave the premises to shop elsewhere then return and enter Lidls presumably to purchase or use the terminal.  Lidl seem to tolerate this.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: Southpaw82 on February 04, 2025, 10:10:31 am
Quote from: unzippy on February 04, 2025, 09:00:25 am
What's that got to do with the price of fish?

Lots. Maybe answer questions instead of gobbing off at people because you perceive it as not fitting your agenda.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: DWMB2 on February 04, 2025, 09:33:56 am
Quote
What's that got to do with the price of fish?
His question would appear to be hypothetical, he's not suggesting you've got a ticket.

One of your apparent issues with the set up here is that you believe the free parking is not 'free' if you have to make a purchase:

Quote from: unzippy on February 02, 2025, 09:57:57 pm
The point I'm trying to make is that it's not free if you need to purchase something

With that in mind, Southpaw82's question seems entirely relevant - in the situation you describe, would a driver have been charged for parking when making a purchase?

I'm conscious we're now 32 replies in, and it's still not clear whether the shop are happy to provide a receipt to use the terminal for people who visit without making a purchase - if they are, much of this debate would probably be moot.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: unzippy on February 04, 2025, 09:04:56 am
Quote from: mickR on February 03, 2025, 09:33:04 pm
Quote from: unzippy on February 03, 2025, 08:09:39 pm
Quote from: mickR on February 02, 2025, 10:05:57 pm

and what did the store manager say when you queried it with them?
you did didn't you?

Dunno if it was the store manager but the person I asked said that they had a 10m in grace period before being charged.  I replied that the sign said there was a 90 minute period before being charged.  ;D
NO. ... about your issue with having to provide a receipt to enter your VRM.

Shrugged and looked blank.  So I went and bought a pint of milk so that I could get my 'Free Parking'.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: unzippy on February 04, 2025, 09:00:25 am
Quote from: Southpaw82 on February 03, 2025, 10:12:05 pm
Quote from: unzippy on February 03, 2025, 08:13:48 pm
Quote from: Southpaw82 on February 02, 2025, 10:00:28 pm
Free parking (in that there is no charge for parking) provided certain other conditions are met isn’t necessarily incorrect. The sign has to be read in context.

And when one of those 'conditions' involves spending money, so that you to be allowed to park without incurring a charge?

Have you been charged for the parking?

What's that got to do with the price of fish?

I'm asking about the validity of the lack of info in the signage, not help with a ticket.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: Southpaw82 on February 03, 2025, 10:12:05 pm
Quote from: unzippy on February 03, 2025, 08:13:48 pm
Quote from: Southpaw82 on February 02, 2025, 10:00:28 pm
Free parking (in that there is no charge for parking) provided certain other conditions are met isn’t necessarily incorrect. The sign has to be read in context.

And when one of those 'conditions' involves spending money, so that you to be allowed to park without incurring a charge?

Have you been charged for the parking?
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: mickR on February 03, 2025, 09:33:04 pm
Quote from: unzippy on February 03, 2025, 08:09:39 pm
Quote from: mickR on February 02, 2025, 10:05:57 pm

and what did the store manager say when you queried it with them?
you did didn't you?

Dunno if it was the store manager but the person I asked said that they had a 10m in grace period before being charged.  I replied that the sign said there was a 90 minute period before being charged.  ;D
NO. ... about your issue with having to provide a receipt to enter your VRM.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: unzippy on February 03, 2025, 08:13:48 pm
Quote from: Southpaw82 on February 02, 2025, 10:00:28 pm
Free parking (in that there is no charge for parking) provided certain other conditions are met isn’t necessarily incorrect. The sign has to be read in context.

And when one of those 'conditions' involves spending money, so that you to be allowed to park without incurring a charge?
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: unzippy on February 03, 2025, 08:09:39 pm
Quote from: mickR on February 02, 2025, 10:05:57 pm

and what did the store manager say when you queried it with them?
you did didn't you?

Dunno if it was the store manager but the person I asked said that they had a 10m in grace period before being charged.  I replied that the sign said there was a 90 minute period before being charged.   ;D
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: mickR on February 02, 2025, 10:05:57 pm
Quote from: unzippy on February 02, 2025, 09:57:57 pm
Quote from: mickR on February 02, 2025, 05:46:00 pm

it says you must enter your reg at the terminal to receive 90mins of free parking"


The point I'm trying to make is that it's not free if you need to purchase something in order to get a receipt so that you can enter your reg.

This is free parking as it doesn't require money to be spent:

and what did the store manager say when you queried it with them?
you did didn't you?
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: Southpaw82 on February 02, 2025, 10:00:28 pm
Free parking (in that there is no charge for parking) provided certain other conditions are met isn’t necessarily incorrect. The sign has to be read in context.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: unzippy on February 02, 2025, 09:57:57 pm
Quote from: mickR on February 02, 2025, 05:46:00 pm

it says you must enter your reg at the terminal to receive 90mins of free parking"


The point I'm trying to make is that it's not free if you need to purchase something in order to get a receipt so that you can enter your reg.

This is free parking as it doesn't require money to be spent:

Quote from: roythebus on January 30, 2025, 08:46:15 pm
At my local Lidl in Ashford (Kent, for the sake of clarity, the other Ashford is in surrey), a customer can either use a scanned receipt and enter the VRM or just enter the VRM[/i].
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: andy_foster on February 02, 2025, 06:28:00 pm
Capitalisation, other than at the beginning of sentences, or for proper nouns (or other such exceptions that might exist) generally either denotes a term of art, or illiteracy.

Posting in ALL CAPS, or italics, bold or underlining creates emphasis.

If the sign advertised "FREE PARKING" or even the more legible "Free Parking" as a stand-alone statement in big bold letters at the top of the sign, it would be hard[er] to argue that it only applied to paying customers.

There will almost certainly be case law that clarifies who is and is not a customer, and under consumer law, ignoring (or reflecting) the general rule of contra proferentem, ambiguity is to be determined in favour of the consumer.

As regards the claim that capitalisation does not change the meaning of words in English, as claimed by one of our more prolific sh*t -posters, other than compliance with the rules of grammar, perhaps he could tell us whether it matters whether the word "capitonym" is spelled with a capital "C" or a lower case "c". Not that I was questioning the meaning, but the implied emphasis.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: mickR on February 02, 2025, 05:46:00 pm
but as Andy correctly says...it doesn't just state "free parking"
it says you must enter your reg at the terminal to receive 90mins of free parking"
you cannot select the words from a sentence that suits your narrative.
the sign also says "£90" are you saying you can get the money?
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: unzippy on February 02, 2025, 05:02:36 pm
Quote from: andy_foster on February 01, 2025, 03:02:10 pm
Yes, I missed those words, but the point remains. The sign shown does not "state 'Free Parking'". It states, amongst other things, that customers must enter their reg number to receive free parking.

"Free Parking" with capitalised initial letters would tend to emphasise that parking was offered free of charge or condition. Particularly if it was a stand-alone statement.

Really?

"Free Parking" means you can park without coughing up any money, whereas "free parking" you might have to pay for it?
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: stamfordman on February 01, 2025, 06:35:56 pm
In such situations I tend to use my loaf rather than buying one.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: mickR on February 01, 2025, 03:18:30 pm
I'm sure some will think there may be an argument around the "customer" aspect, as it doesn't specify of whom. 
I'm a customer of Stacey's erotic massage Sainsbury's (bloody predictive text)
I'm sure a judge would say I've seen you there it's ovious the sign meant at the site it's placed.
if entering vrm at the terminal is a contion of free parking, is it necessary to add receipt required?
you could buy something then return it for a refund and obtain a receipt without paying anything.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: andy_foster on February 01, 2025, 03:02:10 pm
Yes, I missed those words, but the point remains. The sign shown does not "state 'Free Parking'". It states, amongst other things, that customers must enter their reg number to receive free parking.

"Free Parking" with capitalised initial letters would tend to emphasise that parking was offered free of charge or condition. Particularly if it was a stand-alone statement.

Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: DWMB2 on January 31, 2025, 11:09:06 pm
Quote
There's absolutely no need to be entering reg numbers
The VRM terminal system is presumably an attempt to enforce the 'customer parking only' part of their set up.

I realise this seems to still be a hypothetical set up, but if your dad's penchant for a middle aisle bargain sees him receive a PCN, anecdotally Lidl can be quite good at intervening and cancelling charges for their customers.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: unzippy on January 31, 2025, 10:26:08 pm
Quote from: andy_foster on January 30, 2025, 07:18:42 pm
I'm offended by people who start random threads to express their offence at signage stating "Free Parking" and then post an image of the offending sign which does not contain those words.


Does this help?


(https://i.imgur.com/HauA0AT.jpeg)
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: unzippy on January 31, 2025, 10:19:51 pm
Quote from: roythebus on January 30, 2025, 08:46:15 pm
At my local Lidl in Ashford (Kent, for the sake of clarity, the other Ashford is in surrey), a customer can either use a scanned receipt and enter the VRM or just enter the VRM.

That's my point.  I guess I have no issue with them having the system (well I do actually - technically speaking the ANPR cameras are clocking the cars in and out, they know perfectly well who overstayed the 'Free Parking' time limit.  There's absolutely no need to be entering reg numbers) it's the requirement to spend money in order to enter your reg that gets up my nose.

According the staff member I spoke to about it there's a 10 min grace period, also not mentioned in the signage.  However that wasn't useful in this instance as that's not long enough for my 74 year old Dad to enter the store and check out the middle aisle delights.

Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: roythebus on January 30, 2025, 08:46:15 pm
At my local Lidl in Ashford (Kent, for the sake of clarity, the other Ashford is in surrey), a customer can either use a scanned receipt and enter the VRM or just enter the VRM. The signage is confusing as there's a leisure centre on the same block which allows up to 2 hours free parking if using the leisure centre by entering the VRM on the screen in reception. Lidl, which shares the same car park, allows 90 minutes. so if I go to the osteo in the leisure centre then shopping in Lidle, can I park for free for three and a half hours?

Just remember, in any later correspondence never admit to being the driver.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: Dave Green on January 30, 2025, 08:25:06 pm
Quote from: andy_foster on January 30, 2025, 07:18:42 pm
I'm offended by people who start random threads to express their offence at signage stating "Free Parking" and then post an image of the offending sign which does not contain those words.

Does not contain those words?

"You must enter your vehicle registration number using the terminal in store to receive 90 minutes free parking"
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: Dave Green on January 30, 2025, 08:22:05 pm
Quote from: b789 on January 30, 2025, 06:53:18 pm
Since the sign does not state that a purchase is required to use the VRM terminal, the "free parking" offer appears to be unconditional—at least as per the written terms on the sign.
But what the sign does state at the top is "Customer parking only" and as the definition of a customer when using the term as relating to a shop is:
a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business.
or:
one that purchases a commodity or service
it stands to reason that you must buy something when wishing to avail yourself of the free parking.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: andy_foster on January 30, 2025, 07:18:42 pm
I'm offended by people who start random threads to express their offence at signage stating "Free Parking" and then post an image of the offending sign which does not contain those words.

Also, if there is a contractual offer of the right to park in return for entering your VRM, by necessary implication the offeror promises to provide the facility to enter your VRM. I would suggest that this is not frustration (albeit both this thread and the potential issue are frustrating) as this is within the offeror's (of his agent's or principal's) control.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: b789 on January 30, 2025, 06:53:18 pm
Given what we do know, based solely on the sign, the conditions and the scenario can be consolidated as follows:

1. What the Sign States:

• The sign explicitly states that the driver must input their vehicle registration number (VRM) in a terminal inside the store to receive free parking during store trading hours.

• Outside of store trading hours, the sign allows free parking for the same 90-minute period without requiring VRM entry, presumably because the terminal is inaccessible.

2. No Mention of a Purchase Requirement:

• Since the sign does not state that a purchase is required to use the VRM terminal, the "free parking" offer appears to be unconditional—at least as per the written terms on the sign.

• If, in practice, the terminal requires a receipt to validate parking, this would contradict the sign and create ambiguity, potentially rendering the parking terms unenforceable if challenged.

3. Potential Practical Issues:

• If a driver enters the store intending to comply by entering their VRM but finds that the terminal requires a purchase receipt, they would face an unclear situation. Without prior knowledge of this hidden condition, the driver could inadvertently breach the terms.

• Similarly, if the driver is unable to use the terminal due to no purchases (e.g., items out of stock or no desire to buy anything), the driver could be unfairly penalised despite acting in good faith.

4. Equal Free Parking Outside Store Hours:

• The allowance of 90 minutes of free parking outside store hours, without any VRM entry requirement, highlights the inconsistency in enforcing the VRM entry during trading hours. If parking is offered unconditionally outside trading hours, requiring VRM input during trading hours could be seen as an unnecessary and potentially arbitrary restriction.

Conclusion:

• The sign itself does not explicitly require a purchase, so the offer of "free parking" appears valid on the face of it.

• However, if the store in practice requires a receipt to access the VRM terminal, it creates an unwritten condition that contradicts the sign, making the parking terms unclear and unenforceable.

• Lidl and ParkingEye would have to clarify this ambiguity, either by updating the sign to explicitly mention receipt validation or ensuring that VRM entry is accessible without a purchase. Clear communication is essential if the sign is intended to form a contract with the driver.





Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: DWMB2 on January 30, 2025, 06:33:58 pm
I think in such situations there would be all sorts of arguments one could deploy to fight the charge, but on a purely practical level it'd be a bit of a ridiculous state of affairs if one was issued in such a circumstance and surely wouldn't be particularly good for Lidl's business.

Of course this is all hypothetical, although it is the Flame Pit.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: Boomer on January 30, 2025, 06:22:07 pm
The sign (contract) says that to park (for free) you "must enter your vehicle registration using the terminal in store". No mention of receipts, or how you qualify as a "customer".
If they prevent you from entering your vehicle registration because you don't have a receipt, isn't that frustration of contract or something?
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: DWMB2 on January 30, 2025, 06:19:19 pm
Although the requirement to purchase something does bring up an interesting thought - if you turn up in good faith to buy a loaf of bread, as per Dave's example, but arrive to find they have run out, would the store give you a receipt to use the parking terminal, or would you essentially be faced with the choice of either buying something you didn't want vs receiving a £100 parking charge and having to fight your case with ParkingEye?
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: Dave Green on January 30, 2025, 06:08:06 pm
Quote from: unzippy on January 30, 2025, 03:39:01 pm
In order to get a receipt you need to buy something.
If you need to spend money, how can it be free parking?

Of course it's still free parking even if you have to spend money on something else.

If you buy a loaf of bread for £1 and you don't have a car, £1 is what you pay.

If you've parked up in their carpark and buy the same loaf of bread and get your parking ticket validated, you have still only paid £1 and as there was no additional charge for the parking, it is free.

If you saw an advert in PC world for a TV with a free soundbar, would you expect to be able to walk in and get the soundbar without having to spend any money?
The offer of free parking at Lidl's is no different. You have to spend money on something to entitle you to the freebie.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: b789 on January 30, 2025, 05:24:01 pm
Sorry, I'm not a "sign expert" but I do consider myself a "parking expert", at least when it comes to unregulated private parking companies. So, I shall refine my answer:

If the landowner wants to rely on the sign to enforce parking terms, they must ensure it is accurate and not misleading. The sign claims 'free parking', but requiring a purchase contradicts this and could render it unenforceable if challenged. Misleading signage won't hold up in a legal dispute.

However, my original answer still stands because, fundamentally, the owner of private land has the freedom to put up a sign with any message, as long as it doesn’t break laws such as advertising regulations, planning restrictions, or public nuisance laws. The content of the sign itself doesn’t matter unless they intend to enforce it or use it to mislead or defraud someone, in which case stricter rules apply.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: DWMB2 on January 30, 2025, 05:06:58 pm
The original question was whether there is "any mileage when signage is incorrect".

It's not quite clear to me what exactly is meant by that question. If the OP was asking if they can take any action against anyone on the basis of the signage alone (in the absence of a PCN having been issued etc.), then b789's answer would seem to be a decent succinct summary of the situation.

Whether the signage would be capable of forming a contract between the parking operator and a particular driver would be another matter, and would depend on the circumstances of the particular case.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: 666 on January 30, 2025, 04:54:54 pm
Quote from: b789 on January 30, 2025, 03:57:15 pm
It's private land. If you own the land, you can put up a sign that says anything.
Possibly, but if you intend to rely on that sign to regulate parking then you need to be a bit more careful.

One of our parking experts will no doubt provide a more helpful answer.
Title: Re: Incorrect signage?
Post by: b789 on January 30, 2025, 03:57:15 pm
It's private land. If you own the land, you can put up a sign that says anything.
Title: Incorrect signage?
Post by: unzippy on January 30, 2025, 03:39:01 pm
Hello.

Is there any mileage when signage is incorrect?

the Lidl carpark signage states 'Free Parking' and to get that you must enter your registration in store.
In order to enter your reg you need to scan your receipt first.  In order to get a receipt you need to buy something.
If you need to spend money, how can it be free parking?

For comparison the local ALdi has the same system, minus the need for the receipt


Just be clear - I haven't got a ticket, I'm just offended by the sign!

(https://i.imgur.com/ZbUhD4K.jpeg)