Spotlight Wellington Fining Customers For Overstaying.

Forums › Off topic › Spotlight Wellington Fining Customers For Overstaying.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

3260 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#3028455 28-Jan-2023 16:27

Eva888: @sir1963 noting what you said about Police not giving you car owner details...The notice also states that

*The Breach notice has been issued for the reasons explained overleaf, therefore giving reasonable cause for Smart Compliance and Management to apply to NZTA database for the details of the registered owner.*

So now the question is are they allowed to do this.

I just put the whole thing down to lazy police who could not be bothered.

I have had other dealing with the Palmerston North police and to honest I may as well have not bothered, the result would have been the same either way.

Last time we had some stuff stolen, we did not even bother, it was less than the excess and we knew the police would do zero, so we just saved ourselves some time and agro and simply replaced what was stolen.

Bananabob

511 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3028507 28-Jan-2023 16:35

@michaelmurfy Once revoked what affect does it have on legitimate use like insurance companies. I seem to remember putting in my plate number for getting a quote?

Eva888

2432 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3028513 28-Jan-2023 16:45

@michaelmurfy. It was an unmanned car park you just drive in to that has one other store.

Thanks I just opted out, didn’t know you could do that.

michaelmurfy

meow
13243 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3028517 28-Jan-2023 17:04

Bananabob:

Once revoked what affect does it have on legitimate use like insurance companies. I seem to remember putting in my plate number for getting a quote?

I've never once had any issues with this. Insurance companies have access to everything anyway. I've had all my cars opted out.

Michael Murphy | https://murfy.nz
Referral Links: Quic Broadband (use R122101E7CV7Q for free setup)

Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by subscribing.
Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

mattwnz

20155 posts

Uber Geek

#3028520 28-Jan-2023 17:18

Eva888:
Bananabob:

According to a thread on the Neighbourly website for Kapiti the car park at Spotlight is not owned by Spotlight they have no control over the issuing of "fines". You have to take the matter up with the owner of the car park.

It is monitored by a camera that takes an image on arrival, and, I guess, on departing, and they match the times of the images.

Good luck❗

I suspect you are correct. Interestingly though the operator at Spotlight told me to write to their manager, which I am doing before dealing with the outfit that have photographed my car going in and out.

I will also take Michael Murphys advice and rescind permission for anyone to access my details. Good idea. No I won’t pay it.

Argh what a lot of kerfuffle but am also thinking of others that will get caught out and who are worse off than me. I believe that there should be signs visible clearly while still in the car that tell you the size of fine if you overstay and the risks of parking there so you can make an informed decision.

The notice they sent is menacing looking with lots of white on black font and red highlights telling you Do Not Ignore.

Ahh and the pay online option by debit or credit card says a 'card convenience fee applies.'
Also if you don’t pay on time...they issue a $20 administration fee which must be paid in 14 days.

I wonder if the store gets money out of it too. I suspect many people just pay it due to the hassle. It needs regulation.

SirHumphreyAppleby

2844 posts

Uber Geek

#3028525 28-Jan-2023 17:28

michaelmurfy:

Follow through this: https://www.moneyhub.co.nz/parking-tickets.html

Helpful information, but there are a few issues with that advice. For example, in the Disputes Tribunal template, there is a spelling mistake and it indicates the intent to claim the cost of filing. It is my understanding that you cannot claim the cost of filing, which the enforcement company should know. Not that I'd work such a company, but if I did, I'd absolutely let you wear that cost just to be spiteful.

I also wouldn't be offering to make a partial payment for some arbitrary amount unless they could show the parking space was required by other persons visiting the property because they can only claim actual losses. As noted on the page, they need photographic evidence under the Code of Practice for Parking Enforcement on Private Land (incorrectly titled on the page), and if it shows empty spaces, that pretty much invalidates their claim. Note, however, that a Code of Practice is not law.

gzt

17122 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3028526 28-Jan-2023 17:31

Private property. The alternative is tow trucks parked outside all day then go retrieve your car from a tow yard. Expensive and extremely inconvenient for most people. At $65 I'd like to know how many they fine per day. A screen with x number of people fined this week would be an honest deterrent. The loss for the business is not a parking charge, it's a loss of business.

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3028561 28-Jan-2023 18:38

$65?!? You're lucky, here in Australia they charge $88.

If you're curious, they're an ASX listed company called Smart Parking, and their entire business is composed of issuing speculative invoices ("breach notices"). From the Courier Mail:

Smart Parking, according to its most recent annual report, is doing very nicely out of parking breach notices after rolling out an aggressive push into Australia and New Zealand in the past 18 months. The company now earns almost $10m from its parking management business with the number of “parking breach” notices soaring from virtually nothing two years ago to more than 5400 across Australia in the last three months of 2022. Queensland appears to be the focus of the company’s operations with the company recently opening a Smart Compliance Management office in Brisbane.

One assumes the New Zealand figure is similarly exponential.

Eva888

2432 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3028564 28-Jan-2023 18:57

Kyanar:
$65?!? You're lucky, here in Australia they charge $88.

If you're curious, they're an ASX listed company called Smart Parking, and their entire business is composed of issuing speculative invoices ("breach notices"). From the Courier Mail:

Smart Parking, according to its most recent annual report, is doing very nicely out of parking breach notices after rolling out an aggressive push into Australia and New Zealand in the past 18 months. The company now earns almost $10m from its parking management business with the number of “parking breach” notices soaring from virtually nothing two years ago to more than 5400 across Australia in the last three months of 2022. Queensland appears to be the focus of the company’s operations with the company recently opening a Smart Compliance Management office in Brisbane.

One assumes the New Zealand figure is similarly exponential.

Maybe a Fair Go story here?

Definitely a money making dare I say rort. The photos they took are very tight the car fills the entire shot so you can’t really tell where it is or if there are spaces empty next to it, therefore you can’t tell them there was no loss to them.

They also don’t mention Spotlight, just the address as 120 Old Hutt Road. Had to look it up to see where it was I had been.

tchart

2379 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3028603 28-Jan-2023 21:52

Somewhat related. A few months back the “mall” in Upper Hutt installed a similar system, might even be the same crowd. They charge something stupid like 50c per 20 minutes. Mall owners gave some BS reason like to pay for cleaning of the car park but I suspect they were probably told it would bring in heaps of money.

Anyway they stung a few people but since there is plenty of free council parking around the mall everyone just parks there and walks across to the mall. The mall parking is 90% empty even on busy days.

Unless there is something I can’t get elsewhere I go to other shops - eg Mitre 10 instead of the warehouse. They really aren’t doing themselves any favours and it really was a stupid idea given the amount of free parking in Upper Hutt. Complete money grab considering there is literally no reason to over stay.

Oblivian

7297 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#3028615 28-Jan-2023 22:57

Clients: Managing my carpark is hard, can't be bothered confronting people. Let's get someone cheap to do it.

Parking Rorts: Hold my beer. We got this. CA-CHING

mattwnz

20155 posts

Uber Geek

#3028634 29-Jan-2023 02:32

tchart: Somewhat related. A few months back the “mall” in Upper Hutt installed a similar system, might even be the same crowd. They charge something stupid like 50c per 20 minutes. Mall owners gave some BS reason like to pay for cleaning of the car park but I suspect they were probably told it would bring in heaps of money.

Anyway they stung a few people but since there is plenty of free council parking around the mall everyone just parks there and walks across to the mall. The mall parking is 90% empty even on busy days.

Unless there is something I can’t get elsewhere I go to other shops - eg Mitre 10 instead of the warehouse. They really aren’t doing themselves any favours and it really was a stupid idea given the amount of free parking in Upper Hutt. Complete money grab considering there is literally no reason to over stay.

It is completely ridiculous that they begun charging, when the rest of UHs parking is free. I never parked inside it anyway because it was dark and tight to drive in, and I didn't feel safe in it, but it is a good way to keep it empty. The mall is dead much of the time anyway and this probably doesn't help. Many people just go to Queensgate where the parking is free anyway, and that mall actually has lots of shops. It is a pity, and I wonder who made that decision, considering I thought councils required malls to provide car parking, so if they start charging people won't park in it. Although UH did try and bring in parking fees a number of years ago, but the public didn't want it.

nickb800

2716 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#3028651 29-Jan-2023 09:12

Bananabob:
According to a thread on the Neighbourly website for Kapiti the car park at Spotlight is not owned by Spotlight they have no control over the issuing of "fines". You have to take the matter up with the owner of the car park.

That's what staff have told customers. I have looked up who owns the land with LINZ, it is "Kapiti Coast LFRA" which is fully owned by "Mountvue Pty" which also owns Spotlight. The registered office of "Kapiti Coast LFRA" is Spotlight Manukau.

I don't know if staff know the truth or not, but regardless they are misleading customers

Bananabob

511 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3028674 29-Jan-2023 10:45

nickb800:
Bananabob:

According to a thread on the Neighbourly website for Kapiti the car park at Spotlight is not owned by Spotlight they have no control over the issuing of "fines". You have to take the matter up with the owner of the car park.

That's what staff have told customers. I have looked up who owns the land with LINZ, it is "Kapiti Coast LFRA" which is fully owned by "Mountvue Pty" which also owns Spotlight. The registered office of "Kapiti Coast LFRA" is Spotlight Manukau.

I don't know if staff know the truth or not, but regardless they are misleading customers

I am not a lawyer, but I bet because Spotlight is a registered company and Kapiti Coast LFRA is a registered company the dealings are completely separate even though they owned by a holding company. Just an "out" for Mountvue Pty.

snnet

1410 posts

Uber Geek

#3028688 29-Jan-2023 11:34

Bananabob:

I am not a lawyer, but I bet because Spotlight is a registered company and Kapiti Coast LFRA is a registered company the dealings are completely separate even though they owned by a holding company. Just an "out" for Mountvue Pty.

I'd agree with this having worked for a company in the past whom had directors/shareholders with fingers in both, one of them being the overseeing company which was the landlord and hearing comments like "they're actually the worst landlords ever" :D - just because they share a parent company doesn't mean they have the other company's interests in mind

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8