Airport.

[Blade Runner]

Sending letters to an address on the island when the car was parked at the airport has a special ring of stupidity about it.

[Gladys]

8 minutes ago, Blade Runner said:

Sending letters to an address on the island when the car was parked at the airport has a special ring of stupidity about it.

So, what should they do?  Go to the address to see if anyone is there?  Leaving a car in a car park for 6 months without making proper arrangements for it has a special ring of stupidity about it too. 

Good on the innocent purchaser for offering it back. 

[wrighty]

21 minutes ago, Blade Runner said:

Sending letters to an address on the island when the car was parked at the airport has a special ring of stupidity about it.

Post can be redirected, or someone might be checking on the house to feed the cats etc.  

[Blade Runner]

14 minutes ago, wrighty said:

Post can be redirected, or someone might be checking on the house to feed the cats etc.  

Fair point but 6 months seems indecent haste to sell a valuable car?

 

[Two-lane]

16 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Leaving a car in a car park for 6 months without making proper arrangements for it has a special ring of stupidity about it too. 

It is expected that some people are stupid (to a certain extent). That is life. But people who are selected (on merit) to work for the gov. are not expected to be stupid.

A few posts ago I uploaded a photo of the car park entrance. In the UK there are regulations regarding signage (although JohnWright commented on some details re. public or private land), but it is sensible to believe that the IoM has similar regulations and I expect the people running the car park to know them.

The following link (although a withdrawn document) gives an indication of what the regulations cover, e.g.

"3.1.1 An entrance sign must be displayed and maintained at the entrance to controlled land to inform drivers as appropriate whether parking is permitted subject to terms and conditions, including payment, or is prohibited, "

Well, there are none. There are small signs within the car park, but they are a long way off compliant compared to this recommendation:

"b) be sufficiently large to be visible from a distance and legible on approach;

2. A minimum size of 60 cm x 80 cm is regarded as best practice."

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-parking-code-of-practice/private-parking-code-of-practice#signs-and-surface-markings

Even if the excuse is that "The IoM has no regulations covering car park signage - we can do what we want", I would not find that acceptable. The gov., the DoI, is there to make sure that sensible regulations are in place.

[Gladys]

6 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

It is expected that some people are stupid (to a certain extent). That is life. But people who are selected (on merit) to work for the gov. are not expected to be stupid.

A few posts ago I uploaded a photo of the car park entrance. In the UK there are regulations regarding signage (although JohnWright commented on some details re. public or private land), but it is sensible to believe that the IoM has similar regulations and I expect the people running the car park to know them.

The following link (although a withdrawn document) gives an indication of what the regulations cover, e.g.

"3.1.1 An entrance sign must be displayed and maintained at the entrance to controlled land to inform drivers as appropriate whether parking is permitted subject to terms and conditions, including payment, or is prohibited, "

Well, there are none. There are small signs within the car park, but they are a long way off compliant compared to this recommendation:

"b) be sufficiently large to be visible from a distance and legible on approach;

2. A minimum size of 60 cm x 80 cm is regarded as best practice."

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-parking-code-of-practice/private-parking-code-of-practice#signs-and-surface-markings

Even if the excuse is that "The IoM has no regulations covering car park signage - we can do what we want", I would not find that acceptable. The gov., the DoI, is there to make sure that sensible regulations are in place.

Well that is the point, and one I have already made, were they within their powers to seize and sell it? 

However, as others have said there are many steps she could have taken to protect her valuable asset. 

[wrighty]

45 minutes ago, Blade Runner said:

Fair point but 6 months seems indecent haste to sell a valuable car?

 

Absolutely agree. Wait at least until the tax expired. 

[Amadeus]

3 hours ago, SuperHans said:

This is the real issue for me really. Anyone could potentially go on holiday and get injured and end up for whatever reason not being able to read letters sent for months. This smacks of yet more revenue generation from a desperate department to me. Looks like they’ve done ok out of this too with £1400 (net of coroners & auction fees) to recover a £60 debt. That’s literally stealing money off someone. I went back through the last few auction listings last night. There’s certainly been a lot of seized vehicles sold in the last few months. 

Yes never really noticed them before. Needs looking at what else they seized and screwed up on. 

[Amadeus]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

So, what should they do?  Go to the address to see if anyone is there?  Leaving a car in a car park for 6 months without making proper arrangements for it has a special ring of stupidity about it too. 

Good on the innocent purchaser for offering it back. 

Except when it’s, you know, the Long Stay Car Park. And the long stay was unexpected. 

[Gladys]

3 minutes ago, Amadeus said:

Except when it’s, you know, the Long Stay Car Park. And the long stay was unexpected. 

Then you call the airport.  That is exactly what we did when our return flight was cancelled in November meaning that we would collect the car 24 hours late as per the Ringo payment (can't remember why we didn't just add on to the Ringo payment). 

[Amadeus]

2 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Then you call the airport.  That is exactly what we did when our return flight was cancelled in November meaning that we would collect the car 24 hours late as per the Ringo payment (can't remember why we didn't just add on to the Ringo payment). 

Fair enough actually.  

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

So, what should they do?  Go to the address to see if anyone is there?  Leaving a car in a car park for 6 months without making proper arrangements for it has a special ring of stupidity about it too. 

The problem here is that the way things were done appear to have changed after she left it and even if they didn't, there's still nothing to say what the rules are.  If there's nothing to say that there's a maximum stay, then people are entitled to assume that a long stay car park means you can leave your car there for a long time.  They might even feel that it would be safer to leave a vehicle there than on the street.

I suspect this mess is side effect of the way they decided they were going to handle airport parking using the app.  Rather than stop and consider what the best way is of handling all the needs of people who wanted to park at the Airport, they made an arbitrary decision what the 'solution' was going to be and then assumed that everything and everyone else would just have to fit around it.

[John Wright]

8 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

The problem here is that the way things were done appear to have changed after she left it and even if they didn't, there's still nothing to say what the rules are.  If there's nothing to say that there's a maximum stay, then people are entitled to assume that a long stay car park means you can leave your car there for a long time.  They might even feel that it would be safer to leave a vehicle there than on the street.

I suspect this mess is side effect of the way they decided they were going to handle airport parking using the app.  Rather than stop and consider what the best way is of handling all the needs of people who wanted to park at the Airport, they made an arbitrary decision what the 'solution' was going to be and then assumed that everything and everyone else would just have to fit around it.

I don’t think you’re correct. I think you’ve not taken into account the way the airport parking/RinGo app works. 

There are 4 options.

To be legally parked and stay you’ve got to have currently paid.

You can pay:

1. On the app. Max is 12 weeks. After that you have to extend, or you are parking illegally.

2. At the info desk. Max period is 12 weeks. After that you have to extend, or you are parking illegally.

3. By phone. Max period is 12 weeks. After that you have to extend, or you are parking illegally.

1 & 3 you don’t have to be on Island. 2 I presume you, or a friend could pop in.

So it’s actually flexible. Doesn’t need a specified maximum stay period. Just requires that you keep it topped up, 84 days at a time.

[John Wright]

15 hours ago, NoTailT said:

Oh really? Coroner for middle told me that a few months back ref a car when I dropped in some paperwork. 

There are completely different rules set out for real estate and other property. They’re in, respectively, the First ( Real Property ) and Second (Personal Property ) Schedules to the Administration of Justice Act 1981 and the Coroners Enforcement Rules  

[SuperHans]

1 hour ago, Amadeus said:

Yes never really noticed them before. Needs looking at what else they seized and screwed up on. 

This was up the other week seized as well

https://www.easyliveauction.com/catalogue/lot/218dd1f7bb1edd0cef198f2d99c7d834/0af8d24542e81eb9357e7ef448a6646f/vehicle-and-equipment-lot-60/

Again not the sort of car the owner would probably want to see go. There’s been quite a few lately.