Wilson Parking complaints mount
One of Canterbury’s pre-eminent businessmen took on Wilson Parking over an $85 ticket – and won – but only after wasted hours and a Disputes Tribunal claim.
Sir Gil Simpson, founder of Jade Software who was knighted for services to IT, commerce and the community, is among six people to come forward with strikingly similar experiences after The Press reported last week that Wilson Parking refused to waive an $85 breach notice issued to Akaroa resident Victoria Andrews, even after she provided written proof that she had paid the parking fee.
In each case, they were issued tickets incorrectly, had trouble appealing a breach notice, or both. Consumer NZ’s investigative writer Vanessa Pratley says the pattern suggests Wilson Parking may not be complying with the Consumer Guarantees Act, while a Christchurch MP warns Wilson risks losing its “social licence” to operate.
Wilson Parking is required under that Act to provide its parking service with reasonable care and skill, Pratley adds.
“The fact that several users have been incorrectly issued fines, or have had trouble appealing them, suggests that Wilson Parking may not be complying with this obligation, she says.
The Commerce Commission has received 81 complaints about Wilson Parking and its Parking Enforcement Services (PES) division in the past year, but has not said whether it will investigate the Hong Kong-based firm.
Meanwhile, a lawyer says car park overstayers cannot be compelled to pay breach notices, only the amount they should have paid in the first place.
In Sir Gil’s case, the 76-year-old paid the $7 fee in a Wilson car park beside Victoria Square, but wrongly entered his own car’s registration JOLYGD into the kiosk while using his wife’s car.
Realising his mistake when he received the breach notice, the businessman appealed, explaining what happened, but this was not accepted by Wilson Parking.
A check of the records would have shown his wife’s number plate as parking there, he said, but Wilson Parking would not budge.
Not willing to back down, Sir Gil lodged a claim with the Disputes Tribunal.
At that point, Wilson cancelled the breach notice, and Sir Gil withdrew the claim. “I had to go to a lot of trouble. I think it’s how they make money,” he said.
“If you paid an invoice for $7 by internet banking and entered the wrong invoice number ... you would not expect the supplier to charge you a fee of $85 for your mistake.”
Sir Gil added it was unreasonable to expect those parking to “read and absorb” Wilson’s lengthy terms and conditions, especially when the sign was at knee height.
Jasmine Edwards, 35, appealed an $85 ticket from Wilson Parking, providing proof she paid to park in Chester St West (the same place Andrews parked) on March 7. Instead, she received two reminders to pay the ticket.
“I had one fruitless phone call and had to send another email, which I haven’t heard back three weeks later.”
Wilson said a “technical issue” had affected “a small number of customers” at the car park, but this did not wash with Edwards, as she and Andrews had parked on different dates.
“People will just pay that. It’s not worth the amount of time I’ve had to spend chasing this stupid thing,” Edwards said.
Another woman, who did not want to be named, had the same issue at the same car park on February 26, appealed with proof of payment, and was declined.
“It is ridiculous that Wilson can get away with things like this and scare people into paying the ludicrous fines by threatening them with debt collectors,” she said.
The same thing happened to yet another person, twice three years ago.
Meanwhile, Clive Hartley, 62, got an $85 ticket for overstaying after visiting Christchurch shopping complex Tower Junction twice in one day. He sent PES an invoice for wasting his time.
PES ignored the invoice and eventually waived Hartley’s ticket, but he’s frustrated that Wilson Parking could threaten people with tickets but face no consequences when proved wrong.
A 68-year-old man, who did not want to be named, also got a ticket after parking at Tower Junction, then returning later in the day. He said he did not stay longer than 180 minutes either time.
“They wrote back and said just because we left and came back, doesn’t mean the time lapses. My boss wanted to pay it and
I said ‘no you won’t’. “How many people have they done this to? People would pay it thinking they’re in the wrong and they’re not.” He has lodged a claim with the disputes tribunal.
In response to requests for comment, Wilson blamed “technical issues” in most of the instances, and repeated an earlier statement regarding refusing to waive tickets that the company had addressed the issue internally to prevent similar occurrences and “appreciated the feedback”.
Christchurch central MP Duncan Webb called on Wilson Parking “to stop”. “It’s really well recognised in the parking industry that whole idea of imposing an outrageously punitive amount on people for not paying or overstaying is clearly wrong. “If they want to maintain their social licence they better behave like a socially responsible parking provider.”
Wilson Parking also said: “In cases where customers provide clear details that warrant waiving the breach notice, we are more than willing to accommodate such requests.”
Andrews suggested people avoid using Wilson Parking due to its “aggressive behaviour”.
Can you be held legally liable for a parking penalty?
The argument can be made that by using a car park, you enter into a contract with the parking provider in which you agree to pay the parking fee, explains Clinton Light, special counsel at Shein Lawyers Christchurch.
“Essentially it’s a contractual situation, and the landowner can recover any loss, but only that. A $65 [parking enforcement] fee is not a loss,” said Light.
Light said a parking provider arguing an enforcement fee covered staff wages, training, signage, equipment was not a valid argument.
“That’s simply the cost of doing business. Under our law of contract, if you breach a contract you can only recover the loss actually suffered, unless they wanted to prove a penalty clause _ but that is an entirely different and quite a complicated issue.”
Light says his advice for responding to a breach notice issued by a private parking provider is to determine whether you indeed failed to pay for the full time you had used the car park. If you did, pay only the amount that you’ve overstayed.
What is Wilson Parking?
Wilson Parking is owned by Hong Kong conglomerate Sun Hung Kai Properties and has operations in New Zealand, Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore.
In the year to June 2018, Kiwi motorists paid $121 million to Wilson Parking, it has been reported.