Parking system at RUH needs review

Re: Parking at the RUH. I am at a loss to understand the partial sympathy offered by your correspondent, M. Whitemore, over my dispute with Parking Eye.

Has he/she overlooked the following.

1) That my wife was categorically told by the Gynaecological Dept that if she presented herself at the pharmacy, her tablets would be ready and waiting.

2) That, on arrival, I did not note the time in the belief that we would not be more than a few minutes. We could not predict the backlog of prescriptions then being dispensed that caused a 9 minute delay. 3) That I was not away from the car for more than 1-2 minutes and that I was legally parked, at all times. 4) Had I moved my car to the car park, my wife would not have had any way of contacting me and I hope that your correspondent would not expect her to come to the car park, looking for me, when she had only been discharged 4 days previous, following major abdominal surgery.

My point, and that made by Liese Rumbold, is that their slick computerised system is based on “park at your peril” and that they could “be more helpful overall” whereas they hope that many genuine cases will not bother to appeal.

I could provide examples of a 44 minute stay at the front of the RUH to collect a patient being discharged who could only walk with a pair of crutches. And what about going through the Bus Gate 34 seconds early?

No, the entire system should be reviewed. Frank Cottle, Lansdown