Wow! - Unfunny pranks

Shortly after a 3-year old boy was thrown into a crocodile enclosure by a man with learning difficulties, voucher site Wowcher thought it  would be funny to send out a marketing email titled, "Snap up these deals quicker than a croc can catch a kid!"

The boy received critical injuries after being attacked by the reptiles.  He is no longer critical.

Wowcher had no choice but to apologise and stated that they were instigating an urgent review of their processes.

The BBC story is here.

Today's BBC story is more car related and shows the same lack of insight/common sense of two other companies.

Both indoor golf venue Golf Fang Liverpool, and car parking app Parc, decided to use fake parking tickets to advertise themselves.

I don't think that's very funny and neither did the Advertising Standards Authority, the ASA.

The ASA ruled the adverts, which were all wrapped in yellow and black plastic and placed on windscreens in Liverpool and Manchester, risked causing "unjustifiable distress".

I know if someone put one on my windscreen I would be very annoyed.  I'd probably report them to the ASA and also do what I do if I get electioneering letters from Reform and send them back where they came from with no stamp on the envelope.  Did you know Reform Wirral are based in Millbank in London?

Anyway, while looking for a suitable picture of a parking ticket I found this one:

Apparently Diggerland Theme Parks sell them in packs of 5 including the cellophane packaging so that you can prank people.

What lovely people must visit Diggerland.

And no - I have never ever received a parking ticket.

Car Parking Karma

Back in June, the BBC reported about a scam whereby fake QR Code stickers were being placed over real ones in carparks to con motorists into giving away bank details when they thought they were paying for parking.

That sounds like a cheaper way than using genuine parking payments when those payments are operated by Excel Parking.

Here is why.

Basically, they have been widely criticised for charging drivers if they took more than five minutes to pay and demanded thousands of pounds from an 18 year old after she was repeatedly caught out by this rule in Darlington.

It was one of many Excel car parks to stipulate that drivers must pay for their parking within five minutes of entering, as part of its terms and conditions.

But, as she pointed out, it sometimes took longer than five minutes due to poor phone signal and problems with the payment app.  Not her fault.

She initially paid the parking charge notices (PCNs) - which were reduced from £100 to £60 if paid within 14 days - and continued using the car park because she felt it was the safest one as a young woman on her own at night.

She decided to start appealing against the PCNs towards the end of 2022, but Excel still insisted she should pay.

She eventually received a letter, in February 2024, asking her to pay 67 unpaid charges.

Each one was £100, plus a £70 debt collection fee, so the total was £11,390.

Law firm Keidan Harrison later offered to help Miss Robinson free of charge - good on them, glad they got a good mention in the BBC News story.

In March, a hearing was held at Middlesbrough County Court, where she was defended by barrister Seth Kitson.

Mr Kitson argued the £100 penalties were unenforceable as Excel had "no legitimate interest in forcing its users to pay within five minutes".

He also said the five-minute payment rule was "inherently preposterous" - and an unfair contract term under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 - due to the lack of phone signal in the car park and the time taken to pay by phone.

District judge Janine Richards dismissed Excel Parking's original claim for two PCNs, and also its application to amend the claim so it could pursue 11 PCNs.

She found Excel's "conduct in relation to this litigation was both unreasonable and out of the norm", and therefore ordered the firm to pay the winning party's legal costs of £10,240.10.

Sorry, I've basically just cut-and-pasted from the BBC story there for those who didn't click on the link above.

As she had had free legal representation, the judge made a pro bono costs order, meaning Excel Parking had to pay the money to a charity called the Access to Justice Foundation who presumably help out others in similar situations - maybe against Excel Parking - that would be nice.

But Excel Parking decided to appeal.  That was rejected by another judge.

Excel claimed,

"We stand by our position that the terms of parking are lawful, reasonable, and unambiguous. Persistent breaches of this nature cannot be justified."

That was clearly shown IN COURT not to be the case!

They have now paid. Good. Serves them right.  See how they like it!

They also need to change their name - they do not excel.

Electric Fires

 

I think we used to have one like that.

But, of course, that isn't what this post is about.

It's strange how the news stories I find to comment on come about.  There were only four in October while I've already done four this month and there are TWO that caught my eye on the BBC News site today.

The first one annoyed me - it is top of the most watched videos at the moment.  Now I realise that it is the job of the news to report on unusual events and, compared with those happening to fossil fuel cars (as Moggy from electric Classic Cars calls them) or piston cars (as Jonny Smith from The Late Brake Show calls them), electric car fires are very rare - even if they can be more spectacular - that rarity isn't mentioned at all.

In fact, given that the Liverpool Arena car Park fire was caused by an old Land-Rover and the Luton Airport Car Park fire was caused by a Range-Rover, then maybe the BBC should look to be covering the next JLR car to catch fire.

Talking of London airport car parks, the other story today didn't annoy me.  It tells of temporarily repurposing a car park at Stansted for a drive-in movie location.

"Airport bosses have stressed that pilots will not be distracted by a large LED screen at a temporary drive-in cinema at its site in Essex."

The whole article goes on about how it will be safe and all checks and authorisations are in place - I'm not sure why the whole article is about that - NOBODY HAS SUGGESTED OTHERWISE!

Do they think that some passing pilot might fancy watching Top Gun? It has been suggested before.

Car Park Full

I like what Gareth Wild has done because it is daft and he enjoys the fact that it is daft.

BBC News have his story here.

Gareth is a Dad of Two from Bromley who dislikes shopping.  Much like myself (apart from the Bromley bit).

Anyway, to make his shopping trips less boring, he has managed to park in all 211 parking spaces that he is allowed to use in his local Sainsburys.  He's used Excel and a diagram to keep track:

He said, "It was only six years ago when I said to myself, 'wow I could probably park in every single one of these spaces given enough time', and time is on your side when you're doing the weekly shop."

When asked about the trickiest spots to get, he said: "Without getting too technical, when I say B7 and B8 you'll know exactly what I mean. They were really difficult to get. I don't know what it is because they're not even great spots but people seem to love them..."

(In my opinion, those are the only two spots that you don't have to reverse in or out of which would explain their popularity)

"...So I went down one evening for snacks quite late and I managed to snag B8...ooh that was quite a moment in my life."

His next challenge? "I've got my eye on Lidl. But how do you go up from this?"

I like his style - and it's an excuse to revisit something I wrote on the subject many years ago when I was nearer his age: Metro's Car Blog - Shopping Trip

Itchycoo Car Park

Want to see an ant in a car?

or maybe two?

Unfortunately, this story relates to a whole colony of ants.

 

Also, unfortunately, I have to link to Fox News.  The story does appear to be true though despite this.

 

The infestation happened at Charlotte Douglas International Airport after the car had been left in the parking lot there for three days.

 

Meanwhile, another bug has also been making news on the Fox site.

 

This one's allegedly up for $1 Million:

Now I wouldn't mind having a colony of those to sell.

A Crushing Blow

If you happen to use the underground car-park in a certain block of flats in S.E.London, you'll have had a shock when you came to get to your car today.

I say "today"- I read this BBC report from today but it doesn't actually say when the event happened.

It's a strange one.  A water pipe has burst causing polystyrene insulation under the floor to expand, raising the cars until they were damaged by the car-park roof:

You wouldn't think polystyrene would be that strong.

I spent ages trying to work out what this car actually is.  It's obvious from the badge that it's a Ford and I've finally decided that it's an Explorer.  It was particularly unfortunate that it was a tall car parked under some pipework - the Fiat 500 next to it looks like it might have got away with it.

The article goes on to say that if any of the cars were removed too hastily it could result in a gas explosion.

An interesting engineering problem.

I wonder who will be paying for this damage - I bet there's no wording in motor insurance policies about vehicles being crushed by rising polystyrene.

Meanwhile, this chart shows rising polystyrene prices:

It is the bit at the end - and it is just Chinese polystyrene prices.  Following plant closures in April, production of polystyrene has been reduced, tightening supply and causing prices to rise. Increased demand for high impact polystyrene (HIPS) and expandable polystyrene (EPS) in particular further supported the price rise. However, despite lower production rates and rising production costs, coupled with high demand, prices still remained down 20% year-on-year.

It's amazing what you learn when you put "rising polystrene" into Google.