Great Western Coffee Shop

Not quite train travel but sort of related..

I got a penalty ticket today for parking at Maidenhead station (where I park most days).. I just wondered if anyone else who paid by Ring-Go got a ticket too or was I just the lucky one??

I did just call the Ring-go payment number and was asked (by the automated person) if I'd like to extend my parking which means I definitely paid this morning.. ;D

Stupid system.. >:(  ::)

Although I'm no lawyer, I'm fairly sure these tickets are nothing more than an invoice, covered only by the laws of contract and/or tort, not criminal law. So my first bit of advice is don't pay up. Far easier to argue your case now, rather than try and get your money back later.

You may find this interesting:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=46975

Thanks bignosemac..

I have just been into the RingGo website and there was an option to enter details for having received a parking ticket even though payment was made.. So I did just that..

As a result they e-mailed me a letter template to send off to Apcoa about this mistake and (more importantly) the VAT receipt for my parking today...

I wonder how it all happened though.. It's the first time it's happened to me...New parking attendant maybe? access to RingGos list broken? (although I assume the car park guy has a phone number to ring in such circumstances)..

I think I might walk in future..

Too many PPCs appear to issue these invoices (they are not charges, penalties or fines) for the most petty of reasons. No doubt many are issued in error also.

Jo, was your invoice issued for having no valid ticket or some other alleged contravention of the car park's rules? Makes no real difference, the advice is the same: don't pay. Just curious.....

It was issued for the following infringement (their words not mine):

01.. (I turn over the ticket to find out that that is...)  No valid payment/payment not correctly displayed..

So.. Since I paid (and now have proof) via Ring Go.. That is obviously a mistake on their part..

But still. It shouldn't happen..

Apparently if I don't pay they'll go to the DVLA to get my address to help them collect their debt.. Hhmm they could just follow me home any evening from the car park  ::) ;D

I'd say let them go to DVLA. They have to pay for each query. Even then all that gives them is details of the registered keeper, which may not necessarily be the person who contravened the rules, or who they, in your case, mistakenly believe has done so.

In your case, it's an error on their part because of a system failure. But it's still wrong IMO to use these invoices (often made to look like Penalty Charge Notices issued by Councils or the Police - which are backed up by criminal law) in an attempt to extort a large sum from the unwary.

Even if you hadn't paid the required fee to park, or overstayed, or contravened some other notified rule, my advice would be the same; don't pay the the invoice stuck to your windscreen. The only real loss to the parking company is the fee relevant to the amount of time you were parked there. So if you ever get a similar 'ticket' in a free car park (say at a shopping centre) then that loss would be.... err.... ^0.00.

So there was a glitch in the system, which is being rectified admittedly with a little bit of annoyance but  with some phone calls, postage etc its resolved.  To take it to the extent of letting the parking company make the inquiry at the DVLA starts a whole chain of events of letters, county court, even as far as bailiffs.  Yes it is a civil offense but these car parking companies see non payment in the same light as shoplifting and will pursue it to the end.

If this keeps happening then it would be time to send a letter to the car parking company CEO asking for reimbursement of personal costs

Yeah I half was considering to ask them to re-imburse the price of the stamp to see if they actually will  ;D

Did APCOA issue the "ticket" under the Railway Byelaws or was it simply an "invoice" for infringement of their made-up rules?  I'm quite interested in knowing as this would have occurred on railway property.

It's a "Civil parking notice" for non payment of car park charges.. even tho i did..No railway bylaws mentioned as far as I can see

Don't pay it. Don't make any contact with RingGo or APCOA, don't respond to any letters from "Roxburghe Debt Collectors" or "Graham White Solicitors". This is a known scam.

Do a search on the Moneysavingexpert or Pepipoo websites.


They can't. It's illegal to do so, and they know it. The only people who can issue byelaw tickets are the police, and payment has to be made through a magistrates court, not a private company.



BTW Stafferton Way Multi-Storey in Maidenhead (council run) is cheaper!! ^4.10 a day, only a 3 minute walk from the station.

I wouldn't call it a civil offence. The word 'offence' implies some from of criminality. It is far from similar to shoplifting. Breaking rules in a car-park (excluding council run ones) is at worst a breach of contract. For which the onus is on the party at loss to prove their case. First off, they have to prove you were the driver. If you were the driver then ask them for proof, don't volunteer the information yourself. No need to incriminate yourself!

Damages for breach of contract should reflect the actual loss, so an arbitrary penalty of say ^50, which often rises exponentially with each subsequent demand for payment, for what is actually a minimal loss is unfair. This is covered by the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999:


There is plenty of case-law out there where private parking companies have attempted to sue for breach of contract for amounts grossly in excess of the actual loss, but I've yet to see a single case where they have been successful.

If you've broken a rule in a private car park, then pay a sum relevant to the actual loss suffered by the parking company/landowner. Overstayed by an hour? Pay one hours parking fee. Occupied two bays? Pay twice the fee for your stay. Even then, only pay up if the parking company can prove their loss. DO NOT pay the extortionate amounts on the invoice stuck on your window, or demanded in subsequent letters.

Remember though, IANAL  ;)


EDIT: Legal proceedings CAN be initiated under Railway Byelaw 14 by an agent acting on behalf of a Railway Operator, but the car parking companies at railway stations rarely go down this route, because the fines issued by a magistrates court do not go to them. They prefer the invoice approach coupled with threats of county court action, because,  if you are mug enough to pay up, they get money.

No it isn't. It's a contractual dispute. They will not persue it to the end, as APCOA don't "do" court. They do not want their practices to be investigated in the process.

If you receive a letter alleging that you were the driver, ignore it. If you DO want to write back to them, PM me- I've got some good solicitor written templates.


It would be very clever if the DVLA had records of who was driving any vehicle at any time!!! APCOA tried to tell me that I was under obligation to inform them who was driving. I advised the person on the other end of the phone that only the police could do that, and that it was a criminal offence to impersonate a police officer  ;D  ;D

So in theory I could go and park at my local APCOA station, not bother buying a ticket at all and then I have absolutely no onligation to pay when they demand relevant fees?

As the law currently stands, then yes. That's why many private parking companies have resorted to using wheel clampers.

I don't condone such action as not paying- It's FGW's right to charge for parking, and our right to park elsewhere if we think it's too expensive. What I object to is the action of the private parking companies making extortionate "penalties" for minor infractions like parking with one wheel over the line, and then using intimidation techniques to try and bully you in to paying.

I think if anyone tried it every day, it may get noticed- I'm no legal expert but I guess FGW as landowner could have an injunction served against anyone doing this or have them prosecuted for trespass?

FGW are put tenants in most cases, Network Rail are the Landlords

Just out of interest, what's a "put tenant" - someone who's forcibly placed somewhere, perhaps? It's not a term I've previously come across, hence why it jumped out at me.

Wrong in part. Any 'railway servant' that has been trained in the relevant area (PACE, RRA, RPFR, RA) can issue tickets for byelaw offences. What do you think RPI's are doing when they do a Byelaw 18 on you for no ticket? However it starts to get tricky which is why it rarely happens.
Yes payment for any offences charged (and prosecuted) under the railway byelaws has to be made via a magistrates court. Anything else is an "out of court settlement".


I would personally just ignore the 'invoice', and ignore any correspondence with them. The letters will get more and more threatening and they will 'threaten your credit rating blah blah'. They will just go away.

Another matter, am I right in thinking the 'breach of contract' offence has to be laid before a magistrate within 6 months?

Limitation is, I believe, 6 years for breach of contract.

Ah cheers for the clarification. :-)

typo should have been 'but'

Hi, I've been 'invoiced' by APCOA for failing to buy a ticket at Silco Drive on Friday. I'm in the wrong, I forgot to phone in - it's age related!
I've read another post, but the replies were for an unfair invoice where the enquirer had paid.  My question is, what's the situation re payment of the fine?  It seems an excessive amount for a genuine error.  I'm a repeat customer and registered on their phone-in system.  Can I make a reasonable offer?  Or question the work permit of the parking attendant? Does anybody have any experience to share?  Or do I need to accept it was an 'out of luck' Friday?
Thanks for your help.

Hello and welcome to the forum.. It happened to me a while back and I just had no choice but to pay it.. I don't agree with the "fine" system though.. especially for those registered on the system and pay most days.. but we have to go with the rules I guess. unfair as they are

If you think the invoice (most definitely not a fine) you have been sent is excessive then write to APCOA making an offer to pay the parking fee owed for the time you were parked and a reasonable amount to cover administration. Enclose a cheque if you like. If they refuse that offer and continue to hound you with demands and threats then it is best to stick to your original offer or ignore.

Private Parking Companies have very little legal basis for making excessive demands when car park rules are breached. Contract Law is their only real basis, and contracts must not contain penalty clauses that are too onerous on one party. If the contract is breached by either party, only actual losses should be claimed.

Your case is a little different from those who get clobbered for, for example, overstaying by a few minutes or parking over a white line. That is why I suggest making an offer, as you do actually owe them the parking fee at least. ^80+ on top (which will rise with each subsequent demand) is excessive. Offer a reasonable (your definition of 'reasonable' is fine!) amount to cover APCOA's administration also.

Finally, as I always say in these cases, I Am Not A Lawyer! If you are unsure then seek advice. Two good places to start are:

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/private-parking-tickets
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?autocom=ibwiki&cmd=article&id=56

Many thanks to you both for your responses.  The links are very useful and I have reviewed the information.  With Christmas in the way I've left it too late to write a considered response, so have decided to pay up, but I will have the upper hand by never using their car park again. So they lose longer term.
Thanks and best wishes

Hopefully this is the right place for this post...

The entrance to Maidenhead station Silco Drice car park goes under the Marlow/Bourne End branch line.. so dips down... It has been, and still is, flooded to the point that a lot of (normal size) cars couldn't get to the car park (and indeed today after the overnight rain even the footpath is underwater if anyone did manage to park there they would have to paddle back to the station)...

I just wondered if anyone knows, before I start trying to get someone to sort it out, who is responsible for this bit of road?

The other two car parks are full by 7.30am so would be useful to sort this out..I am happy to do so but need to know where to start.. Thanks..

It would appear from online maps that it is a public highway and not a private road so I would assume (dangerous, I know  ;)) that responsibility for maintenance lies with the highways dept. of your local authority.

Yeah I think so.. I was thinking I would ask the local government about it.. But something in the back of my mind tells me I've heard before it's not them.. Something to do with the traffic lights controlling traffic going under that bridge not working for the last 6 years or so after it flooded very badly..but I might be wrong..

Looking on the bright side.. either someone will sort the flooding out or if not I can park on the double yellow lines on that road ;-)

Silco Drive is designated as a Private Road.  Not sure who owns it Network Rail which I doubt, BRB Residuary which if they did it is likely to have been handed to Crossrail ownership.

So if it is a private road.. does anyone know who controls the double yellow lines? And more importantly, making sure it's passable?

If it is a private road then I'd still suggest the local authority as the first port of call. They should be able to tell you who is responsible for the road.

Although if ownership is somewhat convoluted then by the time you find out the water may have receded anyway!  :P

I've now emailed RBWM and also Apcoa as to be honest it must be affecting their revenue.. Once it floods it is like it for days/weeks currently... I will see who replies...

The water did used to recede quite quickly when there was a lot of business traffic going in and out at all times of the day but now that crossrail have moved them all out, there is little other than car park traffic which is a lot less and so the water just sits there and no one seems bothered...

My daughter however needs to park at the station late morning tomorrow so she can get the train to work and she won't be able to because of this...  :-\

Without wishing to make too much light of the situation, perhaps your daughter should consider investing in some of these:

http://www.gooutdoors.co.uk/svendsen-rt-nylon-wader-p145751?utm_source=google&utm_medium=SEO+product+search

That of course is only if the vehicle used is of a suitable ride height to get through to the car park in the first place.


Edit: And I've resisted the temptation to add RBWM to the forum's Acronyms/Abbreviations page. (Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead)

 :P ;) ;D

meh, I think the only response you'll get from APCOA is 'we're sorry your appeal has not been successful'. I think that's their standard reply. Seriously I once emailed them to tell them they had a missing bulb in a street light, and that's what I got

What does that actually mean (please)?

Paul

http://www.internetslang.com/MEH-meaning-definition.asp

I see.  So if it really means 'indifference' why add it to the front of a detailed answer?

It seems perhaps those who've defined it expect stand alone use of the word...   ;D

Paul

It was intended to be a "tbh", but the predicitve text on my phone must have had other ideas.  I guess I use "meh" quite a lot when texting, so it's quite high up in the phone's dictionary.

No reply from Apcoa so far but the council have told me that Network Rail maintain that road.. So, since the water isn't going away, I shall contact them next.. The only change today was that someone has put a cone in the middle of the water... And thanks bignosemac  ;D but I've only got a small car and won't risk taking it through the deep water..

I am still interested to know if there is any policing of the yellow lines on that road now we know it's owned by Network rail though..

And yeah sorry about the RBWM.. It was late and it seemed like hard work typing the whole name in  ::)

Network Rail do have powers to issue tickets they would get BTP to do it or may have an agreement with the Local Authority to issue them on NR behalf.

Aah cool thank you.. I wasn't going to try parking on the yellow lines (once we can get through the flood that is).. I was just interested...

Still flooded.. No reply from Network Rail or Apcoa....

Ditto today re flood, lack of response.. if my pc hadn't decided to delete everything on there (including those e-mails I'd sent) then I could chase them up.. ho hum.. The water seemed higher today even though it's not rained too much the last few days..

Any ideas of what to do next from anyone?

Replace your car with one of these? http://www.flickr.com/photos/alancookson/4636309241/

Phone call to Passenger Focus?

Thanks Grahame.. I am thinking that the local newspaper might be happy to take this challenge on.. I will try and find time to contact them tomorrow and see what they say..

And yep..maybe someone should run a shuttle service into the car park on one of those duck buses ..mind you then I'd have to park on the yellow lines on the entrance road.. sigh... ::) ;D

Just a quick update on this.. Apcoa did finally reply to say that they won't accept complaints via e-mail (!).. They obviously aren't bothered about getting any money from that car park then (which is backed up by a friend I saw on the train today that also parks there and says she hasn't paid for a month or so as they are not checking tickets there currently!).. Network Rail as you might imagine.. appear not to be bothered.. The puddle/lake is still there...

Well.. Having complained to Network rail for a second time on Monday... And having driven/walked through the vast amounts of water this morning.. I was totally flabbergasted to find it all gone this evening..!! I just can't believe it has taken them this many months since my last contact with them to sort it out....

One of the reasons it was also important to get rid of the water (other than any damage to cars) is that when it's cold (like it was today), as cars drove through the water and spread it up the hill to the main road, and that then froze, it was becoming quite dangerous for pedestrians too.

So.. all good...and fingers crossed it is sorted properly which we will find out next time it rains  ;D

There was a letter in the Maidenhead Advertiser on Thursday saying that last time it snowed the car parks at Maidenhead weren't gritted and wondering if they would be this time.. Having been for a walk this afternoon which included passing the station it looks as if no one has bothered again. The letter isn't online yet so I can't post a link to it for now.. I don't know if the letter is factually correct or not but it says that FGW have a contract with a company called MITIE to grit the car parks..there is a grit box in the car park but no one has used it (not FGW, APCOA or MITIE) despite having all weekend with a nearly empty car park to do this

The Shoppenhangers road car park in particular becomes unusable in large parts due to an incline in the car park...

At least I know to leave my car at home tomorrow and walk to the station..

FGW car parks have NEVER been gritted. I did a 360 degree spin in Twyford car park a couple of years ago  ;D

Walk instead.

If FGW do nothing, they are not liable to anyone who meets with disaster in the car park. If they attempt clearance, they will owe a duty of care to their "neighbours", ie those who may be reasonably expected to be affected by their actions. Doing nothing limits the liability

You would think Apcoa would lose money if big chunks of car parks are inaccessible but they really don't seem to be bothered..

APCOA won't lose much money because (a) many people hold season tickets already and (b) if someone has driven to the car park in order to go somewhere by train it's unlikely that they'll then turn around and go elsewhere.

As some one who has shovelled snow in station car parks, gritted them, arranged snow clearance and also gritting by Mitie, I can assure you that it is completely untrue to say that FGW does nothing about car parks in winter weather. And having participated in twice daily conference calls to review the status of winter weather precautions, I know for a fact that senior management is acutely aware of its responsibilities.

Every station has a winter weather plan. But it starts with priority areas - platforms, bridges and walkways, and then goes on to car parks and other areas.

Some might think it unreasonable that FGW in its duty of care does not succeed in clearing and gritting every part of its property that is open to the public, at times when others fail to get out of their drives. Others might recognise that this is a tall order - when did your local authority last clear the pavements in front of your house?

I'm retired now, but I still keep in touch. And fatuous statements about FGW's winter weather precautions from people who pretend to know everything but really no very little are deeply offensive to the hundreds of managers and staff who are working hard to keep the railway open and safe.

Just because something is difficult/time consuming/expensive does not mean that it should not be done.

Shoppenhangers carpark is appallingly dangerous and, when weather like this has been predicted days in advance, it should be possible to grit the carpark in advance.  Especially for ^1000 per car per year.  Thats 1/3rd of a million quid per annum for Shoppenhangers alone.

I'll be taking the bus for the foreseeable, but its a shame it'll take some expensive insurance claims to get the car park prepared for use.

If the car park owner / operator grits and salts the ice in the car park they may have a concern that if someone then has an accident they would be liable, if on the other hand they leave it as snow and ice then it is obliviously hazardous therefore use at your own risk.


or

They have you money in the form of a season ticket therefore why waste money on salt n grit and the staff to apply it when they can use it for the bubbly at the share holders meeting

Might as well remove the Salt container then.. It appears to serve no purpose other than taking up space..

So why are insurers advising churches that they need to clear snow and grit paths or they might be liable?
(Quote from the Church Times Friday 18th January)

IF they can't physically park their car.. due to the incline and ice/snow between them and free parking spaces.. they have no choice but to go elsewhere in my opinion?

Bullsh*t.

Something the HSE sent in 2010 and also features on several county council websites...

What EBrown posted is quite right: I wouldn't necessarily go so far as to say that it's gospel, but he's quite right.  ;)

It's 20 years since I studied law. I remember one of the leading cases was a town hall whose steps were cleared of snow, but not properly. Ebrown is right to point out that whatever is done must be done properly.

I'm sure FGW will make sure the car park is as safe as it can be. As Oxman pointed out, there is a lot of clearing to be done by a finite number of people. Platforms will be priority number one, the car park will get done in due course. Clearing a car park of snow is hard work. To whoever does it - a big thank you.

Maidenhead platforms were clear by Friday night (And a bit thank you to who did that).. It is now Monday evening.. I'm pretty sure they are waiting for the car park snow to melt.. As you will see if you read my initial post.. It looks as if maybe FGW/APCOA contract out the clearing/gritting of car parks? Though I don't know if that is true or not.. The on-line advertiser still doesn't have the letter on btw or I'd post a link..

Maidenhead platforms this morning hadn't been cleared (well platform 2 anyway - too early in the morning to look at the others!).  One of the staff was making the effort around 7am to clear the snow from the yellow line - presumably so that when the announcer said "please stand behind the yellow line" you'd have an idea where it was.

Shoppenhangars car park was a scene from winter wonderland with no evidence of gritting, etc.

It had to happen to me didn't it ?!?!    ::)

Parked up at Shoppenhangers this morning, gingerly walked to the station and slipped straight over.
Blood pouring out of a 3" gash to my hand and others on my leg.

Notified the station staff who pulled the 'nothing to do with us gov' approach.
Called APCOA who sent me to FGW, who confirmed it is their responsibility.  Waiting for a call back from head office.

I love commuting.  Its so much fun.

The attitude of the station staff is completely unacceptable and entirely contrary to the rules, which state that every accident must be recorded on a form RAF01 and noted in the station accident log. Form RAF01 includes sections to be completed by the station manager re inspection of the site and rectification of hazards found. All staff are briefed on this procedure at least annually.

The RAF01 is sent to the Safety department and checked there. Actions are recorded on a database and the Station Manager must then report on progress. The database will flag up open actions, so there is no escape.

Follow it through and find out why this procedure was not followed. Also ask what action is being taken to make the area safe.

By the way, if you had gone to hospital, the accident would have been Riddor reportable and the Station Manager would have had to produce a report within 72 hours.

And all someone had to do in the last five days or so.. Was grit the car park... assuming it was the car park you fell over in?

I am very interested to know what FGW say about that (whether the car park is their responsibility or if not someone elses, but it is still in FGWs interest).. Hope you're ok NickB?

Not sure if you know or not Oxman but the car park this post was about is a little way from the station, and includes a public footpath/road to get there. I don't know but is the station Manager responsible for remote from the station locations as this?

I don't know the geography of the area, but was going on the admission from FGW (as reported by NickB) that it is responsible for the car park. If this is the case, then the Station Manager will be the local manager responsible for the site.

APCOA was, until a few years ago, contracted to treat car parks, although the contract was unsatisfactory in its scope. APCOA was relieved of its responsibilities when Mitie was contracted to provide gritting and snow clearance.

Morning,

Thanks for your concern johoare - my cuts and scrapes will mend, although I've got rather a stiff neck still.

To clarify where/what happened it was indeed in the carpark, on the slope down towards the (unmanned) ticket booth.  I went down with a bang!  ;D
After my unsuccessful attempt to report it at the station I called the FGW CarParks line, they then passed me to the main Customer Helpline.  Both operators confirmed that FGW own and are responsible for the Maidnehead carparks and that APCOA only collect revenue.  As an aside, to cover myself I also emailed APCOA but they have been silent so far.
FGW asked me to supply the details in writing or email, marking for attention of a particular person.  I did this yesterday morning, but no response yet.

What was quite interesting was that the Customer Services person was in some ways more concerned about the dismissal I received at the station rather than the incident itself.  I guess Oxman's comments demonstrate where the station staff were amiss.

If anything interesting happens I'll keep you updated.

I  may be wrong but I think your reply from Apcoa (if you get one at all) is  that they don't deal with complaints by email..

I had a slightly strange answering phone message from Network rail today to say that "the works" that I had enquired about would be scheduled either for 2013 or 2014 depending on funding...Having said that it looks like they might have started sorting the drains out today (or they are doing something else.. it's hard to tell)

Tonight at 8.15 I got back to Silco drive car park to find it without lights.. I can only imagine that isn't safe for anyone? I imagine Network Rail are most likely responsible for that and so I won't get response should I complain.. I also imagine/can tell from previous posts of mine that  no one here is that bothered unless they use that car park... but... it is quite important that people can get to their cars relatively safely surely?  I for one won't want to use it until it is sorted which might not be anytime soon...

Hmm. It really isn't very good, is it, Jo?

I can't find anything useful in the way of possible contacts at Network Rail, other than to suggest that you telephone their helpline (open 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, apparently!) on 08457 11 41 41 - and keep on at them until the matter is escalated to someone who will do something about it.  ::)

Thanks Chris.. I will do that (though I can't do that from work which probably restricts it a bit).. but since the "puddle/lake" "won't" potentially be sorted out until 2014.. I do wonder how long it would take me to get a reply ... Hhhm.. that worries me a lot about what their main job/aim is... ::) ::)

Lighting issues would get a much higher priority than puddles/lakes, and are likely to be much easier to fix.

Well.. Network rail did respond quite quickly on this one.. to say that FGW look after the car park (so they have forwarded the information re no street lights on to them)

It's not hard to be confused tho..Since...from the main road (which RBWM look after) the roadway and traffic lights (which haven't worked for several years) are maintained by Network Rail but the car park itself is the responsibility of FGW..(which Apcoa manage!!)

Some lights are working now (though mainly in the middle) which is better than total darkness. particularly as quite often someone going to their car after about 7pm might be totally on their own...and it is quite a way from the main road and civilisation :)

There is a sign up at the front station car park at Maidenhead saying that it will be closed from March 22nd until April (can't quite remember the date in April)... It's still open though.. I guess it will be used as a bus terminus again when the lines are closed over Easter but does anyone know when it will actually close?

Ah, a sign of the chaos to come for Maidenhead.  Its not long now until both Silco and the forecourt car parks close forever, and Shoppenhangers reduces capacity by 25%.  No drop-off lay-bys either.

Purely in the interests of continuity and ease of future reference, I've now merged five previously separate topics into this one here.

Hope this helps!  ;)

NickB.. Silco drive car park is closing? They have kept that quiet

Back to my question  from yesterday...  The signs are still up.. the car park at the front of the station is getting smaller (but still had cars parking in it this morning)... Anyone in the know can help here?

I saw that poster of car park closing as well, walking by the other day.
My reckoning is that Crossrail may be beginning but very slowly indeed to upgrade the station area. If thats not happening it might be for the bus replacement services at the front of station as happened a few years back due to Reading Station Redevelopment.
However i dont remember if you could still drop off/pick up at the bottom bit of that front car park. A side from that it should be a proper bus interchange point on station approach all the time and stop taxis from occupying the whole dam station area which includes shoppenhangers road and not to mention (not by but near the station) the delight long queue of eager to go into action mode taxis when I pass by ludlow road! Anyway hopefully that gives you some info jo :)

It is finally closed today.. Although there are a few cars parked.. but could be staff I guess, or cars left overnight..

The small print on the sign says to check the First Great Western web-site for further details.. so I did just that... I couldn't find anything on there about the car park closure though..  ::)

Indeed, there is some very interesting (scary?) reading about the whole issue if you know where to look.  

This is good for starters - Select Committee Minutes for Crossrail
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmcross/235/6062716.htm

"To summarise, the Royal Borough contends that Crossrail's forecasting is too simplistic and does not really take account of current commuter levels and behaviours or long-term changes in demographics which a new rail service could bring; that the modal split of London-bound commuters is significantly more car-orientated and that Crossrail will inevitably increase this, as that is more attractive to them; and that the revised car-parking proposals by the Promoter are not acceptable as it is located even further from the station than the current car parks."

"The Royal Borough believes that the car parking provision should be significantly increased, with the need for a multi-storey car park on Shoppenhangers Road, catering for around 600 to 700 spaces, for current and future rail commuters;"

But the juicy stuff is here:

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/about-us/crossrail-bill-supporting-documents/environmental-statement?folder=/l0/120/asset/618

"In total Maidenhead station will lose 200 out of 352 car parking spaces (57%) (for the duration of construction works, estimated at 3 years)"

"There is one significant operational impact to note at Maidenhead station relating to parking and loading.  Maidenhead station will lose 66 spaces from the (forecourt) northern carpark and 48 from Silco Drive carpark.  The total loss of 114 out of 352 car parking spaces (32%) will constiture a permanent significant impact as it cannot be easily mitigated"

and all of this is built around a stated assumption that "No major changes in passenger flows are expected at Maidenhead station as a result of Crossrail".  Hahahahaha!  That kind of conflicts with the "1m extra movements" now predicted.

A reminder of what happens to people that ignore car park closure notices: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-21292873

 ;D

The taxi situation was bedlam earlier..No obvious pointers as to where to queue for taxis..Very few taxis can appear at any one time as the area they have been given is so small compared to the amount of people that get taxis at Maidenhead particularly off of peak time fast trains..etc...

Chatting to my taxi driver they are not happy also.. The car park at the front of the station is still fairly empty.. And whilst he understands that when buses are running the taxis will have to be banished.. Right now that isn't the case..

http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/News/Areas/Maidenhead/Shoppers-frustrated-by-commuters-hogging-parking-spaces-at-retail-park-27032013.htm (http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/News/Areas/Maidenhead/Shoppers-frustrated-by-commuters-hogging-parking-spaces-at-retail-park-27032013.htm)

When the retail complex first opened there was a two hour parking limit which was policed in an almost too strong a fashion (Eg you could buy things in one or more of the retail shops there, then, eg, pop to the station to renew your season ticket as there is no short term parking at the station, and potentially come back to a car park ticket (As they used to pounce immediately))..

I have no idea what has happened since.. and it seems to have gone the other way entirely,..but someone somewhere must have made the decision to let this happen...

And whatever they decide in the future, thanks to recent legislation they can't clamp or tow you in/from a private car park and can only attempt  to charge you using legally dubious civil Penalty Charge Notices, that are contractual in nature and rarely, if ever, stand up to scrutiny in the County Court.

It may not be the case with this particular retail complex, but many such out of town complexes were granted planning permission which explicitly included free parking. Any charges for parking, be they up front or by way of a penalty could mean that the freeholder and/or its tenants/agents are in breach of the original planning consent.

But I guess if they are removing a fair chunk of Maidenhead parking spaces for crossrail preparations.. where will everyone park if not there? Not that it makes it right... just a question..

Well thats the issue for Maidenhead, lack of car park spaces. What is true is that theres limited space for cars at the station, thats until Crossrail build the multi storey car park, whenever that may be. To be honest the whole thing is a complete mess. Maybe better to use a taxi or bus to get to the station, although for people it may be too much to ask!

Indeed.. I chose to walk generally.. Only as the bus service is far from regular also...

I strongly suspect that the majority of those parking at Maidenhead station live well beyond walking distance and off of the bus routes.  Lets face it, no one pays ^5.20 per day (so thats >^1000 per year) for fun.

It has to be remembered that Maidenhead is a commuter hub for a huge area.  Anyone west of Taplow, south of High Wycombe and east of Reading will see Maidenhead as their fastest route to London. 
You won't convince these people to carshare, or get the bus.   The carparking debacle will get worse.

Personally I'd get the bus if the bus cost a reasonable amount of money, ran more often than once every 30mins, was coordinated with the train timetable, and ran past 8pm....

Wow. every 30 minutes.. We only have an hourly service from my part of Maidenhead (apart from on Sundays that is when we have nothing at all)... ::)

Just had a look into a old thread, and i agree with jo and NickB that the bus service around Maidenhead is shocking.
I did email Courtney Buses, to find out if a later bus could run between Maidenhead and Woodlands Park after 830pm, which is when the last bus is...
However they say that due to lack of demand (not surprising since they like to speed everywhere) they cannot afford to run a later service as it would damage the commercial operation of route 7. Come On i remember in 2003 when First Beeline (yes another First Group operator...) operated the routes 56 and 57 and ran until 1100 pm at night. So what's so different now?
Well maybe theres one thing, the decline of Maidenhead Town Centre in general.... but still there's people who do want a bus service at the time. I for one, if i ever did go to london would never take a taxi back home due to the high cost. Might as well walk  ;D

Something more relevant to this thread.
Apparently Crossrail will be constructing a bigger Car Park on the Shoppenhangers Road side of the Station, however i don't know how they will build two or three levels in such a small area.

Also with Maidenhead Station (Shoppenhangers Road entrance) the entrance will come out a bit further with the bus stop being removed to a different location (maybe as far as the Desborough School Bus Stop).

At the front a bigger two level Maidenhead Station on Station Approach will be built, however the crossing to get to the Maidenhead Town Centre from the Station will be interesting. The A308 can be a dangerous road at times....
Although due to limited space there's only so much you can do, and the council have a habit of preventing positive things such as constructing better footway facilities, and would rather redo the pavement at a cost of ^400,000...

There is a sign up at Maidenhead station (in the front car park) to say that there will be 50 (I think) less spaces available there from July 5th but there will be some additional ones made available in Silco Drive.. I failed to note how long this would be for but I can try and find out later  :)

Third item from Maidenhead Advertiser 29 Oct.

There has been quite a lot of correspondance about parking in Maidenhead in general recently. This week there's a letter headed "Where will all the Extra Commuters Park?".

Asking that very question about the projected growth in users of Maidenhead Station with Crossrail.

Seems a very sensible question and probably applies to all Crossrail served Stations even Taplow!

Thought for Moderators should we have a Dedicated Crossrail thread for issues like this?

My view, and it has been for a long time, is that Crossrail does NOT work West of Paddington, even going to Reading has not changed my view :(

I don't see Crossrail lifting current numbers by very much west of Zone 6 - time will tell.

Are they saying there are many now driving the M25 that will transgfer to Crossrail? If not, why the projected increase & where is it now?

Thanks for your comments, eightf48544.  ;)

Dealing with your first point first, so to speak, I've just merged a couple of topics here now, in the interests of continuity and ease of reference.

As to creating a new and separate 'Crossrail' board, I'll discuss that with the other members of our Coffee Shop admin team, before taking any action.  :-X

Silco drive car park has now been relocated. I was amused to see they've even relocated the broken ticket machine (the only one) into the new car park complete with cover and original sign telling people they have to buy tickets another way because the machine is broken  ??? ::) ::)

Great news - so that is 100 spaces at Maidenhead that we didn't have last week(??). That will help alleviate the pressure on shoppenhangers, particularly since a lot of heavy plant units are being stored there overnight at the moment.

I think it was there last week too but I've been ill so may have missed when the new Silco drive opened. It's bigger than it's predecessor but not sure it will take the extra cars that won't fit in Shoppenhangers anymore.. It was full up when I picked my car up before the rush hour had started today anyway.

Hope you're feeling better Jo.
Well shoppenhangers is full by 7.15 everyday so any extra capacity will be much appreciated. Even a small increase would enable me to get a slightly later, less overcrowded, train. At present train choices are controlled by the car park which is an odd state of affairs.

Thanks NickB.. I think Silco drive won't be full before 8 or later (depending on the day of the week). When I parked about 7am yesterday there was only a handful of cars in there.. Depending on what time you travel I've discovered the 7.13 (as long as it's it's usual 5 car length) has lots of seat choices at Maidenhead, fills up at Slough but generally everyone has a seat from there too, and gets into Paddington (platform 1) very shortly after the non-stop 7.17 departure.

I got back to my car tonight to a note on the windscreen saying that Silco drive car park is "temporarily" closing from the 6th January (it doesn't say if that's the start or the end of the 6th) for up to a year.. They're restoring the spaces they took away in Shoppenhangers and setting up a new temporary car park in Braywick park which is apparently a 12 minute walk from the station (so not really a station car park!) and also the wrong side of Maidenhead to get to for anyone currently using Silco drive...

Braywick Park is a fair trek - won't be much fun when it starts raining.

I'm at Maidenhead tomorrow morning so will try to find out more.

I'm assuming it's not something that has been planned for a long time since they installed a ticket machine and signs in the "new" Silco drive car park that hasn't really been in use that long since we moved from the old one..

Sorry, Jo, but you're assuming there's been some 'planning' involved ... ?   :o ::) ;D

Aah yes Chris - my first mistake  ;D

I wouldn't worry about how long it takes on foot, just remember to add the extra 30+ minutes each way while you sit in solid traffic along Windsor Road/Braywick Road at rush hour!

PS. if you are walking and its raining, beware of the flooded roads as you will get soaked when people speed through them. And keep your wits about you for the moron that drives along the pavement to avoid having to go up to the roundabout in the morning ....  ::)

I agree.. in the rush hour it's not the easiest place to get to. They have also provided a map to help us get from the new car park in Braywick park to the station which first involves crossing over 4 lanes of traffic.. Need to factor in the time for that too!

And not to mention the cyclists on the pavement.... :(

Keep it quite but there are a couple of extra fast trains from Taplow in the morning. Plus one of the evening down Henleyhas an extra stop at Taplow. Temporary whilst Silco Drive carpark closed.

ok thanks.. looking online they are the 7.41 and 8.41 departures from Maidenhead which also stop at Slough and follow stopping trains down the slow line... Unless you know of any extra really fast ones too?

The two Maidenhead station car parks are now full up shortly after 7am each morning. Anyone arriving after that cannot park anywhere near the station.. This morning several spaces were taken up by network rail vehicles too reducing the car parking spaces even further

Does anyone know when Silco Drive is going to reopen? 
It was scheduled to be closed 'until Autumn 2017' and construction activity has massively decreased but Silco Drive remains closed and Shoppenhangers remains overcrowded (full by 6.55 everyday).

I asked GWRHelp via Twitter and they are pretty sure that if it was promised to be open by the end of last year then that means it is open.. How simple life would be if everything we were promised turns out to be true as they believe to be the case  ::) ;D

I suspect they are never going to re-open it and that unless you turn up before 7am then there will be no station parking available..

Thanks for following up Jo.
Since posing my question I’ve asked my contact in Mr Hopwood’s team who told me that the closure remains ‘temporary’, and that a funding bid to expand Shoppenhangers was declined as it was considered too expensive.
I also asked the same question to APCOA who told me that the contractors have not told them when they will be leaving...

It’s a bloody nightmare Mon-Thurs.
From a GWR perspective what is the incentive to expand the carpark? They receive £X everyday for doing nothing. Why go to the trouble of spending £ millions on a multi-storey which will take years to recoup the expenses on?  The frailties of a purely ‘market-led’ economy.

I just asked on twitter again and was told "The Silco Car Park is Open"
So I've asked them when it re-opened as it wasn't open a couple of days ago... ::) ::)

Their response "I spoke to @APCOAUK a while ago and they confirmed it is now open, if you speak with them they can confirm the specific date it was reopened.".. So maybe it is..or maybe I believe everything I am told... I shall take a trip down there later to confirm if this is true or not.

That turned out (as I expected) to be a totally made up fact...  ::) ::)

Thanks for checking.
My expectations for GWR/Apcoa to tell the truth weren’t high. They met my expectations well.

I'm not sure what's going on but Shoppenhangers car park has been more busy than ever for the last 2 weeks - cars queuing to park at the far end by 06.55am, full by 7.  Is there more traffic, is another car park closed or is it a change in the timetable?

I agree - the last two weeks have been hellish. 
Silco Drive being closed is the main factor (hence enquiries to find out when this will reopen).  I think that some passengers from the Marlow branch line (and Henley?) are possibly driving to Maidenhead since the cessation of direct services to Paddington.  And finally it is peak 'got to go to work'/'haven't got any holiday booked' time of year.

I pointed out their incorrect information and that there isn't enough parking and questioned who is responsible for providing enough parking at stations and got the following reply "Hi there. We work alongside APCOA to assess parking. I will make sure your feedback is recorded Maidenhead. I will give the station a call to get an update on Silco Drive. When I hear back I will be in touch".. That was on Tuesday.. I'll chase for a response next week if I don't get one.

An update from my helpful source at GWR.

Works at Silco Drive are delayed due to Network Rail needing to retender.  There is no eta for the release of the car park.

👎

That's not ideal in the slightest.. The car park itself looks to be pretty much empty and unused each day from what I can see from the other side of the railway line which is a big waste or valuable parking space

Indeed.  FYI shoppenhangars road car park is 50% closed for Network Rail activity over the next few days.

I see the top half of Shoppenhangers car park has been tarmaced - which presumably means no expansion (upwards?) of the car park.  Lets hope Crossrail doesn't grow the number of passengers....

I wonder by how much APCOA feel they can increase the daily rate for a non-pothole rubble-covered surface.

I travelled from Wycombe to Birmingham last weekend (and back) and couldn't help notice that GWR could take some advice from Chiltern about providing adequate car parking at their stations..
 
Take High Wycombe for example.. Their car park is about the same size in my opinion as Shoppenhangers at Maidenhead.. But then they've put a big multi storey on part of it so that when I got there about 1pm Friday I had a couple of floors of spaces to chose from. I saw many other similar car parks at Chiltern operated stations from the train..

You mean like the one at Bristol Parkway and the one being built at Didcot Parkway?

Maidenhead Shoppenhangers Rd station car park full by 06.55 again this morning with those missing out on a space facing a tortuous drive around the town centre to find alternative arrangements.  Any news if more convenient car parks will be opened up, or if Shoppenhangers Rd will go double-decker?  if Crossrail ever runs from Reading to central London (2022 maybe?) the situation will only get worse.

I fully concur - this morning was awful in shoppenhangers. Although, as an aside, whilst 20+ cars were battling over the final space at the end of the carpark there was a space right next to the exit that no one had seen!

I have it on good authority that Silco Drive will be reopening, and not too long (in GWR terms) to wait. Once the platform works are completed there may be encouraging news.
Plans to double-deck (or triple deck, which is what is actually needed!) shoppenhangers have been abandoned as non cost effective. In some ways that goes without saying, that parking for an additional 200 cars would take a millennium to repay the millions it would cost to build the carpark, but Wokingham managed to overcome that hurdle...

In the meantime we’ll all have to set our alarm clocks earlier and earlier (I now get up 20mins earlier than I did 9 years ago, purely due to that infernal carpark).

Well it’s now been over a year since I had the pleasure of using any form of GWR service and my blood pressure is much the better for it

Good to see you back online, Nick.  I think it's fair to say that those who have continued to commute have also seen their blood pressure levels drop considerably!   :D

It would be interesting to hear your future plans over on the thread I created last month at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=24728.0 - even though the associated poll has now closed.

A first trip to Maidenhead Shoppenhangars car park for quite some time revealed that approximately 20 bays (10%) have been removed and replaced by c10 disabled bays.

As one might have expected all of the regular bays were in use (ie car park full) but not one disabled bay was in use.

Does anyone know whether the reassignment of valuable parking spaces is a temporary phenomena whilst the forecourt is re-done or whether this work of face-palm genius is permanent?

Thanks

I believe GWR / TfL / NR and RBWM have agreed that the RBWM will be providing the additional car parking capacity for Crossrail at Stafferton Way and Vicus Way

That would be most unfortunate if that is the chosen solution to Maidenhead’s lack of parking because they are park of a one way system that would massively compound the majority of driver’s routes and time spent accessing parking that is not actually near the station. For me that would add 15mins at least to my commute.

What has happened to Silco Drive?  Closed for refurbishment for a couple of months, never to be heard of again?  That was another 100+ spaces.

Should I take it that the answer to my question about the disabled spaces is that they are there to stay (and never to be used)?

Obviously there are rules, and for stations the relevant requirement is in  Design Standards for Accessible Railway Stations (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/918425/design-standards-accessible-stations.pdf):

C2.	European standards	Reference
	The European TSI requirement is that UK national standards shall be applied to ensure consistency across the UK. Therefore, the national standards below must be followed.	PRM TSI 4.2.1
C2.	National standards	Reference
1.	The minimum number of designated spaces should be one space for each employee who is a disabled motorist, plus 5 per cent of the total capacity for visiting disabled motorists.	BS 8300:4.2.1.4
2.	A further 5 per cent of the total capacity should be enlarged standard spaces of 3600 mm wide x 6000 mm long that could be adapted to be designated parking spaces to reflect changes in local population needs and allow for flexibility of provision in the future.	BS 8300:4.2.1.1
3.	Spaces designated for disabled employees should be differentiated from spaces designated for other users.	BS 8300:4.2.1.1
4.	Where space permits, at least one large designated parking space, 4800 mm wide x 8000 mm long, should be provided for side or rear access using hoists or ramps.
5.	Designated disabled persons’ parking spaces must be 2400 mm x 4800 mm with a zone 1200 mm wide between designated parking spaces and between the designated spaces and a roadway (without reducing the width of the roadway) to enable a disabled driver or passenger to get in or out of a vehicle and access safely the boot or rear hoist (Figures C2.2 and C2.3).	BS 8300:4.2.3
6.	Designated on-street parking must be 6600 mm long × 3600 mm wide. This allows access to the rear of the vehicle and free passage between parked vehicles. It also enables the driver or passenger to alight from the side (Figure C2.1).	BS 8300:4.1
C2.	Code of Practice guidance
	If all the designated spaces are occupied for more than 10 per cent of the car park’s operating hours, the operator should consider increasing their number.

The "total capacity" should include all car parks provided for the station, but the designated spaces all go in the nearest one. What if the demand for parking exceeds what is provided specifically, so passengers have to park elsewhere? That isn't clear, but as "total capacity" isn't defined we have to rely on this text alone. So it appears that only capacity specfic to the station is counted, i.e. the assumption is that any other car parking would have its own "accessible" provision. Maybe.

Would suggest it's permanent I think there has to be certian percentage of disabled bays in any car park.

Interesting reading and interesting to see what drives the decision making.
It remains a crying shame that GWR can’t support their actual passengers who increasingly can’t actually park at the station.
With the loss of Silco Drive and the forecourt and the additional disabled spaces I think the total capacity has been halved in the past few years, at a time when it already could have benefitted from being doubled.

I see ground is being broken at the Vicus Way site.  You're right, its a pretty poor location, and I guess will be a year to completion.  However Stafferton way multi-storey is a bit closer to the station and in the past had spaces in the morning.  Neither is as convenient as Shoppenhangers Rd though.  Just another nail in my decision whether to go back to commuting.  Although I expect I will, I will be pushing out my re-start to as far in the future as possible, and only a few days a week.

As an aside, and probably in the wrong thread, but is the extension of the station on the Shoppenhangers Rd side still going ahead?

Shoppenhangers Rd car park back to being full by 06:55 today, presumably due to the opening of the Elizabeth Line.  Neither the Stafferton Way car park nor the new one under construction by Lidl are particularly attractive alternatives, being a longer walk and the wrong side of the busy Braywick Rd.  Cycling might be an option, but the station bike racks are the 'bike theft capital of Europe' according to one local counsellor.

Agreed - I’m not sure what the sudden burst of interest has been this week as the services from Maidenhead are exactly the same as they were pre-go live for the central section of Crossrail.

Time for me to ask GWR why Silco Drive remains shut…

Ps. ALL of the additional disabled spaces at Maidenhead that I mentioned in this thread remain empty.

From the statistics the numbers return to commuting has been gradually increasing over the last few weeks.  There was an initial spike in return numbers it levelled off for a while but has shown a slow increase in the last few weeks, busy days Tuesday to Thursday although Boom Town Rat Day (Mondays  ;D ) has been improving in numbers of late

I see the the price has been increased from £6 to £8 - a 33% price increase when inflation is running around 10%, for no change in service except for bigger potholes.  Also, I've never understood the 20p extra 'convenience' charge to pay via the APCOA app.  Surely it costs more to send someone to collect the cash from the machine as well as to maintain it, whilst the incremental cost of paying online is virtually zero.

I suspect it relates to what the market will stand - it's for the convenience of the car park user who does not have to have the change to hand nor have to walk to the machine.   Convenience (and cost) to the provider is not the issue.

This reminds me of the big sign ... "Loaves of bread at popular prices", and when someone says to the vendor that £5 is not a popular price he tells them "it's popular with me" ...