A disabled pensioner who suffers from diabetes has been ordered to pay £200 after falling asleep in a McDonald’s car park.
John Colliver, 71, went to the Blackwood branch of the fast food chain for breakfast at around 5am on April 4 and fell asleep in his car .
The registered Blue Badge holder from Trinant said he is a regular Blackwood McDonald’s customer and uses the restaurant as it’s open 24 hours a day.
Mr Colliver, who is a former merchant seaman and runs the animal shelter Socolex in Crumlin, received a £100 parking charge in the post.
He said: “I’d been working long days and when I got in the warm after eating I just fell asleep.
“I can’t afford to pay it. I’m a pensioner and voluntarily run an animal sanctuary – you feel like you’re being victimised.
“I want the fine rescinded. If not, I’ll have to ask the court to pay it by instalments.
“I can’t take the chance of going back to eat there and getting done again. It was the dearest hamburger in the world.”
Mr Colliver’s friend Anthony Allcock has been helping with the dispute and said his diabetes causes an erratic sleeping pattern.
He said: “I contacted the McDonald’s branch directly and they emailed me and said that it would be the end of the matter.
“I don’t understand how you can be a regular customer and get penalised for it.”
Despite being told by the branch’s business manager the matter would be dealt with, Mr Colliver received a court letter stating he still owed the £100 charge and was ordered to pay another £100 in court costs.
The car park is run by ParkingEye Limited, a company with an annual turnover of more than £14m.
A ParkingEye spokesperson said: “Car park users enter into a contract to pay the appropriate amount for the duration of their visit or to not exceed free parking limits.
“A parking charge becomes payable if the terms and conditions are not adhered to and, in this case, the motorist overstayed for nearly two hours.
“We operate an audited appeals process and encourage people to appeal if they feel there are mitigating circumstances. The motorist in question received at least four letters, all of which offered the opportunity to appeal but no appeal was made.”
After Caerphilly Observer contacted McDonald’s and ParkingEye, Mr Allcock said he was told that if Mr Colliver paid the £100 charge the other £100 court costs would be waived, but he has rejected the offer.
Mr Allcock said: “It’s a stinking offer. It’s not being very charitable. McDonald’s is a multi-billion pound company and they’ve obviously got a commercial agreement, but in my eyes they should be making John an apology, paying his fine and make a donation to his charity.”
A McDonald’s spokesperson said: “In an effort to make sure there are always parking spaces available for customers, McDonald’s and its franchisees have had to introduce parking restrictions at a number of restaurants, including Blackwood where a 90 minute limit is in place.
“In each of the restaurants where parking restrictions have been introduced, McDonald’s and its franchisees work with industry-approved contractors to make parking policies as fair and as clearly communicated as possible.
“In instances where a customer feels that a Parking Charge Notice has been issued in error, we would ask that they contact our or our franchisees’ parking contractors, which in this case is Parking Eye, to appeal the charge.”
A spokeswoman for the British Parking Association, of which ParkingEye is a member, said: “Drivers have the responsibility to follow the procedures and adhere to the terms and conditions. Do not ignore the Parking Charge Notice for any reason.”
Good now maybe he can eat normal food and live longer
Take my advice, if you are going to ANY of these car parks that are controlled by the ‘Parking Eye’, cover your front registration plate on entering the Car Park. Then when you leave, cover the rear plate. There are cameras on the entrance and exits of the car parks, they just take photos of your plates on entering and exiting.
god tim u r not very nice r u i hope u get a parking fine as i would lol
rip offs best of luck john
Man receives parking fine for staying in a privately operated car park longer than the free parking time limit of one and a half hours – it is irrelevant that he is a blue badge holder, it is irrelevant that the company who own the car park have a turnover of more than £14m, it is irrelevant that he is a pensioner. He drives a car and didn’t obey the parking restrictions of the car park that he chose to park in of his own free will, it’s high time folk started taking responsibility for their own actions.
You might be right when you state the facts so glibly, but really? A 71 year diabetic man. People with diabeties are prone to falling asleep due to blood sugar levels (against their own free will). I accept that the fine was automatic based on cameras, and understand that it would be issued. But ultimately there must be an appeals process where mitigating circumstances can be taken into account. Macdonalds have been very cynical by using a 3rd party to fine people in my opinion, but ultimately they should be held accountable for any fallout.
If Mr Colliver’s diabetes makes him prone to falling asleep against his own free will perhaps his ability to drive a car on the public highway should be assessed – the next time he dozes off behind the wheel might be whilst his vehicle is travelling at 30mph towards a pedestrian crossing packed with children. The one and only person to held accountable is the one who drove his car into the car park and stayed longer than the restrictions allowed, McDonalds aren’t at fault – they only sold him his food, PrivateEye Limited aren’t at fault – they provided one and a half hours free parking. The parking restrictions that are in force aren’t prejudice, they’re for everbody.
I am certain that had he represented himself at court and explained his mitigating cirumstances then he might have got the fine lifted. I suspect that he might have felt the onset of his symptoms and sensibly slept it off. I couldnt comment regarding his fitness to drive, but if he is registered as a diabetic with the DVLA he would be subject to regular reviews, as being diabeitc in itself does not result in someone losing their driving licence . You might be right in your comments, but well have to agree to disagree on this particular matter this time!
The reference to his ‘diabetes’ needs clarification. Type 2 is usually brought on due to lifestyle choice. Type 1 is an auto immune disease where the cells in the pancreas attack each other. The article needs to state which Type it is, they are very different.