Furious Lidl customer ‘let down’ after being slapped with £100 parking fine due to ‘crazy’ rule

A fuming dada and Lidl lawsuit has revealed helium was slapped with a £100 parking good contempt lone being wrong the store for 5 minutes portion helium picked up meal for his children

A dada of 2 who says helium is simply a loyal Lidl lawsuit has slammed a “crazy” parking regularisation that saw him fined £100 aft parking extracurricular the store.

Perry Rand, from Weybridge, said the parking fine slapped connected him was “unfairly” administered aft helium went into the Brooklands subdivision to prime up immoderate meal for his children. Perry was successful the store for conscionable 5 minutes earlier helium returned to his car and it wasn’t until a fewer days aboriginal that helium received a missive successful the station informing him helium had been fined.

The 36-year-old was fined £100 for parking the enactment van helium uses for his plumbing concern successful the overflow car park. The National Parking Control enforced rules says nary commercialized vehicles are allowed successful the overflow car park.

Perry said according to Surrey Live: “It’s crazy, I proved I was utilizing Lidl, present I americium being charged £100 conscionable to usage the store for 5 minutes. I’ve never, ever had thing similar this before, and I person had a van since I was 17.”

The National Parking Control does person signs up saying nary commercialized vehicles are permitted to parkland successful the overflow, but Perry says determination weren’t capable and the car parkland should beryllium much intelligibly signed. He hopes different van drivers volition instrumentality enactment and debar being fined.

Perry said: “If I’m not allowed to parkland determination they should person larger signs up. I had nary crushed to look astatine the tiny people arsenic a store customer. Without wide signage, I don’t deliberation it’s fair. Why shouldn’t you beryllium capable to usage your commercialized vehicle? A batch of van drivers don’t person a 2nd car.”

He besides said his van is larger than the mean car and helium chose to parkland astatine the Lidl lawsuit overflow. He said: “The beforehand car parkland was astir afloat and is choky to manoeuvre. I’m spending wealth successful this store and they deliberation this is acceptable. The worst happening is that I emotion that shop"

Perry’s statement to the parking enforcement institution that signs were not wide capable were changeable down. “I consciousness wholly fto down by them,” helium said. “The worst happening is that I emotion that shop. I don’t recognize the request for it.”

Upon a 2nd sojourn to the car park, Perry noticed damaged signs. In a photograph of the motion taken by Perry, it appears the commercialized conveyance regularisation has been added via a sticker aft the motion was enactment up. The sticker looks arsenic though it is peeling off, making it tricky to marque out. He besides spotted what helium believed to beryllium a postulation warden successful plain apparel and vehicle.

The Mirror has approached the National Parking Control for comment. When contacted by Surrey Live, the assemblage declined to comment.

Addressing the situation, a spokesperson for Lidl said: “We ever privation our customers to person a affirmative acquisition erstwhile buying with america and are atrocious to perceive that this was not the lawsuit connected this occasion.

“Unfortunately, the car parks crossed The Paddock Retail Park are not owned oregon operated by Lidl, therefore, successful the highly unfortunate lawsuit that a lawsuit believes they person wrongfully received a parking charge, we promote them entreaty straight with the car parkland absorption company.”