Park Select

This past weekend I received a fine that said that I need to pay $25 for failure to pay for parking in their lot. I actually paid the fee using their web app which was later confirmed by the Office Manager Ms[redacted]. After filing a dispute on their system, I was sent an email from their "arbitrator" stating that they would issue a courtesy void for this incident. They went on to further explain that courtesy voids are seldom issued more than once but since there was no record of my car or violations in their system, they would issue this void this time. There was no mention that it would be subjected to further review. 24 hours later, I receive an email stating that they have rescinded the courtesy void and that my fine was due in full. They also acknowledged that they did receive payment for my parking. According to their systems, the payment posted 2 hours after the ticket was issued. They have agreed to reduce the find from $25 to $20 to reflect the payment that was sent. I would like the entire fine voided as it is clearly an attempt to make more money than what was owed for 4 hours of parking. I have issues with the following: 1) The attempt to collect a fine for a payment that confirmed received. I cannot be held responsible for their payment systems causing delays in payment posting. 2) The unexpected withdrawal of a promise issued by a company representative 24 hours prior.Desired SettlementI would like the entire fine voided.Business Response Our field rep thoroughly checked both our pay box AND the Pay-by phone ([redacted]) system that evening for this gentleman's payment . He even called me directly to confirm no payment was showing up on my end. I confirmed and noted on this citation in our system for our arbitrator. The customer did in fact check with our office a couple of days later and I confirmed payment was received, but he was told he would have to wait on our arbitrator's investigation of his dispute. A couple of days later, I received a copy of the arbitrator's response notifying him that since this was his first citation he would be receiving a courtesy void (basically saying that we had no proof that he didn't pay---which wasn't true). I immediately knew something was wrong. I reviewed with [redacted] and found that his payment was received by their system 2 hours after he claimed he made the payment; and they informed me that it's not possible for a payment to take that long to process. After doing this research (the same day as the arbitrator's email went out to him), I immediately emailed customer explaining that, unfortunately, our arbitrator had neglected to check [redacted] system and verify the time of payment. Her courtesy void was therefore being rescinded since we did in fact have proof that his citation was valid. I even sent him a copy of the [redacted] with date and time of payment. I told him that since our arbitrator initially misinformed him, he could deduct the $5 he'd paid after the citation was issued, making his payment amount now due $20. I also told him that [redacted] was willing to investigate any delay if he wished them to. I went on to explain that if he felt certain that he'd paid on time, he could send them a BUG report from his phone as evidence of his claim, and they would confirm. I also sent him simple instructions on how to do this.Since he had argued over the amount paid for the time he'd spent in the lot, I explained that the same $5 is charged for someone who stays 10 minutes as someone who stays 10 hours. Our $5 fee is a FLAT amount so there is no correlation between what he paid and the amount of time spent in the lot prior to the pay hours ending at 8AM the next day. I then wrote....."This is the final decision unless [redacted] notifies us of any findings otherwise after receiving your BUG report. I'm sure that if there was a glitch in [redacted] system on that evening, they will find in your favor and notify us as such. However, if not, please note the importance of paying the $20 as soon as possible due to the increased fine amounts (after 21 and 60 days) listed on your citation to cover the cost of collections processing." The customer responded numerous times, arguing over sending the BUG report. This is indicative of someone who knows they are in the wrong. All he had to do was send the report, but I have checked twice with [redacted] and they have never received it from him.We are certainly still willing to consider voiding his citation upon [redacted] review of his BUG report---if he ever sends it.Consumer Response The condescending tone of this response is unappreciated and unprofessional. The instructions were indeed simple and were indeed followed.I work as a systems engineer and software analyst. I certainly understand how apps work and know how there will be errors in programming. I see none of this as a reflection on the company or the app but rather an inherit danger in software development. They are machines programmed by imperfect humans therefore are statistically guaranteed to have problems. I will be more than happy to provide any information from the software requested to help work out any bug or problems if requested.With that said, the bug report was sent the day that it was requested. I have not heard back from anyone regarding this nor did I ever argued that I would not send a bug report. I did, however, argue the fact that they are charging me a fine for a fee that was confirmed collected. I am still awaiting a response to the bug report analysis.I would still like the $20 voided.Final Business Response I stated the facts as they occurred in my previous email, but do apologize for any implied condescension. I checked with [redacted] once more, and they HAVE indeed received the BUG report. What they found in the report is as follows:[redacted] has identified his bug report and found that he installed that application at 7:40pm on March 7th, 2015. They also identified that you requested a verification code to create your account at 9:20pm and initiated a parking session at 9:26pm. The citation was written at 7:25pm (prior to any of the above taking place) making the violation Valid. [redacted] also assured us that they found no bugs or issues with this session. Please feel free to look at the time-stamped log of his activity, as found in the bug report below: 2015-03-07 19:40:46 EST INFO Installed the app2015-03-07 19:41:41 EST INFO [redacted] - Closed the app2015-03-07 21:20:27 EST INFO [redacted] - Requested Verification Code to setup account.2015-03-07 21:26:11 EST INFO [redacted] - call to [redacted]() "Dispute is Denied and $20 payment must be made within 10 days to avoid further processing and/or collections fees.