Standard Parking

August 22, 2014
Dear [redacted],I am in receipt of the complaint regarding the parking operation at [redacted] in [redacted], Virginia. At issue are three distinct items addressed below:
1. Guest Parking Policy. SP+ is contracted as the operator of the parking garage at...

[redacted]. SP+ does not set the parking rates nor are we authorized of offer free or discounted parking to any entity without express written consent from Ownership. Agreements regarding parking are between the tenants and ownership directly. In this specific instance, there is no documented agreement between the [redacted] Group, the residential property management and [redacted], the property ownership that states that residents will receive free guest parking or discounted guest parking. The only authorization SP+ has is to offer discounted parking to the potential new residents. Their parking is validated by the [redacted] agent when the guest comes to tour an apartment.Therefore, SP+ cannot offer free or discounted parking to residential guests. This issue should be addressed to [redacted] Group Property Management and building ownership.
2. Parking Equipment Automation/Validation Acceptance. The complaint states that the new parking equipment is not able to accept validations and is flawed. At the time of the complaint the parking equipment was being installed in stages and was not fully operational. Merchants were given more than 2 months notice to implement the new electronic validation system. However, many were not compliant in doing so. As a service to the customers while the new paring equipment was being commissioned, SP+ staffed each exit gate with personnel to assist those customers who received validations from non-compliant merchants. This service was offered in lieu of ceasing all validation programs.At this time all merchants have implemented the electronic validation system and the exit lanes are no longer staffed. The system operates effectively 24/7.
3. Parking Attendants Service. There are no longer parking attendants employed at this location.Customer Service Representatives are on site to assist customers with equipment issues or questions. However, these personnel are not stationed at any entry or exit point. They roam throughout the garage to offer proactive assistance to customers and address issues as they may arise.
As the issues identified in the complaint have been addressed and those that are within the control of SP+ have been resolved, we will consider this matter closed.
Sincerely,STANDARD PARKING
Tashana B.
Senior Manager

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I have also reviewed these photographs.  I have sent an additional request for information through [redacted] Loss prevention Manager. See below:Good Morning [redacted] –First of all, I would like to thank you for taking time out of
your evening to review the video with me.  Per our conversation, I would
like to request your assistance on obtaining the garage surveillance on
03/22/15 at approximately 2:10-2:30pm and 03/23/15 1:40-1:55pm. 
Specifically the valet driver operating my vehicle entering, exiting and
parking my car.  Last night we saw the entrance of the garage and the
speed bump.  This is where I believe the damage may have been caused.
 I am not getting anywhere with SPPlus or their claims department and I
have not had a response other than blowing me off when requesting additional
information.  They are not working with me at all.Also, as I explained last night I would not be wasting your
time, my time and everyone else involved if I felt that I somehow caused this
damage.  I am willing to claim this through my insurance but I would like
someone to at least pay my deductible or offer some type of assistance on
this.  I appreciate everything you and Mimi have done for me.  You
both have been more than helpful and very understanding!  Please let me know what you find out.
Thank you[redacted]

Revdex.com spoke with [redacted] from the company and he stated that he has spoken with the consumer regarding the complaint. They have security in the deck now and they have a contract looking at the door knobs.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and the proposal -- namely that the business rescind the parking violation and refund me the fine -- is satisfactory to me. Please advise on how I should contact the business to get my refund.
Thanks,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
While it does not resolve my complaint, I am willing to pay for damages on my own.  I still want this logged with the Revdex.com as it was not satisfactory.
Regards,
[redacted]

We have received the response from Ms. [redacted] in regards to complaint # [redacted].SP Plus operates the valet service under a third party management contract. Because of this, we do not control the garage surveillance footage that Ms. [redacted] is requesting. Our client has provided us, as well as Ms. [redacted], with time-stamped, still photographs from the cameras at the front door of the hotel. These photographs show the condition of Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle as SP Plus returned it back into her possession on 3/23/15; the alleged damage is not present in these photographs. Based on the documentation provided, we have concluded that SP Plus did not cause the damage to Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle and will not be providing any assistance with the repairs.Thank you, [redacted]Administrative Assistant

Review: Last weekend, we parked at this garage. It was $8 for parking overnight. The machine wouldn't accept a credit card for some reason. While we were there multiple people tried to use credit cards without success as well. We felt forced to use cash. The machine simply said it took cash. There was no indication about change either way. So, we put in a $20 bill. The machine said it was processing our change, but no change appeared. On our receipt it said $12 was due. I complained to the Standard Parking national office, and they dismissed my complaint because their machines "don't give change." The machine never said this, or at the very least, it wasn't clear at all. Why would a machine say it's processing your change if it doesn't get change. The receipt says "change owed" $12.Desired Settlement: I just want my $12 back and for them to not do this to anyone else.

Business

Response:

We deeply sorry again for her situation. We have a procedure in place for situation like this. The customer submit their receipt and we will process refund for them. If she want to fax her receipt to the office [redacted] I will start the process.

Review: Standard Parking took over for [redacted] to manager the parking garage on [redacted], **. In October my employer moved locations. I cancelled my parking contract but since it was the middle of the month I had already paid for my November parking. I was in the process of cancelling the check but Standard Parking had already cashed it. In my cancellation notice I asked that I receive my monies back for the month of November. Since I cancelled before the end of the month I should not be responsible for paying for November and I should get my money back per the terms of the contract. I have called several times. I was given different numbers called those numbers. I was told they had received my cancellation notice and that their accountant had to call me. Never received a call from the account. It is now a month after I have cancelled and I have not received any of my money or received any type of communication from the parking service in regards to my account. They actually sent me an invoice for the month of November after I had already paid.Desired Settlement: I want the 55.00 I paid for the month of November back. I followed the terms of the agreement. I cancelled before the November bill even arrived and significantly before the end of October.

Business

Response:

Good morning,

Review: I was stuck in the Standard Parking deck for 20 minutes.

The door that allows entrance to and from the stairwell was stuck shut!

Two other adults as well as myself could not force it open.

I took the steps to a different floor to use the customer service call-box.

The call was answered by just a general answering service and proved dis-useful.

According to [redacted], they responded immediately by checking all the elevators because the person that answered the call-box supposedly told the Standard Parking staff that I was stuck in the elevator.

If I was stuck in the elevator, how did I get to the call-box!

The door is to big for the door-frame and required brute force to be burst open.

This is dangerous because the doors on each floor are propped open with wood and can easily become jammed closed again.

Once you come out of the stairwell or the elevator if that door is stuck, you are stuck.

Same thing if you are coming from your car to get to the stairs or elevator, if the door is stuck you are stuck.

There is no map saying "you are here" and ' exit is here".

There is no phone within the area where I was stuck.

There are no posted phone numbers to standard parking.

There are no security or parking attendants on sight.

There are no cameras.

The call box goes to a none safety conscious answering service.

There is no emergency plan nor rescue plan.

If that deck was on fire or in inclement weather we would have had to survive on prayer.Desired Settlement: Company should state what they have done to improve their safety and communication.

Should make the facility safe and clean.

Business

Response:

Revdex.com spoke with [redacted] from the company and he stated that he has spoken with the consumer regarding the complaint. They have security in the deck now and they have a contract looking at the door knobs.

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's offer. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved. If the company does not perform as promised I can get back to you at: [redacted].

Regards,

Review: Standard Parking is the management company for the public garage located on [redacted].

It provides parking for the central [redacted] area of [redacted], VA.

There are several issues with the business that residents like myself and guests have encountered.

1) Without sufficient warning or notice to the residents who share the garage, Standard Parking changed the terms and agreement with [redacted] property management.

When we signed the lease with [redacted] in January, we were told that all guests of the residents would receive free validation of their parking tickets.

This was one of the primary selling points in which we signed the agreement. Because of the shared nature of the garage, it was crucial that family and friends could find parking without paying a premium to visit us. This is especially critical considering that we must pay to park on a monthly basis, and that guests are temporary in nature. Though a private company must care about the bottom line, this was a highly predatory change for the residents whose apartments sit on top of the garage.

When we consulted the leasing/property manager, they informed us that Standard Parking had changed their terms and conditions and that [redacted] could not persuade them to renew these conditions. Currently, there is a policy for a 50% discount for the residents and customers of the parking garage.

2) Recently, new machines were installed to replace attendant cubicles. Instead of a person who accepts credit cards and cash upon exit, newly automated systems were installed.

We speculated that this would improve the flow of the parking lot and speed.

However, the automated system proved to be flawed and needed an attendant 24/7 to operate.

These attendants must now sit on a chair outside on the parallel sidewalk and monitor the machines.

3) For the guests of residents, it has been an especially alarming ordeal. All visitors of residents and the shopping area are generally given some kind of discount in conjunction with the retailers. Likewise, bulk of the people who use the garage are visitors of the many retail/restaurants in the proximity. However, the automatic payment machines do not recognize the 50% guest validations.

Therefore, parking attendant must manually reconcile tickets with validations upon exiting. This has caused the following events:

a) Attendants will see that ticket amounts are between hours. Several guests and visitors have complained that the attendant will have a delayed reaction to validating the tickets manually. This causes the amount to double in cost.

b) Attendants will not be at their chairs or stations at all times, causing frustrated delays to anyone who is leaving with a ticket.

c) Attendants will refuse to acknowledge validations flat out.

d) Ticket amounts shown at the automated payment machines are OFTEN not the amount guests are shown at the exit machines. The parking attendant will not acknowledge discrepancies and charge the highest amount possible.

e) Validated tickets must be manually entered, which causes a 2 lane exit to become 1 manual exit.

f) The attendants are often rude, unfriendly, and hostile to guests and visitors exiting.

g) Attendants refuse to let guests out who have paid in advance if the parking ticket upon exiting does not indicate the discount amount.

4) These predatory parking validation, payment, and exiting practices have caused family and friends to pay more than the promised amount.

The problem has escalated from an inconvenience to completely unethical.Desired Settlement: The burden of hassle should be moved from the guests/visitors to Standard Parking.

Guests/visitors of the residents especially should not have to go through the trouble of validating their parking permits to a broken system.

Guests/visitors should be let out at no cost UNTIL THEY FIGURE OUT THEIR SYSTEMS!

It is simply unfair to have guests/visitors bear the time and money while Standard Parking collects an unfair charge as they implement a new system.

A show of good faith should be shown to residents whose guests have encountered this problem.

Business

Response:

August 22, 2014Dear [redacted],I am in receipt of the complaint regarding the parking operation at [redacted] in [redacted], Virginia. At issue are three distinct items addressed below:1. Guest Parking Policy. SP+ is contracted as the operator of the parking garage at [redacted]. SP+ does not set the parking rates nor are we authorized of offer free or discounted parking to any entity without express written consent from Ownership. Agreements regarding parking are between the tenants and ownership directly. In this specific instance, there is no documented agreement between the [redacted] Group, the residential property management and [redacted], the property ownership that states that residents will receive free guest parking or discounted guest parking. The only authorization SP+ has is to offer discounted parking to the potential new residents. Their parking is validated by the [redacted] agent when the guest comes to tour an apartment.Therefore, SP+ cannot offer free or discounted parking to residential guests. This issue should be addressed to [redacted] Group Property Management and building ownership.2. Parking Equipment Automation/Validation Acceptance. The complaint states that the new parking equipment is not able to accept validations and is flawed. At the time of the complaint the parking equipment was being installed in stages and was not fully operational. Merchants were given more than 2 months notice to implement the new electronic validation system. However, many were not compliant in doing so. As a service to the customers while the new paring equipment was being commissioned, SP+ staffed each exit gate with personnel to assist those customers who received validations from non-compliant merchants. This service was offered in lieu of ceasing all validation programs.At this time all merchants have implemented the electronic validation system and the exit lanes are no longer staffed. The system operates effectively 24/7.3. Parking Attendants Service. There are no longer parking attendants employed at this location.Customer Service Representatives are on site to assist customers with equipment issues or questions. However, these personnel are not stationed at any entry or exit point. They roam throughout the garage to offer proactive assistance to customers and address issues as they may arise.As the issues identified in the complaint have been addressed and those that are within the control of SP+ have been resolved, we will consider this matter closed.Sincerely,STANDARD PARKINGTashana B.Senior Manager