Before we have to go grovelling to the landlords for replacements, would
the last users of the two missing permits please return them? They have
been missing for some time now.
The one on the A4 board should not be difficult to find, it is the thing
that is blocking your view of the road.
The smaller one is the thing that is rustling under your foot when you
Until they are returned or replaced no-one is safe parking here.
Regardless of the legality or otherwise of clamping and possible
countermeasures by the victim the fact is that getting clamped is a PITA.
Do the decent thing.... Bring `em back.
Stick them on an A3 sized board, fitted with a howler which goes off when you get out of range of say 100m from a 433MHz transmitter located in the space.
I still think we should have a way of automating them being handed out.
I think I suggested hacking one of the cheaper electronic safes
(cheapest on ebay is about £15) and tying it into the DoorBot system so
the safe can only be opened with a members RFID card.
Someone wants one, the system logs which member opened the safe.
If there are multiple permits though, it doesn't stop someone taking out
more than one in one go, which could degrade the system.
Unless there was maybe something to detect how many passes were in
their? Maybe some IR-interrupts?
Ken, that's very thoughtful but no thanks.
Don't need a safe - the vending machine would do this well. yes, it's
been a project for a while but it's far closer to completion than
I do think phones would be a good way to do this if they can be found
cheap enough - they have all the right parts ready packaged. Can even
ring them up and ask the user to bring them back !
Stick them on an A3 sized board
Failing that I agree with Adrian we need a simple incentive to return permits. Also we need a simple way of recording who uses them.
> Failing that I agree with Adrian we need a simple incentive to return permits. Also we need a simple way of recording who uses them.
Or we need to start to slowly acknowledge the fact that we now have situations where people are not just pushing social boundaries, handling equipment a bit awkwardly and being generally uncool - but are transgressing.
Tampering with the 3in1 lock, thefts, missing keys, camera covering, missing permits is crossing a threshold. And we're not far off the point where this starts not to be an inconvenience but endangers others in the space. Liabilities come in quickly after.
So I wonder if we are getting close to the unfortunate point where we need to ask our directors to step up their role of protecting the collective on our behalf.
Are there ways to postpone this for another year ?
Perhaps by making it mandatory to sign in and out in a paper logbook ? And mandatory to report in that same logbook any equipment you broke or found faulty ? (Mandatory, as in 'forgo membership' otherwise).
The contract between Workspace and Ace Security is probably more like
a franchise to Ace to collect fines than a contractor who clamps on
their behalf. This will reduce the cost to Workspace, and Ace will
want to make as many clamps as possible, consistent with not being
such a nuisance that tenants complain and leave.
It won't bother either party much that there's no need to fine people
for parking in an empty car park. As far as Workspace are concerned,
it means local residents won't get to think the car park is free to
use, and Ace just want the money.
what about logging them out with the use of the Oyster Card System? its
a metric we record already; and no additional private information is
recorded by us.
Why not mount it on something that just fits inside a windscreen, or even on a piece of plastic you have to extend to fit into a winscreen to secure it. If it is big no-one will drive off with it! That big really would be a feat!