Skip to main content

Ambiguous T&C in Carpark Charges & Services – Call to Enhance Information Disclosure & Transparency

  • 2018.05.15
Acute shortage of carpark spaces in land-starved Hong Kong has driven motorists to scramble hard for parking at shopping malls and housing estates, and, worse, being embroiled in disputes over charges and service.  In 2017, the Consumer Council received 58 complaints against carpark services, and in the first quarter of this year the number of similar complaints already reached 17 cases. Among the cases, some complainants were denied privileged parking benefits despite having fulfilled the required spending amount, while others apparently confused over the unclear charging terms were faced with higher parking bills than expected.  Further, monthly rental users could enjoy no priority parking right over others while some motorists found their parked cars damaged, and subsequently in dispute with the carpark over the issue of compensation. 
 
The Council urges carpark service providers to improve the level of information disclosure and transparency, including the use of clear, direct language on parking benefits and charging methods as well as the prominent display of important terms and conditions to avoid any misunderstanding.  Also, in recent years, some carparks have changed from fixed carpark spaces to variable spaces for monthly rental users; service providers should therefore disclose in detail the numbers of such parking spaces available and registered users as well as their rights etc. and, furthermore, review regularly the actual demand for the various types of parking spaces, and to maintain a proper balance between profit motive and rental users’ interests, to ensure the latter’s right to service. 
 
Case 1: Hidden notice on privileged parking details
Shopping Mall (A) offered parking benefits upon purchase of a set amount for free parking during designated periods.   In accordance with the privileged parking notice, she bought a gift coupon of $200 at a designated shop using a required credit card to sign for the purchase.  However, only when she made the redemption, was she informed that a gift coupon purchase could not be used to claim free parking.   Reluctantly, she paid the $30 parking fee for 2 hours.  After checking the website of the shopping mall, she still could not find any provision that excluded the purchase of gift coupons for free parking.  She then lodged a complaint with the Council, requesting the shopping mall to fulfil its preferential offer.   
 
According to the photos supplied by Shopping Mall (A), the notice containing the details of redemption for privileged parking was prominently displayed at the customer service counter.  But what was separately displayed at an obscure corner were the specific “Terms and Conditions” relating to gift coupon purchase including the limitations and exclusion clauses, which consumers would find it hard to notice.  To draw the attention of the consumers, the Council suggested the shopping mall to display the details of redemption for privileged parking and the collateral terms in one prominent place to avoid unnecessary disputes.  
 
Case 2: Unclear T&C on carpark charges 
The complainant parked her vehicle at Carpark (B), which offered on Sundays and public holidays, a special parking charge of “$1 for the first half-hour and thereafter $18 per hour”.   But after parking for 1 hour 20 minutes, she was much baffled when asked to pay a fee of $37, contrary to her own estimate of $19.  Despite her protest and demand for explanation, the carpark staff insisted that the charge amount was correct as it was computer generated.  The complainant contacted the Council, demanding Carpark (B) to explain the computation.   
 
Upon enquiry of the Council, the company explained that every time a car entering the carpark would be subject to an admission fee of $1 which entitled the user to free parking for half an hour.   Thereafter, the standard charge of $18 per hour would apply.  Further, in accordance with the carpark T&C, parking of less than an1-hour duration would also be calculated as 1 full hour.  Therefore, 1 hour 20 minutes would be charged for 2 hours i.e. $36 plus the admission $1, bringing to a total of $37.  Notwithstanding, the Council considered the wording of the charge notice was couched in such a way that opened easily to different interpretations by the consumers, improvement on clarity was needed, which the company readily agreed to implement.  
 
Case 3: No priority right for monthly rental users
The complainant rented a parking space at Carpark (C) at a monthly rental of $2,700, but soon he found the carpark always full and crowded because too many hourly users were admitted into the carpark, resulting in long queues of vehicles waiting to get in during the peak hours, frequently for as long as one half-hour, causing extreme inconvenience.  Many times the complainant had drawn the attention of the carpark management to the problem but to no avail.  Through the Council, the complainant therefore asked the carpark to follow up on the matter appropriately.    
 
In its response to the Council, the carpark indicated that staff would be deployed to keep order at the entrance during peak periods, and to arrange for monthly tenants priority access to the use of the carpark.   And should the monthly tenants run into any difficulty they could seek help from the staff on duty.  The Council was later informed by the complainant that he had been disappointed with the service quality of the carpark, and decided to discontinue its service.  
 
Case 4: Car damaged whilst in parking
After parking his car at Carpark (D), the complainant returned to collect his vehicles only to find the car body and windowpane smeared with dirt and damaged, which he suspected to have been caused by corrosive liquid dripping down from the ceiling.  Immediately he brought the problem to the notice of the carpark staff who suggested he leave his car behind for inspection by the company mechanic but later notified him that repair could not be successfully carried out and suggested he find outside garage for the repair.  He ended up paying $168 first for the parking fee.  Several days later he obtained from the garage a price quotation of about $10,000, and also the verbal consent of the carpark to go ahead and settle the bill first.  But as it turned out his claim for repair compensation was rejected by the insurer of the carpark company.  The complainant was utterly dissatisfied and sought the help of the Council for mediation.  In its reply, the Council was informed by the carpark that in negotiation with the complainant the matter has been successfully resolved to the satisfaction of both parties.  
 
In using carparks, motorists are advised to pay heed to the following:
 
Terms & conditions & privileged parking
Read carefully the terms and conditions of the shopping mall’s privileged parking benefits, paying particular attention to specific restrictions, such as the types of shops designated, minimum spending and time periods applicable for free parking , as well as the payment method (cash or electronic currency); 
Take note of the mall’s customer service opening hours to avoid missing the deadline for free parking in time; 
Surf the carpark or shopping mall website for detailed information relating to parking charges, such as the charge of day/night parking and in different time periods, and the minimum charge; 
Pay heed also to the carpark T&C, including loss of parking receipt, penalty for unauthorized parking, car damage, loss of car or property inside the vehicle; 
In the event the car is damaged, take photo of the damage and notify the carpark staff immediately, and find out what follow-up needed to be done and issues of responsibility in respect of the repair work.  If necessary, seek independent legal advice. 
 
Carpark space renting
Before signing the contract, read carefully the terms and conditions to ascertain if it is a fixed parking space or variable one; and have a understanding of the number of carpark spaces in supply, security measures available and arrangements for priority of access to parking.
 
The Consumer Council reserves all its right (including copyright) in respect of CHOICE magazine and Online CHOICE.