Skip to main content

Monkey Parking app ‘illegal and predatory’

San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera has issued an immediate cease-and-desist demand to Monkey Parking, a mobile peer-to-peer bidding app that enables motorists to auction off the public parking spaces their vehicles occupy to nearby drivers. A letter issued by Herrera's office to Paolo Dobrowolny, CEO of the Rome, Italy-based tech start-up, cites a key provision of San Francisco's Police Code that specifically prohibits individuals and companies from buying, selling or leasing public on-street pa
June 25, 2014 Read time: 2 mins
San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera has issued an immediate cease-and-desist demand to Monkey Parking, a mobile peer-to-peer bidding app that enables motorists to auction off the public parking spaces their vehicles occupy to nearby drivers.

A letter issued by Herrera's office to Paolo Dobrowolny, CEO of the Rome, Italy-based tech start-up, cites a key provision of San Francisco's Police Code that specifically prohibits individuals and companies from buying, selling or leasing public on-street parking.

Herrera's cease-and-desist demand to Monkey Parking includes a request to the legal department of Apple, which is copied on the letter, asking that the technology giant immediately remove the mobile application from its App Store for violating several of the company's own guidelines which provide that "Apps must comply with all legal requirements in any location where they are made available to users" and that "Apps whose use may result in physical harm may be rejected."

Motorists face penalties of up to US$300 for each violation.  Because Monkey Parking's business model is wholly premised on illegal transactions, the letter contends that the company would be subject to civil penalties of up to US$2,500 per violation under California's tough Unfair Competition Law were the city to sue.

"Technology has given rise to many laudable innovations in how we live and work—and Monkey Parking is not one of them," Herrera said.  "It's illegal, it puts drivers on the hook for US$300 fines and it creates a predatory private market for public parking spaces.”

Related Content

  • Reauthorization 2012: the facts laid bare
    September 12, 2012
    A reauthorization bill for transportation came into law in July 2012, rubber stamping federal funding increases through the 2014 financial year, among other things. The new bill presents the good, the bad and the ugly of transportation infrastructure in the US, writes Pat Jones On June 29 this year, the US House of Representatives and Senate both approved the conference report on the ‘Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act’ or MAP-21. President Obama signed this legislation into law on July 6.
  • Driver with 51 penalty points still allowed to drive
    January 12, 2016
    Three drivers with more than 40 points on their driving licences are still allowed on the road, according to a Freedom of Information request to the DVLA by the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM). The enquiry also found that 13 people in Britain currently have 28 or more points on their driving licence, the worst of those amassing 51 points. In addition, the numbers of drivers with 12 or more points has gone up by nine per cent in just seven months between March and October 2015 – from 6,884 to 7,517.
  • Cars reinvented: huge new opportunities and dangers, says IDTechEx
    December 2, 2016
    The new IDTechEx report, Electric Car Technology and Forecasts 2017-2027 finds that the biggest change in cars for one hundred years is now starting. It is driven by totally new requirements and capabilities. They will cause huge new businesses to appear but some giants currently making cars and their parts will spectacularly go bankrupt. Cities will ban private cars but encourage cars as autonomous taxis and rental vehicles. Already 65 per cent of cars in China are bought by businesses. The Japanese wa
  • Corruption corrodes confidence as ITS battles to improve safety
    October 13, 2015
    News items and articles in this issue illustrate the highs and lows of ITS and the dilemma inherent in enforcement application. An IIHS report showing that speed cameras change motorists' behaviour beyond the immediate vicinity of the installations is further evidence of the positive influence the technology can have, however the guilty plea in the Chicago red light corruption case serves to undermine the entire concept.