On October 7th， according to reports， Ms. Cheng was on a holiday trip when， due to limited parking spaces in a parking lot， she parked her electric vehicle in a charging bay without charging it. Upon her return， she found her car locked and was charged an 80 yuan fee for occupying the space， which she found unacceptable.
Ms. Cheng explained that the parking bay was equipped with a ground lock. When no vehicle was charging， the lock was lowered. However， after two hours， if the charging vehicle had not moved， the ground lock would automatically rise， requiring the owner to pay a space occupancy fee to retrieve their car.
The fee structure for occupying a charging space was that the first two hours were free. After exceeding this period， a fee of 1 yuan per minute was charged. The 80 yuan Ms. Cheng paid was this space occupancy fee.
Ms. Cheng stated that no one informed her about the space occupancy fee when she parked. She also mentioned that she did not notice the information posted on signs by the roadside.
Customer service representatives from the ground lock provider stated that this is a charging spot， and the ground lock automatically rises after two hours to collect an occupancy fee. They emphasized that the information is clearly displayed on signs within the charging area and that staff do not typically inform each individual driver in person.
Ms. Cheng expressed her dissatisfaction， contrasting the situation with Tesla charging stations. She noted that Tesla charging stations have a similar fee structure， but their ground locks are initially raised and only lower upon scanning a QR code， making it an active choice for the user. This proactive user interaction， she felt， made the occupancy fee more acceptable.
However， in this instance， the ground lock was lowered by default. This led Ms. Cheng and presumably any other driver to believe they could park there. She was surprised to find her car locked upon her return， and she felt the on-site signage was not sufficiently prominent. She requested a refund.
Following discussions with the charging station management， it was agreed that the collected occupancy fee would be refunded.
This incident has sparked considerable online discussion. Some netizens support the charging of occupancy fees， arguing that it prevents non-charging vehicles from occupying valuable spots， thus hindering actual charging needs of other EV owners.
Conversely， other netizens believe that while occupancy fees can be levied， clear information must be provided to all drivers at the time of parking. Suggestions include using audible alerts or having the ground lock default to a raised position to better inform drivers.
What are your thoughts on this matter?
