We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 11.5.9 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-06 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 11.5.9, updated 2026-09-28.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 2
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Hard to cancel
ParkWhiz will not refund me for a reservation that I was denied entry by the garage — I reserved a parking spot in a New York City garage using this app. I prepaid the parking and when I arrived at the garage, the attendant denied my…
Unable to cancel parking in the app before parking time. — I attempted multiple times to cancel parking as we were not able to get in time due to traffic… I called and it is only a phone system that tells you to cancel via the app that…
Cannot cancel cannot return — I made a booking through the application. And before start my reservation time I tried to cancel it, but application is not allowing to cancel it. You cannot cancel it no way. I contact the customer service…
Reports of unexpected charges
DO NOT USE THIS APP — They do not make it clear on where to find the parking spot once you pay. If you go to the wrong spot and end up getting charged twice what you paid ParkWhiz, their customer service cannot help you rectify the price…
Limited and terrible support — I seem to have issues with this app more so than SpotHero. There’s no option to extend your time limit like SpotHero and this rain. This difficult situations that I had to pay twice when I finally got around…
Poor user experience — Used in Los Angeles for World Cup and was give conflicting directions. Couldn’t get a refund so ended up paying twice for parking. Will not use service again. Their business lacks adequate customer service.
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.