MSE News: British Parking Association agrees to face its critics

Methusela

infotouch wrote: »

The BPA also deal with local authorities and the tickets issued by them have the offence wording (which is correct).

So I think that deals with your question

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Dear Infotouch, Thank you for your response to my posting about the unlawful use of the word “offence” in private parking charge notices issued by BPA members and its presence in BPA's code of practice.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I see that this was your first posting in any of the parking fightback threads and since your answer might well have come from BPA or one of their PPC members I have to say I am a little suspicious about your motives in this matter. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Unfortunately your posting is completely inaccurate. If you look more carefully at the cover sheet of the BPA code you will see that it states:[/FONT]

“[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]CODE OF PRACTICE – PARKING ENFORCEMENT ON PRIVATE LAND AND UNREGULATED PUBLIC CAR PARKS”. (my italics)[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]So this code has nothing at all to do with local authority tickets and BPA has no reason to show within it a notice with the “OFFENCE” wording, other than to encourage their members to use this unlawful wording to misrepresent themselves.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]So my question to BPA still stands in its original form. I await an answer from them.[/FONT]

nicechap

Its such a shame that the BPA have chosen not to come back yet and respond to our questions.

I really want to know whether they support landowners employing PPCs to clamp disabled drivers (in breach of their SIA licence).

EDIT - I see from the BPA rep user profile they were last logged in this morning at 9.09am, so they are obviously still reading this thread but won't tell us why they won't respond.

Coupon-mad

BPA please come back and answer your critics, as promised. :money:

Coblcris

I would just like to see responses to the matters of fact that have been raised.

Methusela

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I said in my posting #34 that I would await BPA's answer to my first question before I posted any more questions. However, since BPA have so far failed to respond, I will now progress to my second question. This relates to Kelvin's statements about compliance issues in his letter to Martin.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]His letter stresses the idea that being members of BPA and having an official Code of Practice to observe somehow makes BPA parking enforcers better behaved than all the others. He goes on to quote his belief that most problems originate from operators who are not BPA members.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]But in my personal experience this is a long way from the truth. Earlier this year I wrote to BPA to complain about the unlawful activities of a BPA member. BPA replied that they were only a Member Services Organisation, with no statutory powers of enforcement. They went on to say that they were unable and unwilling to investigate individual complaints by the general public against their members.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]So Kelvin, if BPA has no powers of enforcement and do not investigate complaints against their members, why do you pretend that your Code of Practice is vigorously enforced by BPA? Perhaps you could tell me how you have managed to police your member's unlawful activities? How can you ever know which of them are complying with the code and which are not, if you never investigate complaints? [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Kelvin talks mightily about the “new tougher sanctions” that will come with your new Code of Practice. Perhaps you would explain to us how BPA intend to enforce these new sanctions without any enforcement or investigative powers.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Indeed, a more pertinent question might be “does BPA really care whether or not its members comply with the code, so long as they pay their fees to BPA?”[/FONT]

ripped_off_driver

The only purpose of the BPA in respect of private parking is to try to add a figleaf of respectability to it. They are no more than an attempt to apply a thin veneer on what is by any measure nothing more than a mail scam.

Maybe the thread title should change to "BPA agrees to face its critics as long as they do not ask any searching questions". They are clearly so shocked by the very reasonable things put to them they have decided to leave the scene, mirroring their (lack of) enforcement activity. Poor lambs.

backfoot

Post withdrawn

Coblcris

Failure to rebut is agreement.

I believe that the non-response by the BPA to the factual issues raised comprises agreement that the facts are as stated.

Methusela

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Following on from my previous questions (postings #34 and #57) which BPA have yet to answer, I would now like to put a third question to BPA.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]This time I refer to BPA's Code of Practice; “Enforcement Action”; Section A. “Notice to Owner”, which states “When serving a Notice to Owner, operators must include a leaflet advising motorists of the “reasonable cause” and the complaints procedure by which keepers can notify the Information Commissioner and DVLA if they believe their data has been used inappropriately”.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]One of BPA's members sent me a Notice to Owner. They did not include any leaflet as required by the above section of your code of practice. Presumably they did not want me to know how to lodge any such complaint.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]When I complained of this fact to BPA, you failed to take any action against your member, using the well-worn statement “we are only a Member Services Organisation, with no statutory powers of enforcement. We are unable and unwilling to investigate individual complaints by the general public against our members”. (Incidentally, do you have an initiation ceremony for all new recruits to BPA where they learn this chant off by heart?)[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]It seems to me that both your Code of Practice and your letters to Martin make lots of claims about how well BPA members behave and what actions BPA would take against members, if they fail to meet acceptable standards of behaviour. But in reality this is just so much hot air and posturing by BPA.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]It must be obvious to anyone that BPA's investigation of complaints and the enforcement of your code of practice against your members is really non-existent.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Perhaps you would like to comment?[/FONT]

cajef

Methusela wrote: »

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Following on from my previous questions (postings #34 and #57) which BPA have yet to answer, I would now like to put a third question to BPA.[/FONT]

I think you may be wasting your time and effort, the BPA representative appears to disappeared back into the dark hole that they emerged from.:rolleyes: