Unrest in the Parking industry, Upset from the inside - From Pepipoo

BASFORDLAD

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=73472

Just posted on Pepipoo by PPC Guy. Looks like a few feathers have been ruffled !!,

:beer::beer::beer:

Well guys some of you may know me form on here and MSE.

Just come over to report some unrest in the private parking industry. As you know I manage a private parking company.

Over the last few days there has been a large deal of unrest coming from some of the smaller companies in the industry over the way they are treated by the BPA and and the way in which this treatment differs from how the big boys are treated,

You may or may not be aware of an email from a person at the BPA named Kelvin which is of the following content:
QUOTE
"Dear AOS Colleague

It has been drawn to our attention that there is much public concern about some operators who continue to indicate on signage, parking charge notices and similar correspondence that the keeper is liable for the payment of parking charges due as a result of a breach of contract. This is not the legal situation now nor will it be after 1 October 2012.

DVLA has told us that two AOS members have recently been suspended by them for 3 months for doing this. Others may be at risk of an immediate suspension by DVLA.

As a matter of urgency, and to protect the reputation of the Accredited Trade Association and, ultimately, your business, I am instigating a thorough audit of these elements for all AOS members with immediate effect.

Please will you confirm and provide evidence that your current signage, parking charge notices, notices to owner, or correspondence with the keeper, in no way suggests that the keeper is liable for payment. Please submit your evidence by e-mail to Alpha Parking, the organisation that we have appointed to carry out this project for us at the following address: aos@aparking.co.uk

To assist you with transition arrangements and as a service to members Alpha Parking will also check these aspects in your proposed signage, parking charge notices, notices to driver and keeper, or other correspondence with the keeper is compliant with Code 2012 and the Protection of Freedoms Act requirements. Please send this information also to the above email address.

Alpha Parking will be undertaking this audit urgently, and in commercial confidence, reporting their findings to us in the next two weeks and so your evidence should be submitted by return please and certainly no later than Friday 28th September. Failure to do so will result in sanction points being awarded against you in accordance with the Scheme of Sanctions.

I appreciate that this is a busy time for everyone in the private parking sector but I cannot overemphasise how important it is that you assist us with this special audit. If the situation is as prevalent as has been suggested to us it is a serious matter for the credibility of the AOS itself and this is clearly a situation which everyone needs to avoid. We need to ensure that compliance and auditing is robust. You are required to do this now regardless of any recent audit by NSI and whether information held within our systems has been recently supplied.

This information and request is also being sent in letter form by Royal Mail.

I look forward to your cooperation and thank you in advance."

______________________

As we can see from this email the BPA are directly accusing the operators of not complying with the DVLA'S guidelines.

I must mention that following a previous memo from the DVLA to the BPA they were instructed to forward a message to ALL BPA members that keeper liability must not be implied on any signage or document until such legislation has been brought into action. This email was never received by myself and several other operators that i am directly aware of.

The above email is in direct response to the DVLA announcing they are reviewing the BPA's conduct.

In Case you are not aware ALL BPA members are supposed to be audited every year. This audit covers everything from contracts with landowners to signage and complaints.
I am aware of 1 member who has now been suspended from DVLA access by the DVLA (NOT CPS) who was auditied just weeks prior to being suspended for implying keeper liability on the signs.

The DVLA guidelines (which im sure would also fall under DPA) state that any initial communication with the registered keeper must make no mention of any charge, offence of amounts but is merely to ascertain the identity of the driver (currently by request not requirement) at the time.

This means that ALL notices from the larger ANPR operators are in breach of this guideline as they directly are addressed to the registered keepr and mention all the details of any alleged offence. The BPA are aware of this but still it is allowed.

The BPA in their email above have now shifted any blame from them to the operators in their menacing email and also given us 7 days to respond. A call to the DVLA has today confirmed that they are seeking professional advice on the new code and as such the BPA are acting out of turn in this measure as they are enforcing rules and regulations "on behalf of the DVLA" which haven't even been released by the DVAL.

This may be a real chance to effect the parking industry in a way which may only make things better.

As you can see this is a sincere message and i would rather not have any replies with no purpose or content.

HO87

Interesting. Let's just keep the pressure on.

bazster

Hmmm, I will not expect a reply any time soon then to my complaint about the new AOS code of practice. It seems that bigger fish are frying. Sounds like the whole thing is on the brink of collapse.

trisontana

This is the killer paragraph:-

It has been drawn to our attention that there is much public concern about some operators who continue to indicate on signage, parking charge notices and similar correspondence that the keeper is liable for the payment of parking charges due as a result of a breach of contract. This is not the legal situation now nor will it be after 1 October 2012.

JagDriver

More damning is that as the trade associate they were supposed to be monitoring (annually if our friend is correct), and advising. Surely they can't have been running for years like this as a 'front'?

SodG24

BASFORDLAD wrote: »

This means that ALL notices from the larger ANPR operators are in breach of this guideline as they directly are addressed to the registered keepr and mention all the details of any alleged offence. The BPA are aware of this but still it is allowed.

G24 are guilty of this ( on top of breaking contracts with suppliers, harassment and tax evasion ).

Coupon-mad

JagDriver wrote: »

More damning is that as the trade associate they were supposed to be monitoring (annually if our friend is correct), and advising. Surely they can't have been running for years like this as a 'front'?

Surely they can have been...and still were when they recently said Excel's signs were compliant, and when they fobbed off all of our complaint emails - which the DVLA are now receiving instead - and when they 'audited' (= met up for a drink & a natter with) companies this year and ticked all the boxes...

Sounds like the house of cards is about to fall down...what with this news from PPC_Guy and the disastrous new COP and disastrously restrictive 'appeal points' that the BPA have engineered into POPLA.

I can see LondonCouncils seeing the light and abandoning them, personally.

trisontana

One thing I can't get my head around is the seemingly contradiction between this on the above email:-

It has been drawn to our attention that there is much public concern about some operators who continue to indicate on signage, parking charge notices and similar correspondence that the keeper is liable for the payment of parking charges due as a result of a breach of contract. This is not the legal situation now nor will it be after 1 October 2012.

And this from the BPA website:-

In order to ensure that private enforcement remained with a robust solution, our discussions with Government resulted in a form of keeper liability being introduced with the Protection of Freedoms Act, allowing the private operator in England and Wales to pursue the registered keeper of a vehicle if a named driver cannot be traced or denies liability.

So are they saying they can "pursue" the RK but they can't ask for any money off them? If so, what's the point?

esmerobbo

It would seem UKCPS may fail the audit!

Are 'Parking Charges' legal?
Yes. Once our contractual warning signs are erected and an authority agreement signed with the landowner or their agent we can legally issue invoices (parking charge notices). It is legal to levy a parking charge which has been notified (by our signs) to motorists. By parking on land, we patrol, drivers (and, under the proposed new Freedom Bill, the Registered Keeper) enter into a contract as indicated on our signs. Motorists do have a legal right of appeal and the parking charge notice gives full details of this.

taffy056

Well I'm doing my own audit of AOS members websites, and reporting abuses of authority to the dvla I think just about every one of the shysters has claims of penalties, illegal parking, offences and offenders . They do say they will investigate them all

Coupon-mad

taffy056 wrote: »

Well I'm doing my own audit of AOS members websites, and reporting abuses of authority to the dvla I think just about every one of the shysters has claims of penalties, illegal parking, offences and offenders . They do say they will investigate them all

Same! And we are not the only two who have been emailing the DVLA about the websites. I got a ridiculous reply to one of my emails last week so I fired another one straight back at the DVLA to point out that they were falling for the PPC scam if they believed the website said what they thought it did...

...waiting for another response now but I know they are run off their feet with this.