Letter to MP regarding parking companies

peter_the_piper

I would not expect MP's to be a lawyer and would expect that they had a legal department to formulate the laws. If the laws are not correct very few MP's would have an inkling.

27col

Perhaps we should not get MP's thinking too much about things. Almost every time they come up with a new law, the rule of unintended consequences kicks in and usually takes years to get rid of the inequality or something similar that the unintended consequence has exposed.
I think that you will find that a good proportion of MPs are, in fact, lawyers.

Cornucopia

I'm wondering if the law is actually wrong. Perhaps it was intended (or at least accepted) that the law is inconclusive in this area?

Just a thought.

Fergie76

Think a few people (or more) on here need to stand for parliament at the next election...

SodG24

ManxRed wrote: »

Don't mention the Goldstone Ground to Coupon-Mad or SodG24!!

Or indeed his supposed ability to walk from Brighton Station to Sheepcote Valley in 20 minutes !!!!! :mad: The guy is a true moron !

FightOrFlight

The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »

Don't expect anything meaningful or useful from Mr Baker. When the POFA was going through many of us wrote to our MPs, and the letters were forwarded to Mr Baker, who then sent back template letters, i.e. everyone got the same response, which failed to address any of the points made. No doubt he will continue to obfuscate and avoid direct questions. He's a waste of space.

I wonder if he has any 'interest' in the private parking business, i.e any registered links, donations from, close contacts with PPCs or BPA. MP supposed to declare if there is a conflict of interests to the policies their departments oversee.

FightOrFlight

This quote sums up POPLA pretty good (my brackets and bold).

From the papers tabled at London Councils’ Transport & Environment Committee. Proposed Appeals Service in relation to Parking on Private land.

"Whilst the new service [POPLA] has similarities with the existing Parking and Traffic Appeals Service, the key difference is that the new appeals service will be run by a non statutory body considering the merits of each case based on contract law whereas PATAS is a statutory body operating under Road Traffic law."

Source: http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/London%20Councils/Item20.POPLAReport140612.doc

Malovern

Well I got the usual boilerplate response and a pdf from the Transport Minister. Unfortunately, it had a few holes in the reply so I carry on...

Further to your below email, I have now received a response from Transport Minister Norman Baker MP regarding private parking companies. I have attached a copy of his letter for your information.

The Minister notes that he is aware of public concerns in this area, and has already taken several actions to increase standards in the sector. He states that the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 has banned the immobilisation and towing away of cars without authority.

He explains that existing consumer law covers most circumstances where motorists enter a private car park, and that notices detailing charges and terms must be displayed. If they are displayed, the motorist is deemed to have entered a contract with the operator of the car park and agreed to the terms displayed. In the case of being misled by any displays, motorists are covered by consumer protection laws.

Parking companies must comply with the British Parking Association’s signage requirement to apply for vehicle keeper data from the DVLA, and the DVLA will take action against companies who do not comply or breach data user requirements. Mr Baker also states that the DVLA does not sell personal data for profit, and the £2.50 fee paid by companies to access data is to cover administrative costs so that this is not passed to the taxpayer.

To further safeguard motorists parking in private car parks, the Protection of Freedoms Act introduced a full independent appeals service. The Parking on Private Land Appeals service (POPLA) is designed to be free for motorists, take decisions that are binding on the industry and be entirely sector funded. It covers tickets issued on land in England and Wales by British Parking Association (BPA) members with access to DVLA data, and can consider whether a parking charge is reasonable and whether a landlord has complied with the BPA’s Code of Practice.

I do hope this information is useful.

My Reply:

Dear Margot James,

Thank you for your prompt reply.

I have read the reply from the Transport Minister and I am afraid he has failed to answer my questions.

Firstly, the ruling by the court of record in HMRC v VCS and I quote directly from the ruling which for your convenience the link is :

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/TCC/2012/130b.pdf

The conclusion of the judges :

45. We have found, firstly, that VCS had no right to claim damages in trespass
against motorists who parked in breach of the relevant restrictions, and accordingly
that the penalty charges did not constitute, in VCS’s hands, such damages. Secondly,
we have found that there was no contract between VCS and the motorist, and that
accordingly the penalty charges could not constitute damages for breach of such a
contract.

46. In our view the only relevant contract to which VCS is a party is that between
VCS and the client. Under that contract VCS provides parking control services,
which amount to the management and operation of the parking sites on behalf of the
landowner. VCS is permitted under the contract to collect and retain all fees and
charges from parking enforcement action.

This is a superior court of record which means its findings are binding so my questions are, why are the government ignoring the fact that private parking companies have no legal right whatsoever to form a contract with a driver and thus sue for damages under contract law? Only the LANDOWERS can form such a contract. After all, this is purely down to contract law and not as your Minister wrongly surmises, consumer law. This line is quoted directly from the POPLA document :

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/London%20Councils/Item20.POPLAReport140612.doc

"Whilst the new service [POPLA] has similarities with the existing Parking and Traffic Appeals Service, the key difference is that the new appeals service will be run by a non statutory body considering the merits of each case based on contract law whereas PATAS is a statutory body operating under Road Traffic law."

With regards to the DVLA, I completely fail to understand that at £2.50 a time for an electronic link (ie no human intervention whatsoever) for companies to retrieve registered keeper details, that the DLVA are not making a profit. Please can the Transport Minister back this statement up with actual accounts from the DVLA showing that the monies collected as a result of the release of this information is directly accredited to costs in relation to the running of the electronic link?

Finally, the Minister claims that the POPLA parking appeals service is "Completely independent" so how is it that Nick Lester, London Councils Director of Transport, Environment and Planning, to whom it seems, complaints about POPLA are addressed to, is also President at the European Parking Association, as well as Council Member at the British Parking Association! Also that even more interestingly, the BPA has signed a three year contract with London Councils to run the service. So the POPLA assessors are employed by London Councils but PAID for by the BPA through the contract.

This is not an independent appeals service.


I look forward to your reply

Margot James MP reply:

Thank you for your email.

I am afraid that I do not feel qualified to give a view on the legal issues you have raised. However, I do sympathise with your concerns about POPLA. Indeed, as you suggest, it does appear that this service is not as independent as it seems at first glance.

Thank you again for your comments. I will certainly keep them in mind, the whole area of private parking contractors is one for which there are no simple answers.

Best wishes,

At this point I am flabbergasted :

Dear Margot James,

Thank you for your reply.

Unfortunately, again, the questions I raised as a result of the stock reply from the Transport Minister remain unanswered. I am afraid it is simply not good enough for your MP to reply saying she is not qualified to answer the legal points I have raised when this should have been redirected to the Transport Minister for him to reply. The government is enacting laws (POFLA) based on misleading statements (1) from the BPA who is solely in business to protect the interests of its customers, ie the parking companies, and seemingly completely ignoring legal precedents from a legal authority. This is simply not good enough. I would like a reply from the Transport Minister about the legal points I have raised. Surely the government has some legal advisor's?

Just for clarity, I would like to know the governments position on a precedent from a lawful authority. Failing that then maybe a judicial review is required.

People are suffering untold misery from these so called parking companies and it has got to stop.

Margot James MP Reply:

I quite agree with you that I should try to get you an answer from the government, even if it does not satisfy your concerns. Rather than writing again to the Transport department, from which I suspect we will get a very similar response, I will find out which of the three ministers responsible for the legal and justice system is the appropriate contact for this matter and forward your correspondence to him for a view.



Unless I hear to the contrary from you I will do this next week.



Best wishes

Margot

Hopefully the scale of the problem and the legality of it are hitting home. I am equally badgering the DVLA and the ICO as well. Lets see what we can achieve. I encourage everyone to contact their MP and highlight this issue.

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/

Stroma

Thanks for keeping us updated, this surely must be answered not like the stock reply from the bpa, but from the government who implemented this disaster to begin with

SodG24

I have to say, very well written letters with good concise arguments - good work !

Normal mealy mouthed responses from your MP and that slime bucket Norman Baker. Here in Brighton and Hove he's well known for avoiding the question, answering what he wants and telling down right lies !