There's an election coming.

trisontana

On the subject of loss, who's loss are we talking about? It's all very well saying that stores might suffer a loss because potential customers can't park there, but PPC's claim they have suffered a loss not the store. I doubt very much if PPCs pass any money they get from motorists on the the store.

ColliesCarer

There is some info on What-do-they-know obtained through FOI requests made to Lake District National Parks that the paid tariffs go to the landowner and the PPC keep the money raised through PCN's (minus the lost tariff sum which is also paid to the Landowner).

There may be contracts of course where a percentage of the tariff is also retained by the PPC, but the overall business model (whether for tariff based or free for set time car parks) still seems to be that the bulk of the PPC's revenue, hence profit, is made through raising PCN's based on their supposed loss and for free car parks it's obviously 100%

4consumerrights

AFIK - the P&D money raised goes to the landowner in any case - there may be some exceptions where a percentage goes to the PPC.

There are also other business models with permits which are supplied by the PPC (landowner pays for these).

Then of course there is the incentive or bribe by the offerance of a percentage of the parking charges collected when the landowner uses the PPC to manage the car parks.

The PPC world have this pretence that somehow reducing free parking periods will somehow increase parking availability for genuine shoppers. These are the rules that the PPCs make up in order to issue more charges. In fact the longer a customer remains at a retail park, the more they are likely to spend.

A quick turnover of parking does not equate to more genuine users and cannot be quantified by any stretch of the imagination -
Except perhaps for onne scenario where a user parks the vehicle in car park for whole day/week etc whilst going elsewhere.

This thread has certainly deviated from Bazster's letter to prospective new MP's - btw Bazster in theory a good idea - but letter needs rewording as IMO you are coming across as a tad obsessive and too eccentric - so will backfire.

ColliesCarer

Thanks for the info on business models 4CR and for pointing this out

4consumerrights wrote: »

....This thread has certainly deviated from Bazster's letter to prospective new MP's ....

Apologies to Bazter for getting side-tracked