More Waffle From The BPA

trisontana

Parking association hits back at Middlesbrough Mayor's call for review of private car parks

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/parking-association-hits-back-middlesbrough-8064213


Some choice quotes from the Bullxxxx Purveyors Association (copyright NoToMob):-


The organisation said it has “worked diligently” to raise standards liaising with stakeholders including consumer organisations to establish the Approved Operator Scheme (AOS), Code of Practice and compliance monitoring scheme, and POPLA, the first independent appeals service, with an Independent Scrutiny Board to oversee its work.



“We know that a major concern of motorists is the level of charge made by operators when drivers overstay or park without paying. Every one of our AOS members charges no more than £100 and many, in fact, charge substantially less, having adopted better working practices resulting in lower costs and charges.”


One elephant in the room dear BPA, that £100 does not reflect the actual "losses" suffered by your members, £15 is a more realistic figure.

Umkomaas

Another 'gem' from the BS

All of these initiatives are designed to raise standards in the management of parking on private land in the absence of Government regulation. Only the most professional and reputable operators are able to satisfy the BPA’s rigorous compliance criteria. The AOS enables these members to set themselves apart as operators of ‘best practice’.

How come owd Trev's still there?

Ryan_Bryan

The BPA want POPLA extended to Scotland and Northern Ireland as well. to help the poor motorist. Of course they do. UKPC fall flat on their !!! in Scotland this week because POFA doesn't apply.

Half_way

I was under hte impression that the BPA wanted to do away with POPLA, or maybe that was just it being run by London councils.
No doubt some of their members are looking on see what Gladstones are getting away with over at the so called IPC and I wouldnt be surprised to see if POPLA goes the same way - maybe its something Trev could do, or even Mr Duff at Proserve, his lot arent in the BPA or any ATA for that matter so that would tick the box for independent wouldnt it?

As for the BPA THe Gazette should be pointed at the plain language comisions article on a BPA members antics at a Derbyshire Hospital http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/plcdev/app/public/system/pdf_files/files/000/000/191/original/QueensHospitalEd1copy.pdf

That contains this:

"The BPA does little to curb its members excesses. Its previous investigations into similar concerns have tended to produce reports that exonerate the parking firms. As a private company the BPA is held accountable only to its members. given its Hypocrisy about 'raising standards', its pious annual adoption of a 'presidents charity' which it urges members to support ( using money taken from drivers ) and the way it seems to retain the trust of government ministers, the BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisatoins in the UK"

Hot_Bring

This will be the same ethical BPA who hunt down the details of anyone that posts a critical post on the web or dares send them a critical tweet ?

Strangely the Ops Manager David doesn't seem to understand that LinkedIn shows who looked at my profile !!!!

Dack

That wouldn't be the same BPA who said, on their Monday musings response http://www.britishparking.co.uk/Blog/monday-musing-responsible-motorists-never-get-a-parking-ticket/722 , that:

The £100 charge is a recommendation and many of our members and those of the Independent Parking Committee (IPC) charge significantly less. This amount is also in line with Penalty Charge Notices issued on regulated land by local authorities.

trisontana

"This amount is also in line with Penalty Charge Notices issued on regulated land by local authorities."

But they are comparing apples with oranges. A council PCN is backed by a traffic order and is designed to be a proper penalty. PPC's fake fines should never be a penalty, but an appropriate amount of money to compensate for any losses.That raises another question. Who's loss, the landowner or the PPC?

BlackSpangle

Moreover, doesn't that rather let the cat out of the bag? Namely that despite all protestations about GPEOL and contracts and loss adding up to the fictitious total, they're actually seeking parity with an explicitly defined penalty.

The comparison is not merely specious, but I would argue undermines any monetary calculations which any BPA member might use in a courtroom.

nigelbb

Money from council parking tickets goes into the community pot to provide parking management & keep down the council tax.

Money from private parking tickets goes to fund the luxury lifestyle of PPC owners.