BPA Annual accounts for 2015/16

Castle

The BPA have just filed their annual accounts for the year ended 31st March 2016, which showed a deficit of £182K before tax for the year due principally to a deficit of £154K on the POPLA Schemes.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00979689/filing-history

beamerguy

Castle wrote: »

The BPA have just filed their annual accounts for the year ended 31st March 2016, which showed a deficit of £182K before tax for the year due principally to a deficit of £154K on the POPLA Schemes.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00979689/filing-history

Not very impressive

Grimble

Pay rises and big bonuses all round then?

fisherjim

Castle wrote: »

The BPA have just filed their annual accounts for the year ended 31st March 2016, which showed a deficit of £182K before tax for the year due principally to a deficit of £154K on the POPLA Schemes.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00979689/filing-history

What excellent news!

Umkomaas

due principally to a deficit of £154K on the POPLA Schemes.

It will be closer to £1million if London Councils get the money they think London taxpayers are owed by the BPA following their non-payment of the later POPLA invoices.

http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php?topic=5949.0

Aaron_Aadvark

Umkomaas wrote: »

It will be closer to £1million if London Councils get the money they think London taxpayers are owed by the BPA following their non-payment of the later POPLA invoices.

http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php?topic=5949.0

Should not the accounts note an outstanding dispute of such significance?

beamerguy

Reading all this about the monies owed by the BPA, one wonders if their next creditor will be Wright Hassall ?

Clearly the BPA are in a financial mess and there is me thinking that to be an accredited organisation they need to be squeeky clean.

Independent Regulation by the government is the only way forward

Grimble

They will be getting letters from DR Plus next.

beamerguy

Aaron_Aadvark wrote: »

Should not the accounts note an outstanding dispute of such significance?

London Councils is a liability which may show the BPA are insolvent and as such should not be trading

TDA

fisherjim wrote: »

What excellent news!

Why? Do you want them to go bankrupt leaving the IPC as the only ATA in business?

pappa_golf

the way the BPA are going , there will be no members apart from PE next year


look at Mr Whitehouses comments in march last year


"BPA Exodus"


There is a mass exodus away from the BPA which is clearly displayed by utilising both the BPA and IPC websites. Currently there are 133 members with websites and 4 with none totalling 137 members. Follow the same practise with the IPC and you'll find 38 with website and 7 without total members 45. The IPC is just a little over 2 year old and whilst the BPA looses 4 members per month from a starting point almost 200 the IPC gains also 4 new members per month. At this rate the IPC will become the dominant ATA in less than a year.




http://www.anpr-ltd.com/news.php




well not quite as bad as he says , but strip the Debt collectors and "back room" provides from this list , and check the number of PARKING Cos left
http://www.britishparking.co.uk/BPA-Approved-Operators


in march last year the IPC hade 45 members , look now
https://www.theipc.info/aos-members