New BPA Code of Practice - 6.1.2020

DoaM

Fruitcake wrote: »

All the changes from the previous version are listed here.

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/AOS-Code-Changes-2018

C-m posted that link in her OP.

twhitehousescat

15.4 Self-ticketers must be registered with the BPA before they are able to issue a Parking Charge or their operator can request keeper data relating to a parking incident

will this list of back stabbing two faced norris cole be available to view via SAR ? or indeed from the BPA after stating site location


15.8 The practice of offering financial incentives relating to the quantity of parking charge notices directly to the person who issues a parking charge notice or gathers evidence for one, in a self ticketing or similar arrangement is prohibited.


so if this incentive is offered on a website is this for the BPA at advertising standards to sort out


in reality the BPA are trying to kill off self ticketing , IF they follow the above thru , there will be no incentive for norris to sneak out at 4am with his brownie

I do hope that "norris" will be named at court stage

MistyZ

Coupon-mad wrote: »

13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place.

Unlike the more experienced regulars, I do have some trouble comprehending bureaucratic language and sometimes that helps me empathise with other posters. So just to clarify, does the above really mean that if a motorist does decide to stay in a car park, bang goes the 'consideration period' and the clock starts ticking from the moment the car entered?

I recall cold mornings parking when travelling to meetings. Eye sight not great, clumsy anyway and rendered more so by a disease I had but didn't know about then. Weighed down with winter clothing & fumbling with purse. And there was invariably a queue. I didn't read the damn signs, not sure I could have done. Inputting reg. was quite difficult. I expected a ticket every time but could have afforded it. Heaven knows what it's like for those who can't.

If the BPA are going to behave like this then it's time all of us covered our numberplates when entering and leaving private car parks (especially when leaving, I think?) as a matter of principle as well as to avoid being scammed.

beamerguy

There is only one way and that is for the government to start behaving in a responsible way to protect the voting public against the scam ........ ONE ATA, ONE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT that is not financial based.
The DVLA can finance it from all the £2.50 pops

Take all authority away from the BPA and IPC, both are such an old fashioned outdated method allowing scammers to operate

Castle

twhitehousescat wrote: »

15.4 Self-ticketers must be registered with the BPA before they are able to issue a Parking Charge or their operator can request keeper data relating to a parking incident

will this list of back stabbing two faced norris cole be available to view via SAR ? or indeed from the BPA after stating site location

The source of the personal data has to be disclosed under a SAR if it wasn't provided by the data subject.

nosferatu1001

DoaM wrote: »

20.4a ... surely the PPC would need to provide proof of posting?

Not at all - they just need to show they have a robust system to place it into the normal course of post. Same as the police do.

twhitehousescat

Fruitcake wrote: »

My interpretation of this is that the PPC must visit the site each and every time they get a self-ticket request before a PCN can be issued.

15.6 All self-ticketing sites should be visited by the operator prior to any enforcement action being taken, unless there is an exemption by the ATA.

most of the self ticket are done by "app"as in take and upload a pic , often claiming that a ticket was placed on the car

I would imagine that from now on the PPC with claim it was an employee that "ticketed"the car, therefore bypassing all new rules regarding this in COP

I suppose what we should do us infiltrate the PPC by downloading apps and submitting photos of a "guinea pig"

one the £60 has been paid and the blood money has been recieved , the company should be sanctioned and banned


gotta be worth £50 , (£60 - £10 blood money)

Coupon-mad

Castle wrote: »

The source of the personal data has to be disclosed under a SAR if it wasn't provided by the data subject.

That's interesting.

I have a court case I'm helping with where the PPC has provided a screenshot of a whistle-blower phone message showing a distant photo of a car, which tipped off the scammers to scuttle round. The PPC included the phone message in the SAR but did not identify the source.

MistyZ wrote: »

Unlike the more experienced regulars, I do have some trouble comprehending bureaucratic language and sometimes that helps me empathise with other posters. So just to clarify, does the above really mean that if a motorist does decide to stay in a car park, bang goes the 'consideration period' and the clock starts ticking from the moment the car entered?

Yes, that is how I read it. And how is a consumer meant to know that?

If the BPA are going to behave like this then it's time all of us covered our numberplates when entering and leaving private car parks (especially when leaving, I think?) as a matter of principle as well as to avoid being scammed.

This is what I have been saying and encouraging everyone to do for months.

Do it!

Tank40

MistyZ wrote: »

If the BPA are going to behave like this then it's time all of us covered our numberplates when entering and leaving private car parks (especially when leaving, I think?) as a matter of principle as well as to avoid being scammed.

I thought about doing something similar (replacing number plate with one which was rude about the operator) but was concerned as to the point at which I would be either on a highway with a fake plate or on private property in scamera range.

beamerguy

Tank40 wrote: »

I thought about doing something similar (replacing number plate with one which was rude about the operator) but was concerned as to the point at which I would be either on a highway with a fake plate or on private property in scamera range.

Public highway .... NO

Private area .... OK