Private Parking Code of Practice - Public Consultation

beamerguy

send a final version to the Sec of State who decides whether to lay it before Parliament 
You mean Mr cash for favours himself ???

BrownTrout

C_L_S_Henderson said:

The Sec of State for Local Govt (Mr Jenrick this afternoon still) engaged the BSI to prepare a  draft code for public consultation . There will likely  be a  month for this going into September. The BSI may redraft the Code in the light of comments and could reissue it it or send a final version to the Sec of State who decides whether to lay it before Parliament which will have 40 days to decide whether to approve it. The section of the Act reads 

2 Parking code: procedure

(1)Before preparing a code under section 1, the Secretary of State must consult—

(a)persons who appear to the Secretary of State to represent the interests of those who provide, operate or manage private parking facilities,

(b)persons who appear to the Secretary of State to represent the interests of those who use, or may use, private parking facilities, and

(c)such other persons as the Secretary of State considers appropriate.

(2)After preparing a code under section 1, the Secretary of State must lay the code before Parliament.

(3)If, within the 40-day period, either House of Parliament resolves not to approve the code—

(a)the code is not to be issued, and

(b)the Secretary of State must prepare another code under section 1.

(4)If no such resolution is passed within that period, the Secretary of State must issue the code.

(5)A code issued under subsection (4) comes into force at the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which it is issued.

(6)In this section “the 40-day period” means the period of 40 days beginning with the day on which the code is laid before Parliament (or, if it is not laid before each House of Parliament on the same day, the later of the 2 days on which it is laid).

(7)In calculating the 40-day period, no account is to be taken of any period during which Parliament is dissolved or prorogued or during which both Houses are adjourned for more than 4 days.


I see no reason to assume that BPA and IPC will have this "stitched up". Sir Greg Knight. the promotor of the Act, has the measure of these guys and will have a major influence on the Code. We too can have a shout when the Draft comes out and while it is going through Parlt. There is a huge wealth of  experience on this site which should be deployed. My own contribution will argue that PPCs operating on private land must state the name and  address of the land  owner on all signage, PCNs and all communications to the RK and must supply on demand an unredacted copy of the agreement with the landowner to anyone receiving a PCN.  Also the DVLA must supply the landowner agreement which it asks PPC s to supply on its V883 form when the PPC seeks   RK details. 

I would say that the likes of the BPA/IPC would have already had a large input into its drafting...... 

beamerguy

BrownTrout said:

C_L_S_Henderson said:

The Sec of State for Local Govt (Mr Jenrick this afternoon still) engaged the BSI to prepare a  draft code for public consultation . There will likely  be a  month for this going into September. The BSI may redraft the Code in the light of comments and could reissue it it or send a final version to the Sec of State who decides whether to lay it before Parliament which will have 40 days to decide whether to approve it. The section of the Act reads 

2 Parking code: procedure

(1)Before preparing a code under section 1, the Secretary of State must consult—

(a)persons who appear to the Secretary of State to represent the interests of those who provide, operate or manage private parking facilities,

(b)persons who appear to the Secretary of State to represent the interests of those who use, or may use, private parking facilities, and

(c)such other persons as the Secretary of State considers appropriate.

(2)After preparing a code under section 1, the Secretary of State must lay the code before Parliament.

(3)If, within the 40-day period, either House of Parliament resolves not to approve the code—

(a)the code is not to be issued, and

(b)the Secretary of State must prepare another code under section 1.

(4)If no such resolution is passed within that period, the Secretary of State must issue the code.

(5)A code issued under subsection (4) comes into force at the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which it is issued.

(6)In this section “the 40-day period” means the period of 40 days beginning with the day on which the code is laid before Parliament (or, if it is not laid before each House of Parliament on the same day, the later of the 2 days on which it is laid).

(7)In calculating the 40-day period, no account is to be taken of any period during which Parliament is dissolved or prorogued or during which both Houses are adjourned for more than 4 days.


I see no reason to assume that BPA and IPC will have this "stitched up". Sir Greg Knight. the promotor of the Act, has the measure of these guys and will have a major influence on the Code. We too can have a shout when the Draft comes out and while it is going through Parlt. There is a huge wealth of  experience on this site which should be deployed. My own contribution will argue that PPCs operating on private land must state the name and  address of the land  owner on all signage, PCNs and all communications to the RK and must supply on demand an unredacted copy of the agreement with the landowner to anyone receiving a PCN.  Also the DVLA must supply the landowner agreement which it asks PPC s to supply on its V883 form when the PPC seeks   RK details. 

I would say that the likes of the BPA/IPC would have already had a large input into its drafting...... 

There is no doubt about that .... this time will they obey or break the law ?

exongrad

I would expect that breach of the Code would be a criminal offence with directors and senior staff of PPCs being charged with the company. We have to ensure that this Code has teeth.

BrownTrout

C_L_S_Henderson said:

I would expect that breach of the Code would be a criminal offence with directors and senior staff of PPCs being charged with the company. We have to ensure that this Code has teeth.

And back in the real world......

Castle

BrownTrout said:

C_L_S_Henderson said:

I would expect that breach of the Code would be a criminal offence with directors and senior staff of PPCs being charged with the company. We have to ensure that this Code has teeth.

And back in the real world......

The code provision 5

Effect of parking code

(1)A failure on the part of any person to act in accordance with any provision of the parking code does not of itself make that person liable to any legal proceedings in any court or tribunal.

beamerguy

Castle said:

BrownTrout said:

C_L_S_Henderson said:

I would expect that breach of the Code would be a criminal offence with directors and senior staff of PPCs being charged with the company. We have to ensure that this Code has teeth.

And back in the real world......

The code provision 5

Effect of parking code

(1)A failure on the part of any person to act in accordance with any provision of the parking code does not of itself make that person liable to any legal proceedings in any court or tribunal.

It's the new PPI ... Parking Protection Institute

exongrad

beamerguy said:

Castle said:

BrownTrout said:

C_L_S_Henderson said:

I would expect that breach of the Code would be a criminal offence with directors and senior staff of PPCs being charged with the company. We have to ensure that this Code has teeth.

And back in the real world......

The code provision 5

Effect of parking code

(1)A failure on the part of any person to act in accordance with any provision of the parking code does not of itself make that person liable to any legal proceedings in any court or tribunal.

It's the new PPI ... Parking Protection Institute

A fair point, beamerguy. The key phrase is "of itself" implying that additional or aggravated conduct could give rise to legal action. From my experience of one PPC, the conduct is accompanied by lies and misrepresentations to the DVLA which is too dozy to investigate fully even when put on notice. It is worth quoting the rest of the clause : 
" 5

Effect of parking code

(1)A failure on the part of any person to act in accordance with any provision of the parking code does not of itself make that person liable to any legal proceedings in any court or tribunal.

(2)But the Secretary of State must have regard to a failure to act in accordance with the parking code when deciding—

(a)whether to disclose any particulars contained in the register to a person under regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002 (S.I. 2002/2742);

(b)whether a person should be, or should continue to be, an accredited parking association.

(3)A person is an “accredited parking association” for the purposes of this Act if—

(a)the person (“the association”) represents the interests of persons who provide, operate or manage private parking facilities, and

(b)the Secretary of State considers that it is appropriate for particulars contained in the register to be disclosed to persons who are members of the association.

(4)In this Act “the register” means the record kept by or on behalf of the Secretary of State of the vehicles registered under section 21 of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994.

(5)The parking code is admissible in evidence in any legal proceedings.

The last sub clause (5) is important.

Snakes_Belly

(1) A failure on the part of any person to act in accordance with any provision of the parking code does not of itself make that person liable to any legal proceedings in any court or tribunal.

In the context of the above does "person" refer to an individual rather than the undertaking? So the person could not be held vicariously liable.  

Fruitcake

I've had replies from two different departments within the BSI, neither has been able to help me.

I need to revisit the said Act, because according to the BSI, anything they produce is not mandatory.

From the BSI's response to my email: -
"This seems like a piece of legislation, please note that British Standards are not legal requirements, they are voluntary codes of practice."