The Draft Private Parking Code of Practice (PAS 232) now out for Consultation

Snakes_Belly

"This will give courts more time to focus on family issues and issues surrounding children which have been increasing during lock down. These cases are heard by the same judges that hear the parking cases. These family cases should have precedent."

I have noticed when looking at Courtserve that there is an increasing number of non-molestation cases some requiring screens. This must be as a result of the increase in domestic violence during lock down. I would think that there has to be an usher or security present during these cases.  

Then there is likely to be increased evictions. All this is going to strain resources at the courts and some of the judges are restricted in how many days that they can be in court. They would surely be glad to see the back of the parking claims.    

Snakes_Belly

What do people think about VAT being included in the overall parking charge? Naturally want to see the motorist come out of this on top and pay less. Rishi has to get money from somewhere. Is this dangerous to suggest this? 

The suggested small payments are more of an admin fee.

Castle

Snakes_Belly said:

What do people think about VAT being included in the overall parking charge? Naturally want to see the motorist come out of this on top and pay less. Rishi has to get money from somewhere. Is this dangerous to suggest this? 

The suggested small payments are more of an admin fee.

The easiest place to get some additional tax revenue is to charge, (and collect), the business rates which the PPC's should be paying.

D_P_Dance

No, the easiest way to get revenue will be a tax on second homes.  However, imo, this is likely to lead to rent increases.

Snakes_Belly

D_P_Dance said:

No, the easiest way to get revenue will be a tax on second homes.  However, imo, this is likely to lead to rent increases.

They have already increased stamp duty considerably and reduced tax relief on loan interest. There is also the risk of a bad tenant. There is a point at which renting out property will no longer be viable and the market needs quality rental property. 

Not everyone rents because they can't afford to buy. Some people are on contract for a couple of years and then move on. 

Snakes_Belly

"The easiest place to get some additional tax revenue is to charge, (and collect), the business rates which the PPC's should be paying."

Yes, when I was working on my case I could not find that the PPC was paying business rates and yet they were registered as leaseholders at the Land Registry. I assumed that this could have been because the rates were paid by the holder of the head lease.

Are they not paying business rates then? That is something that should be looked into. 

IMHO there are too many companies getting away without paying corporation tax by registering abroad. Any company should be taxed on profits from revenue earned in the UK.

Castle

Snakes_Belly said:

"The easiest place to get some additional tax revenue is to charge, (and collect), the business rates which the PPC's should be paying."

Yes, when I was working on my case I could not find that the PPC was paying business rates and yet they were registered as leaseholders at the Land Registry. I assumed that this could have been because the rates were paid by the holder of the head lease.

Are they not paying business rates then? That is something that should be looked into. 

IMHO there are too many companies getting away without paying corporation tax by registering abroad. Any company should be taxed on profits from revenue earned in the UK.

The only PPC's I can remember seeing on any Business rating listings are (1) Excel, mainly because they do have leases with the landowners in many cases and (2) NCP, because they actually own the land.

Fruitcake

I've given the PAS a first pass, and this is what I've got so far. I'll go back and give it a few more passes over the next few weeks to make more comments, and get everyone in my family to comment as well.
Once registered on the BSI website, despite having to give an occupation, the system is very easy to use.
What follows is bullet points where I have expanded on the comments section and then provided focused comments on the "Proposed Changes " section.

4.1 Signs

Parking operators must obtain advertising consent for all signs, and must not change the approved parking period granted by the planning department without a revised planning order/consent.

4.1.2 Entrance Signs

The entrance sign shall take into account the expected direction of vehicles as well as their speed. They must not face away from the normal direction of traffic flow.

5.2 Accessible Parking, where the BB scheme is recognised.

Displaying a BB must not be mandatory to allow for people with disabilities who have Protected Characteristics as defined by the EA 2010 but who do not have a BB, as well as people with physical and cognitive disabilities who have a badge but are unable to display it, or people whose badge has expired but the disability has not.

7.2 Pay and display premises.

The whole vehicle including seats and footwells should be searched for a ticket, especially where non-adhesive tickets are used.
Non-adhesive tickets should be printed with identical details on both sides to allow for doors closing or windows left open for ventilation.

7.3 Keying Errors

Parking operators must not use vehicle registration monitoring or recording technology that will allow an incorrect Vehicle Registration Mark (VRM) to be entered into a system. 

8.1 Use of cameras and other technology

ANPR cameras are not permitted for car park monitoring in council or local authority car parks because they are not fit for purpose. Private car parks must be brought in line with Government controlled car parks by prohibiting the use of unauthorised car park monitoring systems such as the use of ANPR cameras.

8.3 Use of photographic evidence.

Photographic images must clearly show that the vehicle was parked on relevant land at the time of image capture, not just show the VRM.



That's as far as I have got.

Le_Kirk

Fruitcake said:

Once registered on the BSI website, despite having to give an occupation, the system is very easy to use.
What follows is bullet points where I have expanded on the comments section and then provided focused comments on the "Proposed Changes " section.

Like you @Fruitcake I found it poor website building to have a drop-down box marked "retired" and then couldn't go any further until inserting an occupation.  I resisted the temptation to be rude and put "Engineer (but I'm alright now)."  I agree with you that it is easy to navigate.  I have put my comments on the web site and saved it, when I have completed it I will go back and (i think you can) download it, extract my points and post in this thread.

Snakes_Belly

I have been giving some thoughts to the comments that I intend to make. Must start the process soon.

One particular issue is the fact that motorists receiving PCN's can result in CCJ's. This is particularly damaging to young people who need to obtain finance and may be applying for jobs. Employment is going to be difficult enough in this environment without have a CCJ on their credit file. Any job in finance would be ruled out.

Hopefully the proposed reduction in parking charges will help but at the moment students who may not go home because of COVID could fall foul because they have not received paperwork. They could easily end up with a default CCJ. Young people should not be damaged in this way at the start of their adult life.

I would like to see some guidance regard parking, signage and the fact that they are forming a contract as part of their driving test.

Also anyone receiving a CCJ for a parking claim should have the ability to remove it if paid off. It should not be on for six years.