Victory for Motorists: MHCLG Caps Parking Charges at £50 (£80 in London) with Mandatory 50% Discount

bargepole

The BPA response is all doom and gloom, describing the lowering of charges as ‘unworkable and unsustainable’, and suggesting that it means ‘the end of free parking’.

 

They should have been careful what they wished for:

 

Government consultation response heralds the end of free parking for everyone (britishparking-media.co.uk)

Nuddmann

“so that motorists are left at the mercy of rogue operators, who will be incentivised to operate without requesting DVLA data as part of their enforcement operations.”

Not being an expert but a very interested follower on here, just what exactly will they do without keeper data from the DVLA.? And the fact that POFA makes immobilisation a criminal offence?  

They”ll huff and puff and blow our house down?😂

ratechaser

Nuddmann said:

“so that motorists are left at the mercy of rogue operators, who will be incentivised to operate without requesting DVLA data as part of their enforcement operations.”

Not being an expert but a very interested follower on here, just what exactly will they do without keeper data from the DVLA.? And the fact that POFA makes immobilisation a criminal offence?  

They”ll huff and puff and blow our house down?😂

More windscreen tickets designed to entrap motorists into admitting they were driving...?

blackdog2220

Nuddmann said:

“so that motorists are left at the mercy of rogue operators, who will be incentivised to operate without requesting DVLA data as part of their enforcement operations.”

Not being an expert but a very interested follower on here, just what exactly will they do without keeper data from the DVLA.? And the fact that POFA makes immobilisation a criminal offence?  

They”ll huff and puff and blow our house down?😂

yes huff n puff andf like many in the past (and as recent as wing parking in jan/feb this year) simply apply confetti to a car in the hope that the law abiting person with the car realises they have caused a problem and simply pays up ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, just like possably 60% + of tickets now .

a large proportion will ring.email / write giving there name address , blood group and shoe size and wonder why they are being taken to court 
however rogue operators will have a lot of anpr camera gear going spare as it will be of no use to them 

beamerguy

bargepole said:

The BPA response is all doom and gloom, describing the lowering of charges as ‘unworkable and unsustainable’, and suggesting that it means ‘the end of free parking’.

 

They should have been careful what they wished for:

 

Government consultation response heralds the end of free parking for everyone (britishparking-media.co.uk)

Thanks for the link to the BPA.  So, the BPA have joined hands with the IPC .... difficult to understand given the scam operated by the IPC and IAS ?
And the BPA say they are driving up standards ?? ... WHAT, going to bed with a known scam

THE END OF FREE PARKING ...... what rubbish, the public are happy to pay for parking as long as it's fair ... not a £100 scam ?  It would mean that the BPA ensure that ticket machines work.

It would be unfortunate if the laudable intentions of Sir Greg Knight, and the significant collaboration between government and the parking sector these past two years led to a significant decline in compliance with existing parking rules, and higher parking charges for most motorists who will be at the mercy of more rogue operators. That cannot be the government’s intention and we call upon it to rethink its proposals. The BPA and IPC stand ready to work with government on delivering a parking service that is fair to everyone.

Wake up the CEO of the BPA, you already have a fair number of "motorists who will be at the mercy of more rogue operators"

Get your act together BPA and get rid of YOUR rogue traders. 

"It would be unfortunate if the laudable intentions of Sir Greg Knight"
WOW ??   difference is that Sir Greg is acting on behalf of the motorist and the BPA support their scammers ..... no option here, this thread has been sent to Sir Greg

Coupon-mad

ratechaser said:

Nuddmann said:

“so that motorists are left at the mercy of rogue operators, who will be incentivised to operate without requesting DVLA data as part of their enforcement operations.”

Not being an expert but a very interested follower on here, just what exactly will they do without keeper data from the DVLA.? And the fact that POFA makes immobilisation a criminal offence?  

They”ll huff and puff and blow our house down?😂

More windscreen tickets designed to entrap motorists into admitting they were driving...?

Yes, that could happen.

I suspect this is how Wing Parking are currently winging it.  Because people are duped into thinking they have to appeal to a non-AOS member and handing over their data.

There is a risk but it's small and the Government could introduce a statutory instrument, making it a criminal offence to issue a parking/penalty charge without being an enforcement body (LA, Police or AOS member) maybe with one possible exception - unless the issuer is the landowner.  If that landowner is also a parking firm, they must be in an AOS and abide by the new Code, otherwise to issue a charge would still be a criminal offence (misleading business practice, maybe).   

Or, landowners are also not allowed to issue PCNs of any description and it is an absolute offence for anyone to impersonate a parking charge or penalty.   

Two ways of looking at it: retailers, for example, should not be corralled into using this scummy industry and should be allowed to operate parking on their own land, within reason (the only worry is, scam/trap sites by chancer landowners popping up, charging £200 and people falling for it).

At the moment it's already a criminal offence to issue 'PCNs' on the public highway so I think that's going to have to be extended to be a general offence.  Not sure how achievable that is but I expect it has been considered. 

blackdog2220

 lead to higher parking charges for all responsible motorists and encourage a return of rogue operators who will act outside of the Code of Practice.  

what the hell !!! popla and the bevis case both agreed £100 (£85 at brevis) was enough for the parking co s to operate and make a profit 

Both the BPA and the IPC have both acted against the goverment and allowed parking co s to add on "extra s" 

I would say that every parking co that has added extras on , beyond basic court cost and solisitors fees are rougues 
so come on BPA and IPC , sort your rougues out 
to late the goverment is doing it for you 

Coupon-mad

The Government was taken in by the BPA in 2011 before the POFA was enacted.  

Not this time.

blackdog2220

Coupon-mad said:

The Government was taken in by the BPA in 2011 before the POFA was enacted.  

Not this time.

we can only hope , it would be nice, if the words BPA and ipc were the words you so on the wayback machine and not in real life 

, 

bargepole

Another complete load of claptrap in that BPA response, is this paragraph:

''Over 80% of the public supported the industry’s approach, which was put forward as part of the BSI and MHCLG consultations to meet the specific objectives originally set out in Sir Greg Knight’s Private Members Bill.''

What they actually mean, is that ''We got all our members, their wives, their servants, and their tennis partners to respond to the consultation as if they were members of the public, to make it look as if the majority supported the industry position''.

Fortunately, the MHCLG and the BSI saw through this unsubtle ruse, and didn't need to be Sherlock Holmes to do so, as most of those responses used the same template, containing the same grammatical and spelling errors.

You couldn't make it up.