Parking News - JUDICIAL REVIEW - here we go again

Castle

patient_dream said:

Mr Clark made me laugh by saying that if a car park charged £100 a day then the motorist could abuse this by just paying the reduced £25.

Clearly he didn't get the memo about the new COP which would have told him; (at 8.2):-

Where the parking tariff exceeds the parking charge, the full payment of the tariff may be pursued.

(Of course, the Tariff would normally go to the landowner, not the PPC).

Coupon-mad

Money was already thrown at a JR last year, as was stated in a previous issue of Parking News.  It hit a brick wall because it couldn't proceed when no final decision had been made by Govt at that time.  You can only challenge a decision once made.  Article about it here:

https://www.transportxtra.com/publications/parking-review/news/69350/private-sector-operators-judicial-review-bid-turned-down/

Given they did it once, I fully expect them to try again.  A few tens of thousands in costs is small change to a large PPC or DRA.

Hundreds of millions ride on the false 'debt recovery' inflation.

Millard-Smith comes across as a smarmy know-it-all, doesn't he?  Appalling that anyone thinks what the DRAs do to gaslight and scare people and artificially inflate the money, is OK.

Also disappointed to hear SC use Will Hurley's imaginary phrase 'debt resolution' where the latter (plus Stewart 'thingummybob' ex-UKPC now DRPlus) tried to lead the Select Committee into actually thinking what they do is of value and caring to consumers.

Umkomaas

Appalling that anyone thinks what the DRAs do to gaslight and scare people and artificially inflate the money, is OK.

Not that dissimilar to solicitors! 🙂

Fruitcake

Whilst I hate all the PPCs we see on here daily (I am convinced there are some decent ones but because they are decent, their names never appear on here), I still don't understand why PPCs never followed the ParkingEye business model.
At the oral hearing, you had the head of the BPA, IPC, and DRP positively whinging like spoiled brats that they couldn't possibly survive without the fake add-ons, yet ParkingEye had recently posted an annual profit of £12 million without the fake add-ons.

If PE can do it, it begs the question, what on earth are the other PPCs doing wrong? To me it is proof positive that the add-ons are indeed made up spurious amounts.

MothballsWallet

Umkomaas said:

Clure is talking as much BS as he did at the Select Committee. He knows tap all about private parking per se, just its outworkings and the opportunity to make wonga from it. 

But, of course, they can blame Mr O for all of this. 

Gary Osner Q&A - Powered by ParkMaven

Lydia Woodward|  3rd September 2018

The secret to successful parking enforcement? Mind control. Just ask Gary Osner, founder of ZZPS.

Hi, Gary! Can you briefly introduce your role and company? 

I’m the founder, owner and driving force behind ZZPS. We are a notice-processing debt collection business, but it’s not traditional debt collection – more like customer service with teeth. I’ve always believed that if you’re nice to people, you’ll get a better result. 

One of the aspects I like very much is NLP (neuro-linguistic programming). I came to my role now through sales, but NLP in debt collection is fascinating and an important part of our approach. 

Tell us some more about that… 

You get the customer to imagine being debt free. ‘You owe me money; we’re here to help you solve your problem’ is simply a different way to say, ‘you need to pay me’. This positive approach produces a different result. We’ve tried to train our people so instead of saying things like ‘no worries’, two negative words which make you instinctively begin to worry, we use phrases like ‘yes, sure, safe haven, free advice’. All of those positive words mean that you’ll be in a happier and healthier place, which is the message we try to deliver in debt recovery.

Debt recovery naturally has negative connotations and so does parking. We’re trying to turn those things into something positive.

How did you get into both parking and debt collection?

My father had a family business which my brother and I took over back in 1990 – that’s how I got into debt collection. One of our clients, a mainstream lender, moved to a parking company, and we were doing such a good job for his old business that he asked us to do the same in this new industry! 

I created the model of ‘admin fees’ for debt recovery because ticket value was so low that nobody would make any money. Parking is business and business is about money, after all. 

There are many other enforcement and debt collection companies in the parking industry. What’s different about ZZPS? 

I think NLP is a huge differentiator, and a customer-focussed approach rather than ‘pay up or I’ll kick your head in’. Not that others necessarily do that, but service is definitely our USP for both our clients and their customers. What you’re looking for ultimately is compliance in the car park, not to make anyone’s life a misery. Our approach is all about positivity.

Your fantastic young customer service staff recently won ‘Team of the Year’ at the British Parking Awards. How did you build that team? 

Basically, by treating them as grown-ups. We’ve built a cloud-based business. It’s great for a young workforce who have children, based on the fact that if they have trouble they can work from home. It’s a flexible approach which gives them freedom, so we have happy staff, which is important. 

We’ve tried to create an environment where it’s more about the team than about individuals. They don’t have any individual targets -  it’s all about the firm. 

Positivity is great, but people still really hate getting PCNs. A lot of the innovation we’re seeing in parking is aimed at getting rid of them and putting you out of business. How will ZZPS evolve to stay relevant? 

You’ll never get 100% compliance. There are always going to be people who want to get something for nothing, fortunately for us! They’ll want to park in disabled bays, parent-child bays, and so on. Whilst the market might diminish in some respects, it will increase in others.

One of the interesting questions is who’s responsible in a driverless car. That’s a key technological advance that we’re going to need to find an answer to. Our business is about the driver, so if there is no driver, we’ll need to adapt. 

How have you leveraged new technology in your own operations?

Debt recovery is mainly about people. We’ve shied away from some aspects of technology, because people need to deal with other people, particularly in emotionally-charged situations. If they’ve received a fine, often they want to ring up and shout at someone, or moan to a sympathetic ear before they pay. Other companies have IVR (interactive voice response) technology and we don’t, because I don’t think that’s progress in debt recovery. 

I google'd ParkMaven - it's a software platform, and has 1.0 star review on Google Reviews - does that tell anyone else anything?

Castle

MothballsWallet said:

I google'd ParkMaven - it's a software platform, and has 1.0 star review on Google Reviews - does that tell anyone else anything?

You can't give it "No" stars

Coupon-mad

When the BPA don't understand what a LBC and the pre-action protocol is, nor the court process thereafter, and are quoted saying misleading things as if they are fact, it does make you worry.

New article just published:

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/features/new-rules-making-car-parks-fairer-uk-drivers

Steve Clark at the BPA agrees: “We want to avoid the type of chaos seen at many seaside towns and beauty spots when lockdown eased last summer. Already eight million motorists are breaking the rules, which are for everyone’s benefit. Our research shows that reducing the deterrent level could see as many as 13 million parking charges issued as more people take the risk of ignoring them.”

Clark also criticises the abolition of the £70 debt-recovery charge: “Recovery firms are licensed credit brokers that can help people pay their fine in instalments. Now motorists will simply get a letter telling them they must appear in court in five weeks’ time.

My italics. But, Whoops...

The word 'fine' is misleading enough (ironically, the BPA themselves ban it) but this isn't what happens re a small claim.  Five weeks!  No LBC?  No chance to settle or dispute under the PAP?  No defence period, then waiting 6 months for a hearing and your chance to show your WS and evidence?

About as correct as the ludicrous Mazars '£19.5 BILLION hit to the economy' fake news.

Umkomaas

Steve Clark used the word 'fine' during the BPA Conference Q&A session. Quickly recovered and changed it, but you have to raise an eyebrow at where the subconscious is!

patient_dream

Mr Clark said ...Our research shows that reducing the deterrent level could see as many as 13 million parking charges issued,

Mr Clark said  ...Now motorists will simply get a letter telling them they must appear in court in five weeks’ time.

This is just fantasy stuff from Mr Clark. Even his own members must see this is dream world rubbish

No wonder government is ignoring him

Coupon-mad

So, the PPCs were hoping that the Govt would let them charge £70 for the 'service' of letting a victim pay £50 in instalments.

You could not make it up.

But the DRAs and robo-claim lot have...and very nearly got away with it for the future, set in stone by order of the Government...very nearly.  In 2021 we all saw it was on the cards.

We dodged a bullet there.  Thank goodness the DLUHC looked more closely at it all and saw it for what that is.  Extortion.