A plea from the BPA

Isle_of_Wight_man

For information, seen on twitter from the BPA.

Getting desparate now?

"Government proposals will mean 23% of currently managed private parking spaces will no longer be managed, leaving many destinations congested and inaccessible."

https://t.co/do72U68KzX

The claim is the government are reducing parking charges, where in fact it's the charges they scam motorists with for various reasons that are being reduced.

Implies their members can't run car parks on honest income from motorists so they have to top it up with scam charges.

Snakes_Belly

How will it hamper the countries economic recovery? I would have thought that it would benefit the housing industry with less people getting CCJ's and being able to obtain finance.

"Footfall declines will lead to a £19.5bn hit to UK Retail Sales" No it won't. They have plucked that figure out of the air.

Umkomaas

Getting desparate now?

"Government proposals will mean 23% of currently managed harvested private parking spaces will no longer be managed cash cows for the private parking sector, leaving many destinations congested parasite-free and inaccessible once more a pleasure to visit and support."

Fixed that for you BPA!  Sounds a lot less desperate now. 🤓

patient_dream

Government proposals to reduce parking charges will lead to a £19.5 billion hit to the UK economy .... SAYS THE BPA

Who writes this rubbish at the BPA ?  

This is seriously dreamworld propaganda by the BPA, where do these fools get £19.5 BILLION from ...... what they mean is their scammers might not be able to buy expensive cars, villas abroad and big houses.

Government must be alerted to this rubbish. It really is rubbish ???   If the CEO of the BPA really believes in this rubbish then he does not deserve to be the CEO and should resign and get himself a real job.

Such total rubbish just confirms that the BPA is not fit for purpose and government should terminate them as an ATA

Footfall declines will lead to a £19.5bn hit to UK Retail Sales
Amazing dreamworld stuff ..... footfall is due to parking scammers and covid plus people are buying online

https://www.britishparking-media.co.uk/news/government-proposals-to-reduce-parking-charges-will-lead-to-a-gbp-19-5-billion-hit-to-the-uk-ecomy

In all my years, I have never read so much rubbish and is a total shame on the BPA to try to mislead government and the public

SHAMEFUL PROPAGANDA and I ask again who at the BPA writes this verbal Diarrhea.
£19.5 billion ..... ???? what a load of pure crap

Fruitcake

Nine million parking charges issued in the year before Covid stalked the land, some reduced due to early payment balanced out by fake add on costs and court case, so let's say an average of £100 per invoice = £900 000 000.

Getting rid of all the PPCs would mean an extra £900 000 000 in pockets for people to spend and boost the economy.

Plus, reduced stress, reduced suicides, and a significant reduction in the load on UK courts, and more tax revenue for the government to spend on the NHS.

This could be achieved at very little cost by withdrawing Schedule 4 of the PoFA, which be a much cheaper option than the current process. The BPA lied to the UK Government in 2012. 
Looking at that argument has failed to convince me they are now telling the truth.

Oh well, the new proposed scheme will be a step in the right direction.

Some landowners seem to have been woken up to the fact that PPCs are bad for business and a few have been kicked off site as a result.

Take Sandhills at Instow in Devon, a beach car park. DSFP were kicked out and the landowner has taken back management of the site. Car park usage has increased with increased revenue for local businesses, as has car park revenue for the landowner, and all of that has happened during Covid.

ParkingEye posted a profit of £12 million not long ago, and that's without fake add on charges. Half that under the new scheme would still be a decent profit. All the BPA need to do is get ParkingEye to teach their business model to all other parking companies, and none of them would go out of business.

In other words, yet again the BPA is being economical with the truth.

patient_dream

What the BPA say, they must prove now about the rubbish £19.5 billion that will affect the UK economy ?

Could this fabrication be of concern to Mr Gove MP ???? ,,,,,, guess not, but it will prove that the BPA is simply not fit for purpose due to their support of money scammers

patient_dream

Fruitcake said:

In other words, yet again the BPA is being economical with the truth.

Economical with the truth ???? , what better reason 
The BPA supports scammers, what better reason for them to be terminated as a ATA

Fruitcake

patient_dream said:

What the BPA say, they must prove now about the rubbish £19.5 million that will affect the UK economy ?

Could this fabrication be of concern to Mr Gove MP ???? ,,,,,, guess not, but it will prove that the BPA is simply not fit for purpose due to their support of money scammers

Billion dear boy, billion, not million.

The parking industry wouldn't get out of bed for a measly annual £19.5 million don't you know.

holderness

The BPA are a bogus organisation with zero credibility as a regulatory body and setup only to protect the income of its members, its code of conduct is a sham

Below is a reply I received this week to my complaint to the BPA that a PPC who was displaying BPA signage but was not a current BPA member was using a second BPA company to access DVLA data on their behalf. I complained to the BPA that the first company did not have written permission at the time of the ticketing and that the managing agent at the car park location had never heard of the second company let alone had any contract with them

I supplied an email from the MA to BPA to that effect as evidence...

Thank you for your reply.

In order for us to investigate breaches of this kind, we will need evidence that the landowner has not given permission for an operator to enforce on this land – this evidence should be in the form of deeds to the land and written confirmation that they have not authorised the operator to enforce on their land.

Furthermore, if the company requesting the DVLA data work on behalf of another operator, if that operator is not a member of our Approved Operator Scheme they do not need to adhere to our Code of Practice.

I trust this information is of assistance to you.

I do find it breathtaking that even though I had already provided proof of no written landowner contract, that I should be expected to provide further evidence of my title to the land and get written confirmation that they did not have written permission to issue tickets, when all they have to do is ask the PPC for a redacted copy of their contract. (Which of course they don’t have)

I am unsure what the second paragraph is stating because it sounds like a cowboys charter to me

Fruitcake

Unbelievable! 

Completely believable. The BPA want proof of a negative instead of demanding proof from their member that they do have landowner authority.

95Rollers

You can smell the stench of the desperation!  Perhaps if they didn't take the p*ss out of people with their petty "rules", hidden terms, crap signs, one-sided appeal system, non-enforced compliance "rules" that are merely suggestions to cherry-pick, questionably harvesting people's data on flimsy grounds of false-pretence, being judge jury and executioner!!!    I WILL NOT drive to certain town's where they operate the carparks!  Its not worth the risk so I'll just buy online instead as I know there is no risk of people I don't want obtaining my identity then trying to tax then bully or harass me if I don't submit!  

Its funny that they've not commented on the Home Working initiative, Clear Air Zones and striving for public transport/ cycling initiatives over driving which will have more effect on their business model than this new proposed bill.