Breaking News: Government has announced the statutory Code of Practice, and Enforcement Framework

patient_dream

Fruitcake said:

patient_dream said:

95Rollers said:

Have BPA, IPC, Gallstones/ other bent solicitors, DRA, PPCs and other bottom feeders issued any statements or quotes!?!  I imagine there will be some serious steam coming out of Captain Clamp-It's ears right (which will match the Hot Air that comes from his mouth!).  Oh well you can't take the pi55 out of people, rip them off, harass and bully them forever just like you can't deal drugs or cash in fraudulent cheques for ever either. Every crime and criminal has a shelf life!   They done their own legs by their own greedy, dishonest and nefarious behaviours!!! The government had enough and kicked the troughs away from the reach of their greedy snouts!!!

I would imagine that the PPC's are very disappointed in their leaders,, both ATA's who FAILED them

For government, the icing was on the cake with the recent BPA propaganda which said ...

Government proposals  to reduce parking charges will lead to a £19.5 billion hit to the UK economy ?

Whoever the BPA employed to come up with such rubbish ... they should ask for a full refund because parking charges have been reduced to £50 in the new bill and guess what ..... their will be no hit to the economy ?

The government effectively said the exact opposite. 

It is the unregulated parking companies who have already caused a major hit on the UK economy.

Apart from their inherent unfairness, these practices damage our high-streets, our towns and our city centres. We are determined to bring them to an end.

Thanks Fruitcake ,,,, that says it all

Fruitcake

I think I might have influenced this during the consultation.

In the case of motorcycles and other vehicles, where display on a window or dashboard is not practicable, images must be taken of all locations where a receipt might be displayed.

I used to own an ex-army Austin Champ. The windscreen could be folded flat onto the bonnet, or removed completely. Other, inferior all-wheel-drive vehicles have a similar ability.

Umkomaas

Ministerial foreword

Key to helping our local high streets and town centres roar back into life as part of our recovery from COVID, is encouraging more people to shop local and support local businesses.

Yet, poll after poll - both before and during the pandemic - shows that a lack of cheap, easy parking is one of the greatest barriers to people visiting their local high street.

This is unlikely to come as a surprise for anyone who owns a car, because if there is one thing that unites all motorists it is that poor quality, expensive parking - and the universal fear of a parking ticket - are enough to put anyone off driving into town.

And that fear is not entirely unfounded.

Private firms issue roughly 22,000 parking tickets every day, often adopting a labyrinthine system of misleading and confusing signage, opaque appeals services, aggressive debt collection and unreasonable fees designed to extort money from motorists.

Apart from their inherent unfairness, these practices damage our high-streets, our towns and our city centres. We are determined to bring them to an end.

That is why we threw our full support behind the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 introduced by Sir Greg Knight.

This set out a clear vision for the regulatory system with the interests of safe motorists at its heart and a commitment to making sure that individuals who deliberately park dangerously or obstructively can’t get away with it.

The publication of this Private Parking Code of Practice is a big step towards translating that bold vision into reality.

Produced in close consultation with private parking experts, including consumer and industry groups, this Code sets out straight-forward rules for private parking companies to follow.

It includes things such as clear signage, surface markings and compulsory grace periods so that people parking legitimately at the supermarket to do their weekly shop can no longer be hit with a heavy-handed fine for running a couple of minutes late.

The Code also bans the use of aggressive and pseudo-legal language that we’ve all seen on those yellow parking slips doctored to look like official Penalty Charge Notices.

Importantly, this new Code also allows drivers to challenge unfair fines through a new independent appeals service.

And there will be no wriggle-room for rogue companies who continue to flout the rules. If they fail to follow this Code, they will effectively be banned from issuing parking charges indefinitely.

I would like to thank everyone who has had a hand in developing this Code and its accompanying explanatory document – including those who took part in our public consultation.

They have made sure that these changes will work on the ground, delivering real benefits for both businesses and motorists for decades to come.

We recognise that many of these changes – like bringing private parking charges in line with local authority charges – will take time to implement.

The publication of this Code therefore marks the start of an adjustment period in which parking companies will be expected to follow as many of these new rules as possible. The Code will then come into full force before 2024, when the single appeals service is expected to be in operation.

Taken together I’m confident that these measures will make it much simpler for people to park near their local shops and services without being unfairly fined. In doing so, it will deliver a shot in the arm for our high street businesses throughout our town and city centres, helping them to bounce back from the COVID pandemic stronger than ever before.

Minister Neil O’Brien, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Levelling Up, the Union and Constitution

Given Neil O'Brien's scathing Ministerial Foreword, PPCs should be rather grateful that they've got what they have in the new Code of Practice!

Humdinger1

@Fruitcake you are one of the regulars I was wanting to thank but wasn't quite sure how many capital letters you had in your name and you weren't on the page for me to check.  Absolutely splendid work! Humdinger x 

Fruitcake

7.2 Camera vehicles

Camera vehicles used to monitor, and enforce, compliance with relevant obligations must be clearly identifiable as such and must clearly and prominently display the name of the parking operator. Camera vehicles must also bear the logo and may bear the livery of the parking operator. They must not be used for covert surveillance, or carry misleading branding e.g. ‘Road Safety Unit’ or ’Security’.

Perhaps I should put in a bid to repaint VCS's fleet of vehicles at my local airport with the words, SCAM VAN.

Umkomaas

Designed with deception aforethought. 😠 

Isle_of_Wight_man

As @patient_dream commented on, it's a shame they did not include planning permission for ANPR and signage, and not retrospective action like Cornwall Council does.

7.1 Use of photographic evidence technology

Many private parking operators use automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) technology to issue parking charges. The Code prevents parking operators from issuing parking charges unless the photographic equipment is fit for purpose and maintained appropriately and complies with relevant standards and regulations. This may impose a cost to operators who need to update their technology.

Jenni_D

Isle_of_Wight_man said:

As @patient_dream commented on, it's a shame they did not include planning permission for ANPR and signage, and not retrospective action like Cornwall Council does.

7.1 Use of photographic evidence technology

Many private parking operators use automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) technology to issue parking charges. The Code prevents parking operators from issuing parking charges unless the photographic equipment is fit for purpose and maintained appropriately and complies with relevant standards and regulations. This may impose a cost to operators who need to update their technology.

Is this a business opportunity for Owd Trev? 😁

Umkomaas

As @patient_dream commented on, it's a shame they did not include planning permission for ANPR and signage, 

Section 14 and Appx G2 provide openings for challenge, certainly on the signage front, but cameras are mentioned too, if somewhat tangentially. The PPC must discuss with the landowner and determine who takes responsibility for the consents, and enshrine that within the contractual agreement ...... as I read it. 

Extrapolating ..... if it is agreed that the landowner will acquire the necessary consent, does not do so and the PPC has commenced enforcement action, it could drag the landowner in to any legal action .... possibly?

bargepole

Umkomaas said:

Extrapolating ..... if it is agreed that the landowner will acquire the necessary consent, does not do so and the PPC has commenced enforcement action, it could drag the landowner in to any legal action .... possibly?

The basic principle in law is known as 'ex turpi causa non oritor actio', which as any Latin scholar will know, translates as 'from a dishonourable cause an action does not arise'.

So if the signage which creates the contract is unlawful, due to a lack of planning/advertising consent, the argument would be that any purported contractual terms are void and unenforceable. It doesn't matter whether the landowner or the PPC was responsible for obtaining the necessary consent, the fact remains that the signs are there unlawfully.

Some Judges might agree with that argument, others may not. As always, it's Judge Bingo once you enter the hearing.