Secure Parking Solutions NTK

Coupon-mad

IhateFines said

Can she count to 14 at least? 

We may never know!

But what we do know is that we need all new posters to be heard by Government and you will have a chance soon.

Even though this PCN battle is over, there is a far bigger 'war' for honest motorists to win.  Please do make time to come here every week over the Summer so you get to add your own voice to the Public Consultation:
https://www.nationalworld.com/lifestyle/cars/parking-rules-uk-private-parking-code-of-practice-fine-limits-easier-appeals-under-threat-3743008

"A spokesperson for the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities dept said the code would be introduced once a second consultation had taken place.

They said: “We have received a legal challenge from parking operators on two elements of the code and we now have to go back and reconsult with the industry.

“The other elements of the code remain intact and we are very much hopeful that the two we are reconsulting on will also remain.”

We ALL need to ensure that happens!

New posters included (especially) as you have up to date 2022 experience of how intimidating this crap is and genuine victims of this intimidation can tell the Government first hand, for example, that:

(A) had the signs been crystal clear, no breach would have occurred because drivers don't set out to break rules (therefore the deterrent is in the signage message, not the sum of money) 

and

(B) had the 'penalty' been lower, no doubt you'd have paid it or appealed, and felt deterred from repeating it - but at least you'd have felt less ripped off.

But one further thing is for sure - and I think most posters here would agree:

Threatening to send a case to debt collectors, who would (at the moment) add an extortionate scam +£70, is NOT the way to win the hearts and minds of the public.

Strange though it may seem to PPC World, adding layers of further greed doesn't make good people more likely to pay a scam PCN that is already a lot of money, and which they knew nothing about and/or want to dispute.

ParkingEye are the only ones who currently get it right by not adding false costs. People pay them once they know about the parking charge and their model makes them millions.

Reduce the PCN in some cases to £50 and ParkingEye will still make millions. Just a few million less than before - but that's the whole point of regulating a rip off rogue industry that's been riding on a gravy train for far too long.  They'll all have to reduce their litigation teams anyway because fewer cases will need to go to court. People will pay.

Castle

Coupon-mad said:

IhateFines said

Can she count to 14 at least? 

ParkingEye are the only ones who currently get it right by not adding false costs. People pay them once they know about the parking charge and their model makes them millions.

Reduce the PCN in some cases to £50 and ParkingEye will still make millions. Just a few million less than before - but that's the whole point of regulating a rip off rogue industry that's been riding on a gravy train for far too long.  They'll all have to reduce their litigation teams anyway because fewer cases will need to go to court. People will pay.

Actually they would make a lot more, (if everybody paid up):-

Over the 6 years period from 1st January 2015 to 31st December 2020; ParkingEye's turnover was £215.55million based on a total of 9.53million KADOE Requests-an average income per request of £22.62. (NB-Profit before tax for the same 6 year period was £51.70million).

(Of course we don't know how many of the 9.53million PCN's were subsequently cancelled/lost on appeal at POPLA or are still outstanding or even what proportion were paid at the discounted rate).

Coupon-mad

Over the 6 years period from 1st January 2015 to 31st December 2020; ParkingEye's turnover was £215.55million based on a total of 9.53million KADOE Requests-an average income per request of £22.62. (NB-Profit before tax for the same 6 year period was £51.70million).

That really interesting @Castle. Thank you for working that out  Exactly the sort of thing to use as evidence for the Public Consultation.

Given that a lot more people will pay, because the sum of money will be lower and certain scam loopholes are closed by the new Code, and some PCNs in London will be issued for £130 (and given there will naturally be fewer court claims and associated costs and staff) there is no reason to believe any statistics from the industry that suggest the lower levels will cause losses.

It is mainly the ANPR firms who will be charging £50 (overstays) and some of them already offer a discount as low as £20 (e.g. APCOA at Tesco) and First Parking's standard University PCNs offer £30 as the discount.

So £25 falls in the middle of what the better, less greedy ANPR firms are accepting anyway. Clearly £25 is commercially viable or APCOA wouldn't accept £20 at Tesco!

What is worrying is this:

Ex-clampers who operate mainly at residential locations will be unaffected (can still charge £100) or will be able to make wven more money than before by charging £130.

WHY?  This is a major mistake.

Now that the £ levels are being revisited, I still see no reason whatsoever for a geographic difference for 'London' (nor any explanation of what they mean by London) and never did agree with the hybrid levels which make no sense.