REVIVING THE PRIVATE PARKING BILL

patient_dream

The word "SOON" or in "DUE COURSE" is just fob off patter from government.
Will this be before or after Rachel from Accounts bankrupts the UK ?

We do not need another consuultation, how many more times are the public to be let down.  A consultation has bee done.

Since 2012 the two ATA's, the BPA and IPC have sat on their backside and watched the parking scam increase to what we see today.  Both have lost control and are not fit for purpose. Why cannot government see this and rid themselves of these two ATA's
TWO ATA's are NOT required.  There is no point in the IPC/IAS and the licence should be taken away to allow their members to access personal data from the DVLA
The DVAL should be banned from giving out personal data. The money the DVLA collected from money scammers/ cowboys should be allocated to UK POT HOLES

I doubt Reeves or Rayner  and indeed Stamer fully understand the damge parking companies are doing to the public, let allone the legal timewasters who bolck the courts.

These 3 stooges of Government must wake up, must get their act together before the parking cowboys and the ATA's  place more peoplee in poverty

NO MORE STUPID CONSULTATIONS, IT IS TIMEWASTING .... Every day from now on means honest people are falling foul of the sacm and the courts suffer from timewasters.  

Get rid of the BPA and IPC and access to the DVLA . Rachel from accounts knows how to destroy lives .... it will not be a problem for her
 

Protest

The work was done by DLUHC by May 24. Possibly that work was then set aside awaiting direction from the new Minister, and perhaps even a fresh start by a new crew of civil servants. In due course (not "soon" I note) a new draft Code will issue for consultation. Probably not before the Summer recess.  MPs have been bemoaning the rip-off situation since the debates in the 1990's but all they do is talk. It is pitiful to watch the process - it is a very costly club for people with zero drive. Another rip-off situation! 

Coupon-mad

https://whatson.parliament.uk/event/cal51564

A Westminster Hall debate on parking regulation has been confirmed to take place on 6th May at 11:30am.

exongrad

A 4 page article in the May 2025 edition of Which ? On PCNs is woefully inadequate.There are only two slight references to the Government’s draft code.No where is the POFA cited and there is no advice to remain silent on the identity of the driver. There is no mention of this site.This is not up to the standard we have come to expect from Which ? Will someone better qualified than I write a letter for the June edition ?

1505grandad

Possibly something to do with this?:-

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81403742/#Comment_81403742

Coupon-mad

I see that separately, the BPA are keeping the DLUHC / MHCLG busy and causing delays and costs:

https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/GRC/2025/434.pdf

The gov. must either release the requested info or try new exemptions. If it is the latter, then back to tribunal for round 2. The FTT will then view the withheld info and ask all 3 parties for views.

Won't lie down, will they?

Umkomaas

I bet they're not winning many friends in the DLUHC / MHCLG!  

Nellymoser

Coupon-mad said:

I see that separately, the BPA are keeping the DLUHC / MHCLG busy and causing delays and costs:

https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/GRC/2025/434.pdf

The gov. must either release the requested info or try new exemptions. If it is the latter, then back to tribunal for round 2. The FTT will then view the withheld info and ask all 3 parties for views.

Won't lie down, will they?

If the requested info is released to the BPA it would also have to be released to those members of the public who request it under FOIA.

Had a good laugh at this in the BPA's reply: 
"The BPA wishes to be able (with the assistance of parking operators) to link the requested letters with details of the incidents that led to the issue of the PCN in question, so that the BPA can test whether a letter gives a fair and accurate account of the relevant circumstances." 

Who the hell does the BPA think they are. They were not given the role to test the fairness and accuracy of the evidence the DLUHC received. As someone who submitted an evidence complaint to the BPA I would have to say the BPA are quite deficient in the skills required to test documents for fairness and accuracy.

The DLUHC did seem to have the skills required I believe they identified suspect responses submitted to a previous parking consultation. 

Coupon-mad

They appear to be suggesting that the public lied in all the hundreds of complaints that bombarded MPs and the DLUHC in that period.

The link says they've already had the news articles, already released to them (which was our News/Media thread).

So now this ongoing complete waste of money & court time is all about scrutinising hundreds of (now old) complaints made by the public when the Tories were in government. Shut up BPA.

Kaizen2024

Tons of the articles will be complaints that have no merit i.e ‘poor me’ stories. The BPA may wish to demonstrate that the majority of them were issued fair and square.