Parking Code of Practice Consultation 2025 - now let's see what happens

prowla

Meanwhile, I avoid going to places with scammer-operated car parks.

Protest

"….political commentary on this thread….." will likely cease "as soon as possible" (an inane and near-infinite political period)

Nellymoser

https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/national/25939716.drivers-hit-76m-parking-tickets-since-law-aimed-stopping-rogue-firms/

Private parking companies have issued 76 million tickets in the 7yrs since a parliamentary Bill for a still-awaited code of practice became law, according to new analysis.

Steve Gooding, RAC Foundation said: “No one denies there are some drivers who will always try it on, but the idea that the vast majority of the estimated 48,000 people who get ticketed daily set out to flout the rules is absurd.

“In this financial climate who knowingly risks getting charged a ‘penalty’ of typically £100?

“This suggests something fundamental is wrong with the system and we urge ministers to finally act to curb some of the power of the parking industry whose aim – which is understandable in a way – is to make as much money as possible."

Sadly the parking industry don't agree their thought process can't get passed it's due to "record numbers of vehicles on the road"

Coupon-mad

Stewart Clure and Will Hurley sat with straught faces when they told the DLUHC Select Committee in Nov 2021 that:

"we don't want to issue any PCNs".

😃

Umkomaas

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81926442#Comment_81926442

And the response from the MHCLG was …..

A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Governmentspokesperson said: “Motorists must be protected when using private car parks and we are determined to drive up standards in the industry.

“We have run a consultation on this issue and will set out further details on the private parking code of practice as soon as possible.”

🤦‍♂️

Coupon-mad

The delay was caused partly by a cabinet reshuffle and having over 4000 responses to read and dissect but the big problem IMHO, is how awful the Options Assessment was.

The list of options had blatantly taken a lower PCN cap "off the table" before the Consultation was even launched. Sigh…

Despite the Beavis case spelling out that the £85 included the costs of the whole letter chain and despite Sch4 of the POFA banning such double recovery, every option given in the darn Consultation talked about what the MHCLG decided to call the 'DRF' like it was a valid additional head of cost!

Kicking both cans down the road.

How they'll unpick that error I honestly don't know. But appalling error it was, IMHO.

Protest

Goodness….another ministry masterclass in muddle, Surely not.

And was the consultation process itself not designed for machine processing - dump all the replies in an AI mixer and ask for a majority viewpoint.

Coupon-mad

Well it doesn't need a genius to know what the vast majority viewpoint will have been: ban the fake 'double recovery' fee and make parking charge invoice levels proportionate, instead of the current self-serving licence to print money & unjust enrichment for getting to second letter stage.

But the problem was the Options Assessment was so BAD, with literally everything consumers asked for "no longer on the table" which is the MHCLG's own phrase used to the ICO in response to an FOI challenge in September (Google it - the MHCLG said the last 2022 Impact Assessment was 'wrong' but nobody except the parking industry knows whatever it was that the MHCLG had been shown that convinced them of that).

I fear the APAs had the floor behind everyone's backs and concocted some new figures that the MHCLG believed and so they decided the Tories' IA had been 'flawed'.

How exactly? No idea.

This farce last year reminded me of when the DFT believed figures concocted by the BPA & their members in 2011, only later (after granting keeper liability) to realise they were duped on court figures & litigation likelihood.

Of course ParkingEye were ready to hit the court claim & CCJs ground running with their new litigation team, which the BPA knew or should have known, all along.

Thus the race to court started right there.

And here we go again…

In 2025, it looks like the Government has accepted some unknown cherry-picked figures behind everyone's backs.

As we all saw to our horror, there were no 'cap' options for fairly protecting the motorist from more of the same. It showed the Minister had not listened to a damn word from the good side, is my take on it. And they swallowed unknown new submissions from the sector that nobody else saw or was allowed to challenge & just went along with what the APAs wanted.

The AA & RAC published similar thoughts to mine, accusing thd MHCLG of cosying up to the sector.

Looks like the last Minister Norris wanted the project rushed through by kicking the two important cans down the road. Unacceptable.

The good guys & gals haven't been tirelessly attending meetings on the damn Steering Group for six years only to settle for "let's let the sector carry on ripping people off at £170 a pop" just because Ministers don't get it, or maybe don't care enough, or even have another agenda and/or think "any Code will do".

He had clearly not listened to MPs or expert members of the Steering Group and I noticed from the online versions in the public domain, that the Options Assessment was written last March, with one tweak in May (probably to pay lip service to the Westminster Hall debate that month).

Literally nothing was altered AFAIK after the Steering Group met in person with the Minister last June.

Why did we bother to go to Westminster?

IMHO it looks like the Government were running scared of a Judicial Review and in fact they have now - I think - opened themselves up to one by inventing a new acronym for the fake fee (like it's a real additional cost) and thereby failing to consult properly on the desperately needed ban.

Again! Same error as in 2021/2022.

I have no idea if the new Minister is any better as I haven't met her but thank heavens the last Minister (who signed off that tone deaf Options Assessment) has long gone. Like the motoring organisations who also called it out as 'bending the knee' I am appalled by last year's hopeless attempt … and the MHCLG are well aware of the strength of feeling.

I am patient, up to a point.

But the Code must not reflect the Options Assessment. That needs binning. Replacing with a proper one, if that's what it takes to get the proper changes over the line.

If the Government gets the fee ban (must be a complete ban) and much-needed fairer & more proportionate - Local Authority similar - lower PCN caps wrong, we will have to swiftly engage with MPs to object and block the Code during its 40 days.

I'm ready to do that.

Opposition MPs in particular should be primed now.

patient_dream

THE MHCLG are not fit for purpose, whar do they do all day lomg ? Drinking coffee in DUE COURSE ?

Start POFA all over again and get rid of the BPA and IPC, they and their members have created the biggest scam in the UK

Half_way

My take on what should happen:

Ban the use of ANPR on it own as a means to generate Parking charge notices

Prohibit parking companies making a profit through the generation and issuing of parking charge notices, income should solely be based on offering a public service ( car park) and through service fees to landowners as well as the cost to use a car park where the car park is a pay car park( ie £1.50/hour)

Ensure that all employees, staff ( from top to bottom) and agents of parking companies have a clean criminal record check (enhanced DBS) any criminal conviction for violence, dishonesty ( theft fraud etc) abuse etc must be a bar for anyone who could have direct or indirect access to personal data

Turn off the automated access to the DVLA database, all requests for RK data must be manually submitted by hand with the applicant for that data paying an appropriate fee to cover costs, those requesting RK data must be able to to demonstrate why they are entitled to it

Cap parking charge notices at £25, plus the full day rate if it is in a paid car park