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

molerat

The mouth from the BPA on BBC news stating "it is not about the money, it is about protecting the land owner". Ha Ha, pull the other one !

Not_A_Hope

I don’t like para 9.1. This seems to condone the Osner scam where an £70 can be added to an overdue payment. After rejecting appeals no doubt all PPCs will jump on this bandwagon and point to the new code which allows it.

Alternatively could it be that the additional £70 is the maximum they can charge if they take it to court i.e. cost of court hearing fees and legal costs?

9.1

Where a Parking Charge becomes overdue a sum of up to £70 may be added, for the purpose of debt recovery only.

MrJenkinsEsq

"First two hours free, thereafter £120 per hour."

cooldude255220

Another important point, I think:

i) Circumstances where a charge should be cancelled upon appeal when the motorist is able to provide reliable evidence:

• where the parking operator has breached an obligation in this Code of Practice relating to the issuing of a parking charge
• where the parking operator has breached an obligation in this Code of Practice resulting in the driver being unable to adhere to the relevant obligations of the car park

I'm reasonably certain I've seen rejected appeals where the IAS have basically said "yes there's a breach but tough luck" so this is welcome. Though I'm not sure exactly what would fall under the second bullet point.

Car1980

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82174930#Comment_82174930

Read 9.2 though:

"9.2

Parking operators must ensure that they comply with applicable consumer protection legislation. Compliance with Clause 9.1 does not override the requirement that motorists must be given a fair opportunity to see, read and understand any term relating to additional fees before deciding to park. The maximum amount of £70 permitted by Clause 9.1 does not mean that an additional fee will be fair, recoverable or payable in every case."

The parking company must overcome the CRA 2015 and JUSTIFY is my understanding.

This is a good thing. I read it as quashing the £70 "contractual" agreement they usually rely upon.

Now they must explain how a recovery charge is incurred. This could well be £2.50 DVLA fee + stamps + paper.

Car1980

Circumstances where a charge should be cancelled upon appeal when the motorist is able to provide reliable evidence:

where the driver has paid the tariff but made a minor keying error, i.e. 0 instead of o; I instead of L; 1 instead of I) and this has not been picked up by the operator at the time of issuing a parking charge in accordance with Clause 6.3

a vehicle paused on a private road network because the driver needs to check directions – for example, on an industrial estate where the driver has a legitimate need to access premises within that estate

a vehicle has been driven onto relevant land due to an instruction to the driver by a member of the emergency services, or an invitation or instruction from the landholder(s) or parking operator

a vehicle has been driven onto relevant land due to an emergency which could not be avoided due to the exceptional nature of an incident outside of the control of the driver – for example, serious illness

where the driver or a passenger in the vehicle suffers the onset of illness

where the driver or a passenger is delayed by overrunning medical appointment

where the driver suffers delays due to childcare arrangements

where the vehicle has broken down

This is all good stuff 👍

Car1980

iii) Circumstances where reduced charge of £20 applies

where the vehicle would have been permitted to park, but the driver failed to enter their registration into a terminal/device before leaving the site

Tablet traps not eliminated entirely, but the £20 offer is a good step.

Car1980

8.2.3

Where a motorist has failed to pay a parking tariff in accordance with the terms and conditions of the parking site, the operator may issue a parking charge. Where this unpaid parking tariff exceeds £60, and the operator has been approved by the Accredited Parking Association for the purposes of tariff pursuit, the operator may pursue both:

payment of the unpaid parking tariff and

payment of the parking charge

A little bone for the PPCs 🦴

Car1980

8.3 Process for appealing a notice of parking charge

c) requires the parking operator to consider appeals received outside of the normal 28-day period allowed for lodging an appeal where the appellant provides evidence of exceptional circumstances for the appeal not being lodged within the normal timeframes (see list below). In these circumstances, the period must restart and any enforcement, including court action, must be paused. It is the operator’s responsibility to apply for a stay in the court proceedings.

Exceptional circumstances must include the following, but this list is not exhaustive and other scenarios outside this list should also be considered on their individual merit:

where the addressee only discovers and can show that a notice of parking charge has been issued in their name after the 28-day appeal period

holiday or extended work trip

hospitalised as an in-patient

property vacant (living elsewhere due to renovations or displacement due to emergency)

family emergency causing recipient to be away from home (care duties, bereavement)

moving property resulting in a short overlap period where mail goes to the old address

parking charge delivered to the wrong address through no fault of motorist

Court claims must be stayed. Which begs the question of what happens when they refuse.

Protest

The £70 position is the main problem? If it is not nailed down fairly quickly then the calender begins to dominate and an election will kill progress. This time it is unlikely to reappear post-election. The Code may have cross-party support but that will probably be negated by the emerging new party dynamics.

Without CMA pressure, might we expect:

• the Code to commence;
• immediate adoption of provisions already contained in the industry code;
• prolonged “transitional” tolerance over genuinely new protections;
• cautious, private negotiation over breaches;
• very few operators actually losing DVLA access - it hasn't had any actual effect since it was introduced;
• the £70 debt-recovery addition surviving while another consultation proceeds;
• government presenting legal commencement as successful implementation.

In other words, the 2019 Act will finally be implemented on paper, while the practical settlement and pricing issues remain substantially industry-controlled.