Tuesday, 8 October 2013

Have the BPA Ltd lost their nerve?

In June, the British Parking Association Limited issued a whole raft of sanction points, awarding them to 13 companies. It looked as though they were finally whipping their members into shape. Then a rival ATA appeared on the scene, the Independent Parking Committee Ltd and after that things went quiet.

Between July and October only 4 'transgressions occurred, and a total of 10 sanction points were awarded. Compare this with the previous year; an average of 5 transgressions a month occurred, garnering an average of 17 sanction points a month.

The Prankster wonders therefore if the BPA Ltd have lost their nerve and are backing out of issuing sanction points in case their members take umbrage and defect to the IPC. The Prankster has been made aware of many recent complaints about members, none of which have apparently resulted in the issue of sanctions.

The Prankster understands that the operator recently expelled from the BPA Ltd, Car Parking Enforcement Ltd, does not appear on the list because although they would have incurred a huge amount of sanction points due to their actions, these were never awarded and they were given the boot instead.

The Prankster questions why they were not actually awarded during the months that led to their expulsion and suggests this throws the whole process into disrepute; an operator should not be allowed to continue issuing charges while the BPA Ltd prevaricates. Award sanction points when they are due, and not several months afterwards.

Finally, The Prankster also understands that a new secret operator code is issued for each transgression. Thus, members of the public cannot see if the same member has been awarded other sanction points, because they will have a difference secret code each time. Operator AA99 and CC55 may well be the same, but the public will never know.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster

1 comment:

  1. A recent BPA 'investigation' to a complaint I made consisted of them passing it on to the operator, whose reply failed to address the substance of the complaint at all, before declaring that no breach of the CoP had occurred.