There are two Approved Trade Associations (ATAs) allowed access to the DVLA database, the
British Parking Association Ltd and the
Independent Parking Committee (IPC) Ltd. Although The Parking Prankster does not agree with all of the IPC's policies, he does think they are the more forward looking, motorist friendly and fairer organisation of the two. In short, it is now the IPC who are defining the industry standard practices, not the BPA Ltd.
Given this, it is perhaps appropriate to investigate one of the larger organisations, ParkingEye, to see whether they measure up, and to see whether the IPC would allow them to become a member.
Here are the results.
Require sight of copies of all written authority with landowners.
ParkingEye have failed several times in court to produce contracts which were dated before the parking event.
Audit wording and design of signs
ParkingEye have a wide variety of signs, some of which are misleading, or refer to charges as 'fines', or have other problems.
Require compliant entrance signage
ParkingEye have stated that they do not need to put compliant entrance signs in place until Oct 2015
Signage plan for all site
ParkingEye have submitted signage plans to court which were inaccurate and misleading. Some sites are apparently designed to create entrapment zones where no signs are easily visible to motorists.
Requires a resolution to appeals within 28 days
ParkingEye cannot even keep to the BPA 35 day limit and therefore use delaying tactics to keep to the letter of the code of practice, but not the spirit
Requires adherence to Equalities act 2010
ParkingEye believe that the Equalities Act means that all people, disabled or otherwise, should have exactly the same time to park. A favourite target of theirs is breastfeeding mothers. They categorically do not allow more time for anybody covered by the Equalities Act 2010.
Must have pre-estimate of loss calculations for all sites
ParkingEye's total cost per £100 ticket are £53, and many of these costs are not allowed as pre-estimate of loss calculations. A profit of almost 50% is not compatible with a 'pre-estimate of
loss' calculation. In addition ParkingEye use a global pre-estimate but charge different amounts at different sites.
Should have grace period of 1 month where changes occur or new sites commissioned
ParkingEye prefer to bag the loot immediately. Periods where drivers are unaware of changes are extremely lucrative.
.
Additional signage required at entrance when signage changes
ParkingEye cannot even get the normal entrance signage right. Extra signs would be totally alien to their culture.
Must not use predatory or misleading practices
ParkingEye admit that over 50% of tickets are cancelled at appeal. Their scatter-gun approach to issuing tickets willy nilly is certainly predatory.
Grace periods before and after parking must be allowed
ParkingEye have recently issued tickets for overstays of less than a minute. See above for 'predatory practices'
Pre-join audit
The problems listed above would certainly mean that ParkingEye would fail to pass the pre-joining audit.
Well there you have it. The BPA Ltd recently published a risk register showing they would be in financial trouble if ParkingEye left them, and may have to adjust staff levels. Based on this analysis they have nothing to worry about. The BPA Ltd's lax attitude to enforcement mean that ParkingEye are likely to remain with them for the foreseeable future. ParkingEye simply do not measure up to the stricter requirements of the IPC.
Happy Parking
The Parking Prankster
No comments:
Post a Comment