Dodgy' parking firms face Government crackdown amid new code of practice, New parking code of practice to be passed into law by government |
Dodgy' parking firms face Government crackdown amid new code of practice, New parking code of practice to be passed into law by government |
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 03:03
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 353 Joined: 19 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,634 |
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-53...e-practice.html
A little bird tells me that a certain ppc is being referred to the ico for consideration to prosecute. |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 03:03
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 06:20
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,825 Joined: 16 Nov 2008 Member No.: 24,123 |
QUOTE Andrew Pester, chief executive of the British Parking Association, said: 'We welcome Sir Greg's Bill that aims to drive consistency and fairness in the private parking sector. Our membership already complies with a robust code of practice which we continuously seek to improve through consultation. Perhaps ParkingEye lied to the court in Beavis ? QUOTE Clause 19 provides: “19.5 If the parking charge that the driver is being asked to pay is for a breach of contract or act of trespass, this charge must be based on the genuine pre-estimate of loss that you suffer. We would not expect this amount to be more than £100. If the charge is more than this, operators must be able to justify the amount in advance. 19.6 If your parking charge is based on a contractually agreed sum, that charge cannot be punitive or unreasonable. If it is more than the recommended amount in 19.5 and is not justified in advance, it could lead to an investigation by the Office of Fair Trading.” QUOTE ParkingEye concedes that the £85 is payable upon a breach of contract, and
that it is not a pre-estimate of damages. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 07:18
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Noting that the court found it complied with 19.6?
-------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 12:01
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,915 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
What is also urgently needed is a crackdown on rogue councils and others like TfL who ruthlessly game the system. Adjudicators or maybe a new regulator is needed to stop enforcement when signage is ruled to be inadequate, and for very strong guidance on what constitutes "de minimis", especially for bus lane contraventions, restricted bus stops, and yellow box junctions.
|
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 17:56
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,535 Joined: 16 Jan 2009 From: Up north Member No.: 25,505 |
-------------------- Bridges burnt, Rubicons crossed. Parthian shots delivered, but always with style
|
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 19:04
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,213 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
What is also urgently needed is a crackdown on rogue councils and others like TfL who ruthlessly game the system. Adjudicators or maybe a new regulator is needed to stop enforcement when signage is ruled to be inadequate, and for very strong guidance on what constitutes "de minimis", especially for bus lane contraventions, restricted bus stops, and yellow box junctions. What is needed is a system where those who do the enforcement don't get to keep the penalties (or otherwise directly profit from issuing them). I know it sounds a bit far fetched, but imagine if somebody could come up with a system where operatives - lets call them Traffic Wardens - were employed by the police and the fines went to the treasury. There would be no incentive to 'game the system' (a phrase whose use in this context I consider analogous to describing Adolf Hitler as being slightly anti-Semitic). -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 19:30
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,915 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
What is also urgently needed is a crackdown on rogue councils and others like TfL who ruthlessly game the system. Adjudicators or maybe a new regulator is needed to stop enforcement when signage is ruled to be inadequate, and for very strong guidance on what constitutes "de minimis", especially for bus lane contraventions, restricted bus stops, and yellow box junctions. What is needed is a system where those who do the enforcement don't get to keep the penalties (or otherwise directly profit from issuing them). I know it sounds a bit far fetched, but imagine if somebody could come up with a system where operatives - lets call them Traffic Wardens - were employed by the police and the fines went to the treasury. There would be no incentive to 'game the system' (a phrase whose use in this context I consider analogous to describing Adolf Hitler as being slightly anti-Semitic). Yes, let's bring back the Traffic Wardens !! However, I suspect there isn't a Chief Constable in the land who wants to take on more traffic enforcement. Better to ban surpluses, and any that accrue to go back to HM Treasury. Bus lane enforcement is a real scam. When you see the photos of the alleged contravention, there is never a bus in sight. Better to change the law to be "obstructing a bus in a bus lane". You would be able to enter the lane but only if you obstructed a bus would you be whalloped. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 19:33
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Yes, let's bring back the Traffic Wardens !! However, I suspect there isn't a Chief Constable in the land who wants to take on more traffic enforcement. Better to ban surpluses, and any that accrue to go back to HM Treasury. Bus lane enforcement is a real scam. When you see the photos of the alleged contravention, there is never a bus in sight. Better to change the law to be "obstructing a bus in a bus lane". You would be able to enter the lane but only if you obstructed a bus would you be whalloped. Yes but then people would appeal saying "oh there was no bus in sight when I moved into the bus lane, then this queue of traffic appeared out of nowhere which blocked by exit, nobody would let me out of the bus lane, and this that and the other..." and bus lanes would become unworkable. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 19:57
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
When adjudicators repeatedly find a contravention not proved, because of signs or lines. Then the chief adjudicator should be able to rule that they are non compliant. Any PCN's issued after that ruling would be invalid the council should be forced to pay them all back and an investigation into whether or not an abuse of power has occurred should be held If yes heads should roll
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 20:11
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 353 Joined: 19 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,634 |
Money for removal and storage used to go to the 'police fund'.
|
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 22:21
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Money for removal and storage used to go to the 'police fund'. Nothing mysterious about it. It’s the name of the fund established under s 14 of the Police Act 1996. Every police authority has one. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 22:33
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 353 Joined: 19 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,634 |
Money for removal and storage used to go to the 'police fund'. Nothing mysterious about it. It’s the name of the fund established under s 14 of the Police Act 1996. Every police authority has one. It existed long before that, and I did not say it was 'mysterious'. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 22:34
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Money for removal and storage used to go to the 'police fund'. Nothing mysterious about it. It’s the name of the fund established under s 14 of the Police Act 1996. Every police authority has one. It existed long before that, and I did not say it was 'mysterious'. No doubt. Your use of quote marks gave that impression. If that wasn’t your intention then fine. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 23:34
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 353 Joined: 19 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,634 |
Draft bill
5 Effect of parking code (1)A failure on the part of any person to act in accordance with any provision of the parking code does not of itself make that person liable to any legal 35proceedings in any court or tribunal. (2)But the Secretary of State must have regard to a failure to act in accordance with the parking code when deciding— (a)whether to disclose any particulars contained in the register to a person under regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) 40Regulations 2002 (S.I. 2002/2742S.I. 2002/2742); Parking (Code of Practice) BillPage 3 (b)whether a person should be, or should continue to be, an accredited parking association. (3)A person is an “accredited parking association” for the purposes of this Act if— (a)the person (“the association”) represents the interests of persons who 5provide, operate or manage private parking facilities, and (b)the Secretary of State considers that it is appropriate for particulars contained in the register to be disclosed to persons who are members of the association. This post has been edited by 4101: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 23:35 |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 23:41
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 701 Joined: 11 Oct 2006 From: stapleford,nottingham Member No.: 8,176 |
QUOTE QUOTE What is needed is a system where those who do the enforcement don't get to keep the penalties (or otherwise directly profit from issuing them). I know it sounds a bit far fetched, but imagine if somebody could come up with a system where operatives - lets call them Traffic Wardens - were employed by the police and the fines went to the treasury. There would be no incentive to 'game the system' (a phrase whose use in this context I consider analogous to describing Adolf Hitler as being slightly anti-Semitic). Yes, let's bring back the Traffic Wardens !! However, I suspect there isn't a Chief Constable in the land who wants to take on more traffic enforcement. Better to ban surpluses, and any that accrue to go back to HM Treasury. Bus lane enforcement is a real scam. When you see the photos of the alleged contravention, there is never a bus in sight. Better to change the law to be "obstructing a bus in a bus lane". You would be able to enter the lane but only if you obstructed a bus would you be whalloped. I drive a bus in Nottingham.In peak time,I anxiously wait for a row of one to several vehicles in line at the start of the bus lane waiting to filter into the line of private vehicles, making me even later than I currently am. If private vehicles were allowed to use the bus lane, but must leave the bus lane when a bus approaches in the bus lane, there would be a snarl up of private vehicles waiting to get out of the bus lane.Or drivers would ignore the bus stating they never saw the bus approaching as they didn't look in their rear view mirror. In Nottingham, there is a bus around every 25 seconds between the Queens Medical Centre and the City.Some bus lanes are peak time use, some are 24 hour use.In my opinion, they work well but could work better if drivers didn't wait at the start of the bus lane waiting to filter into the traffic lane.The bus drivers job would be easier, we could hopefully reach our intending passengers on time(or near enough), and we would hopefully keep on time, preventing passengers asking "Why are you late driver"?. This post has been edited by southpaw82: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 00:02 |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 23:54
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 353 Joined: 19 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,634 |
QUOTE I drive a bus in Nottingham.In peak time,I anxiously wait for a row of one to several vehicles in line at the start of the bus lane waiting to filter into the line of private vehicles, making me even later than I currently am. If private vehicles were allowed to use the bus lane, but must leave the bus lane when a bus approaches in the bus lane, there would be a snarl up of private vehicles waiting to get out of the bus lane.Or drivers would ignore the bus stating they never saw the bus approaching as they didn't look in their rear view mirror. In Nottingham, there is a bus around every 25 seconds between the Queens Medical Centre and the City.Some bus lanes are peak time use, some are 24 hour use.In my opinion, they work well but could work better if drivers didn't wait at the start of the bus lane waiting to filter into the traffic lane.The bus drivers job would be easier, we could hopefully reach our intending passengers on time(or near enough), and we would hopefully keep on time, preventing passengers asking "Why are you late driver"?. That is civil enforcement (councils etc.) the draft bill covers private land only. It will be interesting to see what happens to the IPC when the FOIA stuff comes out (which may be in March). I favour electric trams for town centres, but they are expensive to buy etc. Private cars are gonna be banned eventually, starting with dirty diesels. I have been looking at Nissan Leaves, the Mayor seems to approve. This post has been edited by southpaw82: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 00:01 |
|
|
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 09:27
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Many bus lanes are sensible, some are bizarre.
I recall when Northants introduced the bus lane from Sixfields down to St James, it was for a 2 hour period during which 6 (yes SIX) buses were scheduled, one every 20 minutes (give or take), yet it significantly impeded the other traffic for no real benefit, it was never congested UNTIL they brought in the bus lane, so there was no benefit for the buses anyway. -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 12:10
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 9,985 Joined: 20 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,992 |
This thread has gone from what I'd hoped would be a lengthy discussion on how long Simon Renshaw-Smith is likely to be banged up in Chokey, to a conversation about trams and bus lanes.
Yours, Disappointed of Neaden. -------------------- Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 17:07 |