Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: New Statutory Guidance on Parking 2015
FightBack Forums > Discussion > Government Policy
Incandescent
The revised Statutory Guidance on Parking 2015 is now on the DfT website, so is now an official document. In it are two key dates, (1) 1st April - Ban on the general use of CCTV, but with the exceptions as announced (2) 6th April - 10 minute grace period starts for cars parked in designated parking bays on or off street.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...ry-guidance.pdf

Jlc
I'm sure the BPA and IPC will be rushing to formalise similar arrangements in their respective Codes of Practice.
X-treem
The legislation is here.

There appears to be an obvious loophole. A motorist could easily pay for the minimum parking period (say 1 minute), and then stay for 11 minutes, and then keep paying for another minute every 11 minutes. In theory, someone could stay for an hour and only pay for 6 minutes.

Am I missing something?

Obviously, there is the element of effort, but I'm sure one could easily write an app to automate this process with PayByPhone, RingGo, Parkmobile, ParkRight and other mobile parking apps.

For example, earlier today, I paid for 45 minutes and stayed for 55, then paid for 10 minutes and stayed for 20, then paid for 5 minutes and stayed for 15. It was legitimate because I kept getting delayed where I was and kept forgetting to extend my parking, but, in total, I paid for an hour, but stayed for an hour and a half. I half-expected a ticket when I got to my car thinking there may be some sort of protection against this sort of "abuse", but there was none.
jdh
If I was working those apps I'd have your VRN flash up an alert to send a warden straight round to your location, bound to be an easy ticket somewhere with your history icon_wink.gif
DancingDad
Could someone point me to the legislation regarding CCTV usage.

Guidance says must not be used except for but legislation link does not support?
The Rookie
QUOTE (X-treem @ Thu, 26 Mar 2015 - 18:05) *
There appears to be an obvious loophole. A motorist could easily pay for the minimum parking period (say 1 minute), and then stay for 11 minutes, and then keep paying for another minute every 11 minutes. In theory, someone could stay for an hour and only pay for 6 minutes.

Am I missing something?

Yes, the 'no return within' catches that one out.
X-treem
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 31 Mar 2015 - 11:22) *
QUOTE (X-treem @ Thu, 26 Mar 2015 - 18:05) *
There appears to be an obvious loophole. A motorist could easily pay for the minimum parking period (say 1 minute), and then stay for 11 minutes, and then keep paying for another minute every 11 minutes. In theory, someone could stay for an hour and only pay for 6 minutes.

Am I missing something?

Yes, the 'no return within' catches that one out.

Obviously, I'm talking about the millions of signs without this permitted variant.

For those signs, this seems to be an unintended loophole. My question still stands...
DancingDad
A lot depends on what the minimum period is.
DancingDad
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 31 Mar 2015 - 01:20) *
Could someone point me to the legislation regarding CCTV usage.

Guidance says must not be used except for but legislation link does not support?


Answered my own question.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/10...gulation/2/made
X-treem
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 31 Mar 2015 - 12:27) *
A lot depends on what the minimum period is.

How? If it's 10 mins, I pay for 10 mins every 20 minutes and get a 50% discount using the loophole. If it's 30 mins, I pay for 30 mins every 40 minutes and get a 25% discount using the loophole. My question still stands...
DancingDad
And if the minimum payment is an hour then "free period" is less.
Or if no topping up is applied

There is no question that people will be rubbing their hands with glee at 10 minutes free parking. And that authorities will be looking to minimise the impact on revenue.

Loopholes will exist, betcha we still get people with PCNs for parked after expiry of paid time and similar.
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (X-treem @ Tue, 31 Mar 2015 - 13:35) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 31 Mar 2015 - 12:27) *
A lot depends on what the minimum period is.

How? If it's 10 mins, I pay for 10 mins every 20 minutes and get a 50% discount using the loophole. If it's 30 mins, I pay for 30 mins every 40 minutes and get a 25% discount using the loophole. My question still stands...



Congrats on your upcoming nuptial's by the way. The ceremony is going to be a bit fraught if you keep stopping it every 20 mins to pay for parking

The wedding night will probably be a bit tense too
X-treem
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 31 Mar 2015 - 14:10) *
And if the minimum payment is an hour then "free period" is less.
Or if no topping up is applied

OK, let me be clear. I'm only talking about parking bays where extending the paid time was permitted before the legislation came into effect. The legislation does not make any mention of any restrictions on extending in light of the new 10-minute grace period. Therefore, the loophole exists in all cases where extending was previously permitted. Obviously, the "free period" diminishes in terms of percentage as the minimum period increases. But this does not eliminate the loophole, only the magnitude of its effect.

It seems that there is a loophole as no one has pointed me to any legislation that directly addresses it. I'll be writing an app then to exploit it!

QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 31 Mar 2015 - 14:23) *
Congrats on your upcoming nuptial's by the way. The ceremony is going to be a bit fraught if you keep stopping it every 20 mins to pay for parking

The wedding night will probably be a bit tense too

Thanks! smile.gif And it'll be every 10 mins actually!

"Do you take Miss X-treem to be your lawful wedded wife?"
"One sec, just extending my parking........ Done. Yes, I do."
Fredd
All that this stupid blatant pre-election stunt right-minded measure to treat motorists fairly seems to achieve is to effectively tell councils to extend paid parking periods by 10 minutes (unless they can make a damned good case why not), while introducing the confusion of the de facto expiry time now being different from that printed on the ticket. I suppose the obvious response of the councils would be to spend taxpayers' money amending their Orders, and slapping stickers over all their parking signs, reducing all the paid parking periods by 10 minutes.
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (Fredd @ Tue, 31 Mar 2015 - 15:52) *
All that this stupid blatant pre-election stunt right-minded measure to treat motorists fairly seems to achieve is to effectively tell councils to extend paid parking periods by 10 minutes (unless they can make a damned good case why not), while introducing the confusion of the de facto expiry time now being different from that printed on the ticket. I suppose the obvious response of the councils would be to spend taxpayers' money amending their Orders, and slapping stickers over all their parking signs, reducing all the paid parking periods by 10 minutes.


cynic
X-treem
QUOTE (Fredd @ Tue, 31 Mar 2015 - 15:52) *
All that this stupid blatant pre-election stunt right-minded measure to treat motorists fairly seems to achieve is to effectively tell councils to extend paid parking periods by 10 minutes (unless they can make a damned good case why not), while introducing the confusion of the de facto expiry time now being different from that printed on the ticket. I suppose the obvious response of the councils would be to spend taxpayers' money amending their Orders, and slapping stickers over all their parking signs, reducing all the paid parking periods by 10 minutes.

And how would that help? If they reduce 2-hour limits to 1h50m, then people will just pay for 1h40m instead of 1h50m. There's no escaping it for the councils, and reducing limits would only reduce revenue without eradicating the "problem".

And even if they did that, it doesn't eliminate the loophole I'm talking about, which (if you go back to my earlier post) allows one to potentially only pay for 6 minutes for every hour they park!
Fredd
You're choosing examples that almost never occur in practice , e.g. outside the more insane areas of central London there's no option to pay for 1:40 instead of 1:50 - nor to pay for just 1 minute, which is what's needed for your "loophole" to achieve the full effect you describe. With some minor tweaking of periods paid for and the rates it would be pretty easy for councils to achieve the same revenue, in the vast majority of cases at least.
X-treem
QUOTE (Fredd @ Tue, 31 Mar 2015 - 17:59) *
You're choosing examples that almost never occur in practice , e.g. outside the more insane areas of central London there's no option to pay for 1:40 instead of 1:50 - nor to pay for just 1 minute, which is what's needed for your "loophole" to achieve the full effect you describe. With some minor tweaking of periods paid for and the rates it would be pretty easy for councils to achieve the same revenue, in the vast majority of cases at least.

Did you misread my post? When I said 1h40m instead of 1h50m, I did not mean 1m40s instead of 1m50s (unless you really are saying that councils will allow motorists to pay for 1h50m but not 1h40m which wouldn't make sense!). And the point of my post was that decreasing the limit by 10 minutes wouldn't gain anything for the councils in terms of the new legislation - it would only reduce their revenue as motorists could still exploit the 10-minute grace period no matter how much the limit is or how much the councils reduce the limits by.

Also, I disagree the examples almost never occur in practice. From my experience of parking in London (which I'm sure you'll agree is fairly extensive), I find that most paid parking allows parking to be paid for in very small multiples of minutes. My earlier post describes one such first-hand experience just last Thursday where I inadvertently "exploited" the loophole and paid for only 5 minutes on my last payment in the same space. The PBP app would've allowed me to pay for just 1 minute if I wanted to. Even in my actual example, I got an hour and a half of parking but only paid for one hour due to the loophole. This is what made me think I could take it to the extreme as it were if I were so inclined. Even a minimum time of 10 minutes would allow people to get half of their parking for free no matter how long they parked (as long as feeding is not prohibited)!
DancingDad
Just wait till next week when we have the influx of people saying that they only parked for 5 minutes to pop in the shop and got a PCN, ticket expired 11 minutes before etc etc.
Personally I'm far less excited about any loophole unless we can exploit it to get people off of PCNs
RxBandit
If it gets to be a problem for councils they'll have the tkt machines reprogrammed to either -
1. Only accept payment in 30 or 60 min "lumps"; or
2. Only allow pro-rating after you've paid for the first full hour (eg 60p gets you an hour, 65p gets you an hour and five mins, 50p gets you nowt)

I don't see it as an issue outside of those (pretty rare) really short stay free parking areas some councils have. In those areas they'll likely change the TRO to reduce the max stay by 5-10mins, although there is a cost associated with that. Just depends if ppl abuse it or not. If they do, expect changes.
Incandescent
10 minute grace period starts today 6th April.
DancingDad
QUOTE (Incandescent @ Mon, 6 Apr 2015 - 09:03) *
10 minute grace period starts today 6th April.


First PCNs for overstaying 11 minutes will be served smile.gif
Magandang_Buhay
At 8.7 the document says this: From 1 April 2015 penalty charge notices must not35 be served by post on the basis of evidence from an approved device other than when vehicles are parked on: • a bus lane; • a bus stop clearway or bus stand clearway; • a Keep Clear zig-zag area outside schools; or • a red route.

So I've been caught driving in bus lanes a couple of times, by CCTV. The above would seem to say that it's no longer allowed to send a PCN based on CCTV evidence of driving in a bus lane. Only if one parks there.

Can that be true?
Fredd
QUOTE (markweatherill @ Wed, 8 Apr 2015 - 12:43) *
At 8.7 the document says this: From 1 April 2015 penalty charge notices must not35 be served by post on the basis of evidence from an approved device other than when vehicles are parked on: • a bus lane; • a bus stop clearway or bus stand clearway; • a Keep Clear zig-zag area outside schools; or • a red route.

So I've been caught driving in bus lanes a couple of times, by CCTV. The above would seem to say that it's no longer allowed to send a PCN based on CCTV evidence of driving in a bus lane. Only if one parks there.

Can that be true?

Did you read the title of the document?

QUOTE
The Secretary of State's Statutory Guidance to Local Authorities on the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions
DancingDad
Bus lane contraventions are not enforced under TMA2004
So changes to that act or it's regulations have no effect.
Magandang_Buhay
QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 8 Apr 2015 - 12:59) *
Did you read the title of the document?


blush.gif sorry! Thanks.
busman
I recall a few days this week seeing a few cars being ticketed by C.E.O's a few minutes after 16.00 hrs for being parked in a bus lane that is in force monday to friday 16.00 to 18.00 hrs.Does the 10 minute grace not apply in this circumstance??
DancingDad
QUOTE (busman @ Sat, 2 May 2015 - 14:33) *
I recall a few days this week seeing a few cars being ticketed by C.E.O's a few minutes after 16.00 hrs for being parked in a bus lane that is in force monday to friday 16.00 to 18.00 hrs.Does the 10 minute grace not apply in this circumstance??


Nope
Only to PCNs served under TMA2004 which excludes bus lane contraventions.
And only to certain circumstances under TMA2004, for instance, yellow lines have no grace period.
It only applies to designated parking places where the permitted period has elapsed.
Incandescent
Yes indeed. The change in the law is to draw a line under CEO's waiting by cars near to ticket expiry, preparing a PCN before the ticket expires, then serving it one minute after the expiry time on the parking ticket.

The other law change is to severely restrict the use of CCTV for issuing parking PCNs. This was sorely needed, (more than the new 10 minute grace rule IMHO), because PCNs were being issued on an industrial scale, totally and wilfully against the Statutory Guidance. The councils put their thumbs up to the Government and the government finally responded and cut out their nice little earner.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.