Rogue company to help set code on fair parking

[EXC]

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle6194610.ece

[Tools]

Re: Rogue company to help set code on fair parking

From The Times

April 30, 2009
Rogue company to help set code on fair parking


Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent

div#related-article-links p a, div#related-article-links p a:visited { color:#06c; } A rogue clamping company that overcharges drivers and rejects legitimate appeals has been appointed to a Government-backed body that aims to ensure fairness in parking enforcement.
Parking Control Management (PCM) is one of a group of companies entrusted with creating and enforcing a new code of conduct for the parking industry. Yet it has repeatedly breached the existing code by double-charging drivers. It forced an elderly couple to pay £375 to retrieve their car after they had parked on the forecourt of a boarded-up office for 30 minutes.
The Home Office will claim today that it is taking action against unfair clamping on private land by requiring all parking companies to be licensed and to adhere to an approved industry code. But an investigation by The Times has revealed that the only existing code is already being breached repeatedly by companies that have agreed to abide by it.
It was created by the British Parking Association (BPA), which the Government recognises as the industry’s only approved trade body. The association has investigated 640 complaints against its members in the past year and identified 58 breaches of its code.
Related Links

• Public needs protection from clamping cowboys

• Drivers get rogue clampers crackdown

• Case Studies: victims of rogue clamping

But in no case has it taken disciplinary action against a member, even after multiple breaches of rules on sign visibility and the amount that can be charged for clamping and removal.
The AA said that the code was too weak and that the BPA was a toothless body that could not be trusted to regulate its members. Edmund King, the AA president, said: “We are very concerned that the Government may be outsourcing to the BPA the responsibility for protecting motorists from rogue clampers. The BPA has failed to hold its members to account for breaching the code. It appears more concerned with protecting the profits of its members than ensuring justice.”
Mr King said that motorists ticketed or clamped on private land should have the same right of appeal to an independent body as drivers who were fined for parking offences on public roads. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal, which hears appeals against tickets issued on public roads, said yesterday that it had ruled in favour of the driver in 60 per cent of cases last year.
The Times alerted the BPA five weeks ago to the case of the elderly couple double-charged by PCM in Maidenhead in January in a breach of the code. This states that if a vehicle is removed within three hours of clamping, the driver should pay only the removal fee, not the clamp-release fee.
PCM charged Mavis and Brian Maynard, aged 73 and 77, a removal fee of £200, a release fee of £130, a storage fee of £40 even though the car was retrieved two hours later, and a credit card fee of £5. It rejected two internal appeals by the Maynards.
Martin Halstead was also double-charged by the company in Maidenhead. He paid a release fee of £130 and a removal fee of £200 even though his car was not removed. PCM tried to justify the latter fee by claiming that a removal truck had been called. The company refunded £240 after Mr Halstead began legal proceedings. He wrote to the BPA six weeks ago asking it to investigate eight apparent breaches of the code by the clamping company. The BPA has yet to respond.
Patrick Troy, chief executive of the BPA, said that a member of staff would be visiting PCM to check that it was complying with the code. He said the BPA preferred to work with member companies and give them the chance to change their practices rather than fining or expelling them.
Last week the BPA appointed David Blake, head of PCM, to a board given the job of “achieving greater fairness within unregulated parking on private land”.

[righty]

Re: Rogue company to help set code on fair parking

You couldn't make it up could you I really do despair of this government, it seems they'll get into bed with anybody