Showing posts with label 50%reduction in commercial vehicle PCNs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 50%reduction in commercial vehicle PCNs. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Which Council is in for a big, embarrassing fall from grace?

Rumour has it that staff at one London Borough have been cancelling their own PCNs and giving themselves parking dispensations.

Let us hope that this is not the 'vision for the future of parking enforcment' they had in mind when winning awards. Perhaps if council parking departments were reminded that they are delivering a service and ARE NOT private businesses

If true, then this is just as bad as MPs fiddling their expenses. Civil servants are not above the law and any such abuse must not be allowed to be swept under the carpet and evidence must be passed to the Police.

If true there must be public censure and dismissals no matter how high up the ladder the officers involved. Quiet pay-offs and resignations must not be allowed.

More to come in the next few days.

Monday, May 31, 2010

Show me the Money ...

We have never lost an Edinburgh case ... and the Edinburgh Traffic Regulation Orders are currently being 'regularised.'

What needs to be remembered here is that we are talking 'law enforcement' on the streets of Edinburgh and other towns and cities. How long before the Police have to issue fines to become 'self-financing.'

£15m of profit for parking wardens
By PAUL THORNTON
The Sun

THE country's most feared traffic wardens last year raked in a profit of almost £15million, it emerged yesterday.

Edinburgh's infamous parking attendants delivered £40,000 a day for the city council through fines and charges.
But last night motoring groups blasted the profits as "obscene" - and called for local authorities to ditch plans to hike the cost of fixed penalties.
Councils announced in March they needed to raise the standard fine to £100 to cover rising costs.

But Hugh Bladon, of the Association of British Drivers, said: "They claimed it had become impossible to self-finance parking operations - but this is clearly nonsense.
"Councils must accept they shouldn't be making obscene profits at the expense of motorists."


Seven councils took over parking enforcement from the police in 1991.
Last year Edinburgh pulled in £20.1m through fines, pay-and-display tickets and permits.
Just £5.5m was paid to NPC, the private firm hired to run parking in the city.
Glasgow raised £5.5m, Aberdeen £1.3m and South Lanarkshire £465,000.





Read more: Raking it in ... traffic wardens
Warden assault is an ‘outrage’
CAR rental driver sacked for knocking a parking warden’s hat off is fined for the attack
Patients blast parking wardens
20,000 parking tickets a MONTH
Wardens' two fines a minute

Monday, March 22, 2010

Watching the watchers ...

Richmond Council defends 'spy' car parking on double yellow lines
Friday 19th March 2010
By Chris Wickham »

This was the moment a council car used to catch law-breaking motorists was caught breaking the very rules it is meant to enforce.

Tom Galvin, of Hampton Wick, spotted the Richmond Council Smart car stopped on double yellow lines in Broad Street, Teddington, at about 8am last Wednesday.

The managing director of Chiswick-based property maintenance firm Adrem took this snap – which is likely to leave law-abiding motorists more than a little miffed.

He said if they do not allow flexibility for residents who sometimes parked illegally for short periods they should not be entitled to it either.

He said: “I have no gripe with the council, it does a good job generally – it is a difficult job trying to keep [everyone] happy. But I feel we are watched and picked up on for every little misdemeanour, when you get a ticket from this [car] it feels like you have been mugged and there is a hypocrisy to it.”

Mr Galvin said many of his staff were often handed fines for going about their daily business.
Councillor David Trigg, Richmond Council, cabinet member for traffic, transport and parking, defended the car stopping where it did and said it had dispensation to do so briefly when necessary.

He added: “In this instance the car saw evidence of a vehicle which had been parked illegally on a double yellow line in Broad Street, Teddington.
“In order for the civil enforcement officer driving the CCTV car to take this evidence safely, he had to stop on the double yellow line, or he would have blocked traffic.
“He had moved away again within three minutes. The council runs a firm, but fair, parking enforcement service. Motorists should be aware of parking restrictions which are either signposted or obvious through double yellow lines.
“We aim for a fair enforcement policy and we will always give full attention to any appeals made.”

Monday, January 18, 2010

Council uses helicopter to cancel parking tickets

It is one thing using Smartcars to issue PCNs but helicopters to cancel them?
View from Sheffield City Council's Parking Services Department. Perhaps common sense and discretion would be cheaper all round.



Parking fine as cabbie helps disabled woman
Sheffield Star
Published Date: 18 January 2010
By Ben James

A KIND-hearted taxi driver was slapped with a parking fine - after leaving his cab for just two minutes to help his disabled passenger into a shop.
Bernard Lindley, aged 60, from Manor, pushed 80-year-old wheelchair-bound Phyliss Kerr to a shop in Sheffield city centre.But when he returned he found a £75 parking fine on his windscreen.

Phyliss had called her regular driver and asked him to take her into the city centre from her home in Manor.Bernard could not find a parking space and parked in a loading bay on Surrey Street, behind the Town Hall.Phyliss, who was recovering from a stroke, asked Bernard to push her to the shops and when he returned he found a parking warden had struck.

She said: "I felt really weak from my stroke and was very down. Bernard would do anything for me, he's such a kind soul."

Bernard, who has been a taxi driver for 39 years, said: "I never heard of anything so outrageous. We are told by the council to take care of disabled passengers and make sure that they get to their destination ok. I've done this and they reward me with this fine."I've complied with one part of their policy and got stung by the other."

The fine was for £35 if paid within 14 days and £75 if paid after.

Phyliss said: "I think it's disgusting. He will come out anytime of the day or night for me. If I ask him to come and pick up my bags he will always help me. I don't know what I would do without him."

The council has now promised to refund Bernard after The Star stepped in. Sheffield Council head of parking services Kevin Butt said: "After looking at this and taking more of a helicopter view I can see an argument in both directions."We have therefore decided in this case to fully refund Mr Lindley."

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

£Millions of parking fines unpaid ...

Look at the figures for Leeds and then look at the piece we did with BBC. Government Officers alleging theft and extortion. As more and more evidence is gathered across the country it is only a matter of time before more and more is exposed. My repeated attempts to get a Leeds City Counil parking ticket to adjudication have failed. The Council have cancelled EVERY PCN issued. However, they have not done so for other motorists issued in the same locations.

400,000 parking fines as councils owed millions
Yorkshire Post
11 January 2010
By Jack Blanchard

Traffic warden hot-spots where motorists are more likely to be hit with a parking ticket than anywhere else in the region, are revealed by the Yorkshire Post today.
Figures released under the Freedom of Information act show more than 400,000 parking tickets were given out by council traffic wardens in Yorkshire last year – about one for every five motorists in the region.The fines brought in more than £10m in revenue for Yorkshire's local authorities during the 2008/09 financial year. But it has emerged millions more are still owed to councils in unpaid fines dating back a year or more – including more than £5.4m owed to Leeds City Council alone.

Our investigation reveals Yorkshire's worst street for parking tickets is Clarendon Road in the Woodhouse area of Leeds, where traffic wardens handed out more than 3,000 tickets last year. Close behind was Cookridge Road, also in Leeds, with Sheffield's Ecclesall Road in third place.The car park where motorists are most likely to receive a ticket is the Castle car park by Clifford's Tower in York, where more than 1,800 fines were issued during 2008/09.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Leeds City Council issued by far the most parking tickets in the region. About a third of all parking tickets handed out in Yorkshire are issued in Leeds.The council's team of 84 traffic wardens handed out nearly 350 tickets a day throughout last year, bringing in £3.3m in revenue for the authority. A spokesman said: "Leeds is the largest city in the region and we would expect to issue the most parking tickets, collect the most money and have the most unpaid fines – despite our collection rate being higher than the national average."Parking tickets are only ever issued where motorists have parked outside of restrictions which are quite clearly marked and visible."

Leeds's total of more than 127,000 parking tickets was more than double that of Sheffield, the next-largest city. However, Sheffield oversaw by far the largest year-on-year increase in parking fines last year – 30 per cent more tickets were issued than during the previous year.Sheffield has also introduced the biggest rise in traffic warden numbers. The city council now employs 54 enforcement officers, up from 36 four years ago. Our study also shows rural councils employ very few traffic wardens and hand out very few tickets. This is partly because many smaller authorities have opted not to decriminalise on-street parking offences, leaving ticketing in the hands of police. Councils such as Selby therefore only enforce parking in its own car parks. Selby employs just three part-time parking inspectors and issued 241 tickets last year.





This is the BBC piece on Leeds City Council's parking enforcement regime. You be the judge of its legality. The most powerful quote was not used in the excert above so it is listed below and forms part of the file handed to the Police. The names of the Government officials have been obscured but the Police are aware of their identity.

"... attempted fraud or extortion..."
not my words but the words of one Goverment official to another. Hard to believe? The document we managed to get our hands on (along with many others just as damning, is shown below).






Sunday, January 10, 2010

Storm Clouds gathering over Bolton


Barry Moss is just an 'ordinary,' 63 year-old retired roofer. However, he is passionate about justice and fair play and due to his dogged determination he is very soon going to be before the High Court with what could be a pivotal moment for Britain's motorists.

Barry (left) first hit front page headlines in Bolton in 2007 when he represented his daughter-in-law at a parking tribunal
The case made front page of the Bolton Evening News and now, three years later and after more campaigning and investigating by Barry and evasion and obfuscation by Bolton Council it looks like the issues which Barry and others have uncovered have serious financial implications not only for Bolton but also for every other council in the country who have used road markings which did not comply with the law.

Further investigations revealed massive failings in Bolton's on-street as well as off-street bays and more headlines followed.
The Bolton Evening News broke this news in November 2007

"A report to councillors yesterday conceded that most bay markings did not comply with the Traffic Sign Regulations from the Department for Transport, highlighting problems including the bay lengths and dimensions of white line markings."

There followed another National Parking Adjudication Service decision this time by respected adjudicator, Mark Hinchcliffe which included a statement from John Munns at the Department for Transport in which he remarked that that the bay in question was 'unlawful.'


The implications of Barry's case are enormous and he is seeking a declaration from the High Court that there are unlawful items of account in Bolton's accounts and, as such, these will have to be refunded. This will impact on all similar cases across the country.
You can support Barry's case at The Motorists Legal Challenge.

In allowing the appeal the adjudicator reinforced the decision of adjudicator Gary Hickinbottom (now a High Court Judge) in Burnett v Buckinghamshire County Council where he concluded (note TSRGD 2002 has replaced TSRGD 1994):

Furthermore, although not relevant to this particular case (in which there was no sign at all), not only must the traffic sign must be present, it must also comply with The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 (SI 1994 No 1519) (“the 1994 Regulations”) (Section 64(2) of the 1984 Act): and the 1984 Act makes clear that the signing of parking restrictions etc. by a local authority in pursuance of its powers under the provisions of the 1984 Act with which we are here concerned must comply with those regulations (Section 68(2)).

There is an express prohibition of signs that do not comply (Section 64(4)).

The 1994 Regulations are over 350 pages long and, in meticulous detail, they provide for every particular of permitted signs - including the type, size, colour and dimensions.

Consequently, in summary, as a condition precedent of a local authority enforcing a parking penalty as a breach of a TRO made under the 1984 Act, the obligations of the motorist must be properly signed in accordance with the detailed provisions of the 1994 Regulations."

Saturday, January 02, 2010

Cynical cash raising ploy

Let us see how the councils attempt to justify this one. They have stated that Saturday 26th December is not a Bank Holiday but the same councils have closed public buildings ... apparently because it is a Bank Holiday. Let us see in the coming weeks what the Freedom of Information requests reveal.

Penalty Claus on Boxing
The Sun
By JANE HAMILTON
Published: 26 Dec 2009

SHOPPERS could be stung at the sales today - by Scrooge officials dishing out parking tickets.
More than three-quarters of councils have decided Boxing Day is NOT a public holiday this year because it falls on a Saturday.

And they are set to clean up as shoppers innocently park without paying in areas signed "public holidays - no charge".
Despite deeming it a non-Bank Holiday, other council services like libraries and swimming pools will be CLOSED.

Last night Paul Pearson of campaign group penaltychargenotice.co.uk blasted the grasping move. He said: "Thousands of motorists will have Christmas tarnished by a £120 ticket.
"Boxing Day is a public holiday - it shouldn't not be a public holiday because it happens to be a Saturday."
Paul said drivers face more confusion because some councils DO recognise today as a public holiday and are not imposing car park fees.

Leeds, for example, in West Yorks is not charging, while their neighbour Bradford is.
In London, half of the 32 councils are allowing free parking - but the policy may not be borough-wide. To add to the muddle nationally, some authorities will waive fees on Monday instead.
Last night Bradford Council said: "Because Boxing Day falls on a weekend, we impose weekend charges."

Read more:

Thursday, November 12, 2009

'Big brother' plan to spot-check and tow cars owing more than three fines

London Evening Standard
Ruth Bloomfield


Legally parked vehicles could be towed away as traffic wardens in London are to do spot checks, hunting for vehicles with a backlog of unpaid tickets.
Drivers who owe for more than three parking tickets or traffic fines risk having their cars impounded under the pilot, which starts on 4 January. A database of vehicles with unpaid fines is being created. Drivers whose cars are towed could end have to pay more than £500 to retrieve them.
London Councils, the umbrella group of local authorities organising the trial, says the scheme is vital to stop persistent fine evaders. It involves six boroughs: Ealing, Camden, Hackney, Hammersmith and Fulham, Wandsworth and Kensington and Chelsea. If successful it will be rolled out across the capital. Ealing has suggested a removal fee of £200 plus £40-a-day storage charges on top of the fines.

But Neil Herron, of parkingappeals.co.uk, said: "It is going to be a nightmare of red tape and litigation and smacks of Big Brother."
An AA spokesman said drivers who have only three penalty notices should not be a priority: "Some people have hundreds of unpaid PCNs and it is they that should be the focus."

Friday, October 30, 2009

St. Alban's Parking Tickets

Just a quick line for everyone who has had a ticket in St. Alban's and wants to keep updated with developments.
Just drop me a line at neil@parkingappeals.co.uk and we will bring you the latest news on refunds.
Neil H

Monday, October 26, 2009

Christmas comes early in St. Alban's ...

Santa Claus delivers Credit Crunch Christmas Bonus
As many across the country continue to suffer from aggressive stealth tax parking enforcement by many local authorities Christmas has come early for one city's motorists.

A recent decision by a Traffic Penalty Tribunal adjudicator has ruled the City and District of St. Alban's (Off Street Parking Places) Order 2008 INVALID.

This decision has far reaching implications because it follows similar drafting of previous orders and the 2009 Order follows the 2008 and all make reference to 'driver liability.'

Under Civil (formerly Decriminalised) Parking Enforcement it is the owner (or Registered Keeper) who is liable for the Penalty Charge NOT the driver. This fact is pretty fundamental and it is either crass incompetence, intransigence or arrogance that this council has not seen fit to get their own legal house in order since DPE powers were granted on 1st October 2004.

A full copy of the decision is shown below. The implications for the local authority are:

  • enforcement in ALL the off-street car parks must be suspended immediately.

  • ALL monies derived from PCNs MUST be refunded.

  • ALL monies derived from permits MUST be refunded.
  • ALL pay and display revenue MUST be refunded or given to charity.
  • There must be a full, external investigation to ensure that no-one else is exposed to the risk of a loss from invalid legal instruments drafted by the council officers and that includes all aspects of the operation of the parking regime.

However, there are even more serious implications because the council informed the Department for Transport in advance of being granted DPE powers that this (checking of the lines, signs and TROs) had been done. Heads will have to roll and questions will have to be asked of the highly paid officials.

The letter to the Chief Executive to cease enforcement will be on his desk first thing in the morning. Meanwhile, anyone with a PCN drop us a line at enquiries@parkingappeals.co.uk

A list of the PCN numbers in the 'hotspot' car parks is shown below along with a full list of all off street car parks.

The adjudicator also ruled the PCN non-compliant so that has the potential to impact on all on-street PCNs as well.

‘Popular’ Car Parks in 2007 –PCNs issued

• Adelaid Street 113
• Amenbury Lane 713
• Batchwood Hall 298
• Bowers Way East (Harpenden) 566.
• Bowers Way West (Harpenden) 1047
• Bricket Road 771
• Civic Centre 1540
• Drovers Way 182
• Gombards 775
• Verulamium 598
• Westminster Lodge 1777
• Bowers Way East (Harpenden) 566
• Bowers Way West (Harpenden) 1047

NOTE: These are just ‘popular hotspots for issuing PCNs,
9993 PCNs from just these in 2007
How many in 2008 and how may this year ?
How many since October 2004 ?

WESTMINSTER LODGE CAR PARKS, ST ALBANS
LYDEKKER CAR PARK HARPENDEN
BATCHWOOD HALL CAR PARKS
CHURCHEND CAR PARK SANDRIDGE
CRAVELLS ROAD CAR PARK HARPENDEN
EAST LANE CAR PARK WHEATHAMPSTEAD
HASELDINE ROAD CAR PARK LONDON COLNEY
HIGH STREET CAR PARK (VILLAGE HALL) REDBOURN
MARQUIS LANE CAR PARK HARPENDEN
NOMANSLAND COMMON CAR PARK WHEATHAMPSTEAD
PARK STREET CAR PARK (opposite ‘Swan’ Public House)
THE RIDGEWAY(Library) CAR PARK ST ALBANS
SOUTHVIEW ROAD CAR PARK HARPENDEN
ADELAIDE STREET CAR PARK ST ALBANS
AMENBURY LANE CAR PARK HARPENDEN
BOWERS WAY EAST CAR PARK HARPENDEN
BOWERS WAY WEST CAR PARK HARPENDEN
CLARENCE PARK CAR PARK ST ALBANS
BRICKET ROAD NORTH cAR PARK ST ALBANS
CIVIC CENTRE THREE LEVEL CAR PARK ST ALBANS
ST ALBANS CITY CENTRE MSCP DROVERS WAY
GOMBARDS CAR PARK ST ALBANS
LONDON ROAD CAR PARKS ST ALBANS
ST ALBANS CITYCENTRE MSCP
RUSSELL AVENUE SECTION ST ALBANS
TOWNSEND AVENUE CAR PARK ST ALBANS
VERULAMIUM CAR PARK ST ALBANS

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Credit-card surcharges for parking tickets to be reimbursed

Town halls across Britain are bracing themselves for an inundation of claims by motorists demanding reimbursement of money they were wrongfully charged for paying for a parking ticket by credit card.
[ClickPress, Thu Aug 13 2009]

In a test case in which a London motorist challenged the 1.3% surcharge in Camden, his claim was upheld by the adjudicator (the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service), which said that such surcharges are unlawful and councils could not demand money in addition to the fine for the offence itself.

This ruling applies to all fines set by local authorities, including those outside London which have been given the right to monitor parking offences and keep the fines. This ruling opens the way for millions of drivers who have used a credit card for paying a parking fine to claim reimbursement.

If councils choose not to issue refunds to all those entitled to one, they may face a class action launched by the motorists’ campaign group Parking Appeals.

Neil Herron, a spokesman for the group, said that the surcharges were simply a case of greed on the part of councils “trying to extract every last drop of cash from the motorist”.

A spokesman for the AA also attacked the credit card charges, calling them “outrageous” and a demonstration of “the extent to which councils have been acting as a law unto themselves”.

Peter Roberts, chief executive of the Drivers’ Alliance, welcomed the ruling on the test case. “Councils are taking motorists for a ride with countless stealth taxes and petty fines,” he said, and called on “every council [to] return the illegal charges without delay”.

A government spokesman from the Department of Transport added his voice too to the chorus of critics, saying that “Parking charges should be used to manage demand and not to raise revenue.”

What makes the charges all the more indefensible is that paying parking fines by debit and credit cards is actually much cheaper and more secure for local authorities than processing cheques or dealing with cash brought into a parking shop.

Following the ruling, Camden Council has scrapped its policy of levying an extra fee for processing payments made by credit card, a “goodwill move” which it is applying across all council services, not just on parking fines. It said that processing bills through credit cards was costing the authority some £250,000 a year, costs which the charge was intended to cover.

For press enquiries, please contact Peter Cooper on 020 7183 7247
Email: info@247parking.com Web: http://www.247parking.com/

News provided by 24 7 Parking Ltd, a leading marketing services provider to the car parking industry in the UK, and a leading de facto marketplace for buyers and sellers, or lessees and lessors, of car parking spaces. 24 7 Parking carries out daily surveys of the national media to provide up-to-date news and commentary on UK transport.



One rule for them ...


Those cynics will suggest that this is simply another revenue raiser to fill the council's coffers. I think that there will be many wishing to break this rule!
Just watch as the complaints flood in once the over zealous wardens are let loose. Give them an inch ...

Fines for parking 50cm from kerb
The News
Published Date: 15 August 2009
Portsmouth
TARGET Traffic wardens will ticket cars that are parked more than 50cm from kerb

MOTORISTS who park more than 50cm away from the kerb are set to face a £70 fine.
Traffic wardens will take to the streets armed with tape measures to make sure cars aren't sticking out too far. The move by Portsmouth City Council is part of a drive to stop people parking obstructively. But critics say penalising drivers who exceed the 50cm limit – which equates to just under 20 inches – is a step too far.

Deputy Tory leader Councillor Alistair Thomp- son said: 'It is utterly ludicrous to expect our traffic wardens to go around measuring how close people are parked to the kerb.'What about people with wheelchairs or zimmer frames that need a space to get out of the car?' And what next? Will we be fining people who can't park straight?'

The government has given councils the power to enforce the new parking restrictions in a bid to help traffic flow more freely. In the past, parking wardens have had no authority to punish people for obstructing the highway, and had to rely on police. Portsmouth City Council will be implementing the new rules from next month, unless councillors object to the plans.People that double park or park in front of dropped kerbs will also face fines.

Councillor Luke Stubbs, Conservative spokesman for traffic and transportation, said: 'Few people are aware of the 50cm rule, so it's somewhat unfair to issue tickets to those parked only marginally too far out – a warning note would be more just. Other councils are more flexible, automatically fining only those parked a full metre away from the kerb. Perhaps we should do that too.'

Councillor Lynne Stagg, Lib Dem cabinet member for traffic and transport, said: 'The roads in Portsmouth are very narrow, so people that park too far out in the road do make it very difficult for other cars to get past. There is a law which allows us to do this.'

The city council says traffic wardens won't be measuring every parked car. But if they see a car inconsiderately parked they will measure the distance and issue a ticket if the 50cm rule is broken.But Portsmouth driving instructor Dermot Ryan, from iGO Driver Tuition, said most drivers should be able to park well within 50cm of the kerb.



Monday, July 27, 2009

The vultures are circling ...

This is the beginning of the end for civil parking enforcement as the industry starts to turn on itself ...

We will support fair and transparent enforcement which is NOT outsourced to private enforcement contractors. We will also support pay rises for Civil Enforcement Officers who are employed to keep the streets clear of irresponsible parking and for being the council's 'on-street ambassadors' who are not incentivised or driven by a ticket target culture.

More and more whistleblowers are going to come forward and more and more councils are going to be exposed in a similar fashion to the report below. The guys on the front line on low pay and poor conditions are now set to reveal a culture of bullying by their private enforcement and council bosses.
Forced to issue tickets in areas where restrictions are known to be unlawful or where no legal Traffic Orders exist they now have somewhere to turn, whether it be to the trade union Unite or to the organisation Public Concern at Work or by e-mailing us at enquiries@parkingappeals.co.uk

For too long CEOs have been made the scapegoat for council failings. Now, as the whole industry starts to go into meltdown with the AA and other national motoring organisations
condemning councils for blindly issuing tickets to get the revenue rather than changing behaviour the legislators are going to have to act to change the law to ensure that a fair, transparent system is put in place with councils being forced to respect for the law.

Many councils, to date, have had scant regard for the law (whether it be signing or procedure) whilst 'stealth taxing' the motorist. Now the motorist is learning to bite back and fight back using the law against the councils. It is only a matter of time before this matter comes to a head in the High Court. More on that to follow.

Traffic wardens 'made to ticket'
BBC News

Unions claim some traffic wardens miss out on perks if they miss targets
Parking enforcement officers face "humiliation" if they fail to meet their targets for issuing parking fines, their unions have claimed.
The unions Unite and Unison say wardens often have to meet targets to qualify for overtime and other perks.

Parking attendants have told the BBC this means some tickets are issued when there is no real justification.

The British Parking Association said ticket-targeting was "unacceptable" and it was trying to stop the practice.

'Drivers battered'
An estimated 10 million parking tickets are issued in the UK every year.
The BBC has been told of the pressures that traffic wardens are under.
Too scared of losing their jobs to speak openly, two different parking attendants spoke anonymously to BBC Breakfast.
One said that every day he was forced to issue tickets that his management knew would be overturned.
"They don't care if they will be appealed, they just want the numbers," he said.
"The bosses tell you to issue tickets even when they know there is a fault in signage.
"Drivers are unjustly battered with tickets and if we don't do it we lose our jobs."


The other attendant told the BBC: "If you hit or exceed the targets you get favours, swapping shifts, and most importantly, if you hit the targets you get overtime.
"People get fired for not reaching their targets."

Target driven
Unions have backed up up these claims. They have concerns about practices across the UK and particularly where parking enforcement has been contracted out to private companies.
They say staff are often very poorly paid and have to work in a pressured, target-driven environment where they are often bullied and humiliated if they under perform.

Peter Allenson, Unite's National Officer, said: "There are targets that they need to meet and if they don't meet these targets then there are certain things being used against them such as shift swaps and overtime allocation and this is unacceptable."

Some councils are blindly issuing tickets it appears perhaps to get the revenue rather than changing behaviour
Paul Watters AA

Parliament's Transport Select Committee has warned councils against using parking tickets to raise revenue.
But Paul Waters of the AA said some local authorities seemed to be doing just that:
"Some councils are blindly issuing tickets, it appears perhaps to get the revenue rather than changing behaviour.
"It is a revenue gainer for many authorities, attendants are exploiting the situation - they know where the honey pots are, and they go along and issue tickets regardless of the fact that the signing is dubious."

But the British Parking Association (BPA) which represents companies who employ parking attendants said it was against ticket-targeting and was making efforts to combat the practice.
A spokesman said: "The BPA considers ticket target-setting totally unacceptable, and as a member organisation we strive to make sure that parking control is about improving the streets, and not making money."


Sunday, July 19, 2009

A new peasant's revolt ... or justice on the horizon for the motorist?



How to get revenge for your parking ticket
You can turn the tables on councils that play fast and loose with the law, says Philip Johnston
Published 19 Jul 2009
Daily Telegraph

Yes, I know: it's only a parking ticket. Perhaps I should not be in such a lather about it, but I am and I am not alone. Not by a long way. It is not that we cannot afford £60 (or £30 if we go quietly, which we won't). It is the sheer injustice of it.
This ticket was placed on our car not in the town centre or on a busy urban highway but in the street outside our house where we already pay £90 a year to park in a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ), which a majority in our road voted against having in a referendum. We live in a quiet avenue in London with no problems of congestion or of obstruction.

Related Articles
A mess over illegal parking tickets

But the borough painted a confusing array of white and yellow lines everywhere, removing around a dozen spaces where cars used to be able to park. Near our home, the bay is so badly drawn that, in order not to obstruct a neighbour's access, we parked a few feet over the line, as everyone does and we have done many times.

A ticket was issued. We appealed to the local borough and they said: "We must advise that when using parking bays you must make sure your car is fully within the parking bay or space before you leave it. If it is beyond the end of a bay, straddling two bays or obstructing the clearway you may get a ticket even if you have paid to park, or have a valid permit allowing you to park."

When we pointed out that the lines were not easy to discern, and that if we parked within the lines the car would block a neighbour's access, we were told that "the law does not require that the yellow line must be in good condition. Enforcement can take place as long as the signage reasonably indicates a restriction".

It was this mention of the law that made me sit up. If they are going to quote the law at us, we will try to find out if they are observing it as well. If they are going to quibble about our car being a foot over an arbitrarily drawn line, let's see whether, in the myriad parking regulations, there is a legislative equivalent that we can irritate the life out of them with. If people are to be fined simply because their ticket has fallen off the windscreen, maybe the tables can be turned; and I know a man who can do turn them.

Neil Herron is a sort of latter day Wat Tyler leading a Peasant's Revolt against the parking tyranny that has gripped the land. A former fishmonger from Sunderland, he was a key figure in the celebrated Metric Martyr campaign a few years ago when his late friend Steve Thoburn, a fellow market stallholder, was fined for selling bananas by the pound. He has a sharp sense of injustice and now runs ParkingAppeals.co.uk, which specialises in fighting such cases – and winning them, too.

In fact, he is causing consternation in town halls across the land. In our case, Mr Herron advised that the CPZ may itself be illegal since it does not appear to have been correctly signposted. This could be true of residential parking zones around the country and he has a judicial review under way in which the Government is taking a direct interest because the implications are considerable: if CPZs are invalidated then millions of pounds in penalties may have to be returned.

Were this to happen, councils would have only themselves to blame. They simply became too greedy. CPZs were supposed to cover small areas of around 12 or so streets where there are legitimate parking worries, but they have spread across whole towns because they raise money. Parking has become a stealth tax. A fine is a punishment yet it is levied not through the criminal justice system but by way of a civil regime administered by local councils, many of whom seem not to think it matters whether they obey the regulations or not.

Last year in England, nearly four million tickets were issued, 250,000 more than in 2007 and a fivefold increase since 2001, the year when the decriminalised system (which has operated in London since the mid-1990s) began to spread across the country.

Thanks to Mr Herron, we have now discovered that the ticket we received is almost certainly invalid. Our borough, in common with several others, was making an additional charge for processing credit card payments. This has recently been ruled unlawful by the parking adjudicator because it adds an extra sum to what is a statutory penalty. The charge has been withdrawn; but our ticket was issued when it was still in place, which at least gives us something to argue with.

In the three months that our council operated this illegal scheme it issued tickets to the value of £500,000. These may have to be refunded. Other boroughs face paying back millions.
It serves them right – but in the end, of course, it will be the council taxpayer that suffers, so we will pay anyway. It should come out of the pockets of the people who played so fast and loose with the laws they expect the rest of us to follow.


Friday, July 10, 2009

Insurance Company plays Nostradamus as parking Grim Reaper gathers


An insurance company with the ability to foretell the future warns of the problems facing many councils.
The lure of untold riches from the decriminalised parking stealth tax drove many councils to rush hastily into deals with private parking enforcement contractors. Proper controls and scrutiny went out of the window. Contracts not checked, contractors not managed. Legal requirements for lines and signs and Traffic Orders treated with reckless indifference by council officers as the money flooded in. Little scrutiny as motorist after motorist was abused. No statutory body to force them and their contractors to stop. The abuse grew and grew spiralling out of control to the point that reckless indifference, in many instances, became out of control lawlessness. Restrictions enforced in the full knowledge by all parties that they were unlawful.
Now, the Grim Reaper has been spotted and the prediction of massive financial consequences for many councils is becoming a slowly dawning reality.

However, it is not Nostradamus reciting quatrains but one of the world's biggest insurance companies. Perhaps not time yet for 'we told you so ...' but would suggest that council lawyers start brushing up on misfeasance and malfeasance in public office and checking out how much money they may have to refund not to mention the damages for those suffering loss at the ahnds of bailiffs.

Local authorities ‘unaware and under-prepared’ for outsourcing risks, claims Zurich Municipal

Despite local authorities undertaking unprecedented levels of increased outsourcing and partnership activity, senior managers and risk officers feel unclear and ill-equipped to manage the resulting risks, says insurance company Zurich Municipal.
A new report released by Zurich on the issue of supply chain risk in the public sector warns of the “potentially catastrophic” implications on local government services as councils dramatically increase reliance on back office outsourcing and frontline partnership working.

Unveiled at the CIPFA annual conference in Manchester, Public sector supply chain: risks, myths and opportunities calls for urgent action to improve risk readiness in the sector. Without proper management, the potential financial, legal and reputational ramifications for local authorities of supply chain failure — such as supplier cost overruns, data privacy breaches or mismanaged social care contracts — could be disastrous, says the insurer.

A survey of risk managers, conducted in tandem with the report, shows that whilst the majority acknowledge that partnership and outsourced working have generated new types of risk, few are considering non-traditional risks before contracting a partner, changing practices to embrace these risks or amending their disaster recovery or risk management plans. Furthermore, risk managers confess to feeling distanced from the day-to-day management of partnerships and claim the issue needs greater recognition and increased integration at a senior management level, particularly amongst those heading up partnership activity.

Independently authored by David Kaye, an expert in supply chain risk, the report marks the launch of Zurich Municipal’s “New World of Risk” campaign to provide local authority executive leaders, managers and service providers with leading edge advice and guidance about managing risk within the dramatically changing local government landscape.
Local authorities are taking on new roles and responsibilities as well as an outsourced business model that, in many cases, is leading to an entirely new risk profile and serious challenges, notes Kaye.
“Outsourcing a critical service need is so much more than subcontracting and delivery dates,” he says. “It is a process littered with reputational and political pitfalls as well as statutory and legal risk. These risks need to be actively managed, early on in the process, with clear exit strategies and business continuity plans in place. Without imposing this sort of control environment, at a senior level, both the risk and cost of partnerships could spiral.”

Andrew Jepp, head of local government at Zurich Municipal, added: “The recent and rapid migration of local authorities from service providers to strategic commissioners has engendered initial cost and efficiency savings, but also given rise to new risks that could mean higher costs in the end. Outsourcing services or outcome delivery to a selected partner or partners does not automatically devolve contractual, legal or moral responsibilities; if anything it heightens the importance of direct and thorough risk management.”
The report can be downloaded at:
http://www.newworldofrisk.co.uk/


Thursday, June 11, 2009

Camden Parking Refunds ......

BBC News reports 'Many Parking Fines 'unlawful' '

Builder Richard Chaumeton states:
"Camden Council are behaving like the Sherriff of Nottingham"

Looks like the motorsists now have their own Robin Hood.

The question is now 'Will Camden Council do the decent thing and refund everyone who has been fined unlawfully?'




Friday, April 17, 2009

Invention to reduce parking tickets for the pub trade

Hopefully people can now see that the intention and ultimate aim is to create an intelligent, interactive parking environment based on co-operation and efficient kerbside management rather than draconian enforcement for revenue generation. Hopefully other councils will now start to recognise that commercial vehicles should not be bearing a Penalty Charge Notice cost burden simply for going about their daily business in the most expedient fashion.

The future is to work towards good practice on all sides but to do that there needs to be a massive overhaul of the system. One of the first steps is reported below:

North invention to make life easier for pub trade
Apr 16 2009

by Andrew Mernin,
The Journal
VEHICLE-tracking technology designed by a North East scientist will now be used in London’s pub trade to help stop beer delivery drivers getting parking tickets.
Last year, North East inventor Dr Phillip Tann and Neil Herron – a well-known regional campaigner for motorists hit by parking and speeding fines – launched Fleetm8 on the back of Dr Tann’s groundbreaking vehicle- tracking system.

The technology allows users to track the location of any vehicle and also its historic location, enabling fleet operators to view performance and make decisions in real time.
It has since won a deal to be trialled on buses in India as part of a £17m government transport project and has now been adapted for use in the pub trade and will be trialled in the capital by the City of Westminster Council.

The South Tyneside business came up with the new system after discussions with the Brewery Logistics Group in which they bemoaned the fact that, in central London, there is limited car parking and kerb space to facilitate delivery lorries.

This means that drivers are often forced to park in contravention of a parking or loading restriction, which leads to hefty fines – the annual cost to BLG members is around £3m.
With Fleetm8’s technology, a message will be sent to Westminster Council ahead of a driver’s delivery to a particular pub to request short-term exemption from parking restrictions outside the premises.

This will automatically be granted through a server held at the council, who will create a temporary, ‘virtual’ loading bay outside the pub and will also alert parking attendants in the area, via their handheld computers, not to issue tickets to the delivery vehicle.
To quicken the delivery time, the intelligent system will also send a Bluetooth message to the pub alerting staff to open the cellar doors ahead of the vehicle’s arrival.

Neil Herron, who has become recognised nationally as a campaigner for parking disputes under his organisation Parking Appeals, said the trial in London showed forward-thinking on behalf of council bosses.
“We approached them with the idea of trialling new technology which could assist the brewers making deliveries more efficiently by reducing the kerb time and reduce their administrative burden for dealing with parking tickets by producing an exemption scheme for firms adhering to a set protocol and using the new technology.
“We are working on the project with Tradeteam who are part of DHL and who deliver beer to many of London’s pubs.
“Once we have created the model it can then be expanded to other sectors of the freight transport industry and applied in other local authority areas.”

Dr Tann’s vehicle-tracking technology first gained national recognition in 2007 when he used the device to avoid a speeding ticket.
Northumbria Police claimed he was doing 42mph in a 30mph zone, however, Dr Tann’s vehicle was fitted with a prototype GPS tracking device which proved otherwise.

The inventor said the deal with Westminster Council could help fuel more far-reaching interest in the system in future.
“This new development will add value especially for those firms operating in the London area. We are really pleased that our North East- based company is being used to solve a London problem and anticipate a great deal of interest.”
The technology has been backed by £60,000 in funding from Newcastle-based North Star Equity Investors (NSEI) which specialises in early stage, high-growth opportunities.
The investment is part of the company’s £12m Proof of Concept fund which targets the pre-seed stage of investment, supporting entrepreneurs with up to £90,000 in investment.


Tuesday, April 07, 2009

Councils launch parking website ... but they have missed a vital piece of information for the motorist

Doesn't seem to be anything on the site pointing out to the motorist in the clearest terms that PATROL is paid for at the rate of 60p per Penalty Charge Notice and that the PATROL Joint Committee (the councils) appoints the adjudicators and is responsible for their remuneration. It also fails to point out that Manchester City Council is the lead authority.

The next blog post will reveal the answers to some Parliamentary Questions.

At all times what must be borne in mind is that under Article 6(i) ECHR you have the right to be heard by an independent tribunal and that that it is a breach of Article 6 if it is perceived that the tribunal is not independent.

Councils relaunch new and improved parking information site
Hannah Wooderson for 24dash.com
in Communities , Local Government
6th April 2009

A group of over 200 councils have come together to re-launch their public information website today (Monday 6 April) www.patrol-uk.info.

The 200+ councils make up the Joint Committee of England and Wales for the Civil Enforcement of Parking and Traffic Regulations Outside London. Their new-look PATROL site has been improved to take into account the 12-months of user-feedback received since its launch last year, when the Traffic Management Act 2004 came into effect.

PATROL aims to be a one stop shop for motorists, providing clear and accessible information about parking and bus lane regulations, and guiding people through the ensuing, and often complex, enforcement process – a subject of great interest to local residents.The site promotes a ‘pay it or challenge it’ theme, encouraging people to either challenge a notice they believe they have received unfairly or pay early to avoid a larger fine. It also features a useful flowchart, so that people can easily identify where they are in the process.

PATROL, and the Joint Committee which sponsors it, is an excellent example of partnership working from councils. The group is committed to working together to provide consistent information to motorists. The site has a search option, so people can identify whether their local council is part of the scheme, and also includes direct links to local information via council websites, to enable them to check whether particular circumstances apply to their locality.

Chair of the PATROL Joint Committee, Councillor Ken Gregory said: “The PATROL website is an excellent example of how collaboration and partnership working between councils can succeed. The main aim was to present complex information about the enforcement process which is common to all councils and translate this into clear information for motorists. We’re pleased to have received such a lot of useful feedback from motorists and have taken these views on board to inform the redesign.”

PATROL also has a general information section, which provides a series of simple hints and tips for avoiding Penalty Charge Notices.PATROL’s Head of Service, Louise Hutchinson, said: “The PATROL Joint Committee is committed to providing a single point of access for motorists, and we hope that the new-look website will help us to build greater public understanding of parking issues, traffic management and motorists’ rights.”

www.patrol-uk.info


Monday, March 16, 2009

Westminster parking fines are down by 50 per cent

There are some forward thinking councils who have realised that effective parking enforcement comes from managing the kerbside efficiently. Below is the recent report from Westminster City Council and the reduction in the number of PCNs issued to commercial vehicles is a positive move.

London Informer
The past year has been particularly ambitious for us and has seen some major changes to parking in Westminster.
We have listened to residents and responded by ending the unpopular use of clamping and removal of vehicles.
We have also created more than 2,000 additional, dedicated motorcycle parking bays across the city, and introduced parking cards as an alternative way to pay for parking and are continuing to implement cashless parking across the city.
Further, we have implemented a number of common sense measures.
One of which has resulted in a 50 per cent reduction in the number of tickets issued to commercial vehicles.
Another has given resident permit holders a five-minute allowance to load or unload on single yellow lines.
However, we are not complacent and aim to introduce a number of initiatives to help make parking cheaper, safer and easier in 2009.
These include helping older residents through the provision of discounted parking for carers, providing more spaces for visitors and keeping dropped kerbs free of parked vehicles.
Measures will also be employed to make it easier for businesses to distribute goods and provide essential services across the city and a car club scheme will be implemented as a cheaper and greener alternative to car ownership.
Finally, we know that parking enforcement is not always popular,but with over half-a-million vehicles entering Westminster every day, it is a necessary tool to protect the safety of motorists and pedestrians and to keep traffic moving around the city.
However, we want to ensure that when enforcement is necessary, we are getting it right first time, and if we do get it wrong, that we are using common sense and putting it right quickly.
As the largest parking authority in the UK, Westminster has become the 'blueprint' for improving parking services and we are committed to delivering firm, fair and excellent parking services for all our residents, businesses and visitors.
Cllr Danny Chalkley, Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport
Westminster City Council


Sunday, March 15, 2009

Parking problems in Hull ... this is just the beginning

Lead story on Look North ... parking problems in Hull are the tip of the national iceberg.

The Glenn Dickinson Judicial Review could bring the parking industry to a standstill ... a 'ticking time-bomb' according to one source.




Blog Archive


only search Neil Herron Blog