HINT: Because of the way the govt has set out this document it will probably be easier to follow by clicking on this link: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/parking-code-enforcement-framework/outcome/parking-code-enforcement-framework-consultation-response (https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/parking-code-enforcement-framework/outcome/parking-code-enforcement-framework-consultation-response)
Ministry of Housing,
Communities &
Local Government
Consultation outcome
Parking code enforcement framework: consultation response
Updated 20 March 2021
Introduction
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government recently consulted on new measures to improve the regulation of the private parking industry.
Parking is a crucial part of our transport infrastructure. We all have an interest in how car parks are managed, especially given the important link between transport accessibility and the vitality of our high streets and town centres.
In response to widespread concerns about the poor practice and behaviour of some parking operators, the government initiated a review into private parking practices in 2015 and supported the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019, which was introduced by Sir Greg Knight MP. It will lead to the creation of an independent Code of Practice for private parking companies.
In December 2018, government started work with the British Standards Institution (BSI) to develop the Code of Practice as a British Standard. BSI are the UK’s National Standards Body and are widely recognised as credible experts in regulatory delivery.
The government’s choice of BSI delivered on our promise to listen to industry and consumers and involve them in the design of the new regulation; the process to develop British Standards involves reaching a consensus from a range of key stakeholders, and seeking a wide array of views through a full public consultation.
In August 2020, BSI consulted on a draft Code. The public review for PAS 232, Privately managed parking – Operation and management – Specification, received over 3,000 comments during the 6 week consultation period, covering issues such as signage, accessibility, parking duration and charges. BSI will be working closely with the project’s Steering Group to reach consensus on the draft wording before publication.
The Code, however, is only one part of a wider regulatory framework. In parallel to the BSI consultation on the Code, government consulted on the Code Enforcement Framework and invited views on:
the process for managing appeals against parking charges
the enforcement of the Code of Practice
the establishment of a Scrutiny and Oversight Board
the level of parking charges
an Appeals Charter for motorists to challenge parking charges they believe to be unfair
proposals for a levy on the industry to fund the new Code and framework
This response follows a comprehensive analysis of all respondents’ views. It outlines the responses the government received and how they fed into our policy development. As no consultation is a representative sample, we put weight more on the substantive content than on the percentage of the views expressed. It also provides further clarity on the next steps for the development of the Code of Practice and its Enforcement Framework.
Timeline
Spring 2021: Work begins on Certification Scheme with United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS).
Spring 2021: Pre-market engagement for single appeals service.
Before summer 2021: Code of Practice complete and transition period begins to allow parking operators to adapt to the new requirements.
Summer 2021: Scrutiny and Oversight Board appointed.
Before the end of 2021: Certification Scheme completed and appeals service supplier appointed. The appeals service will go live within 6 months.
When appeals service supplier is appointed, the transition period ends and parking operators must follow the requirements of the new Code of Practice.
Early 2022: Conformity Assessment Bodies receive UKAS Accreditation and trade associations are awarded Accredited Parking Association (APA) status by Secretary of State.
By mid-2022: Single appeals service goes live.
Breakdown of responses
Overall, the government received 1,000 (applicable) responses to the consultation, of which:
957 were received through the online portal used
31 were email responses
2 were postal responses
Furthermore, we can break this down by respondent type:
individuals – 708
organisations – 282
126 organisations were identified as members of the two private parking trade associations
Chapter 1: Determination of appeals
Q1 Do you agree or disagree that members of APAs should be required to use a single appeals service appointed by the Secretary of State?
Q1.1 Please explain your answer.
Q2 Please provide any other feedback on the determination of appeals, including the funding model and features that an appeal service should offer e.g. telephone or in-person hearings, the ability to submit evidence online.
1. These questions asked respondents for their views on the principle that parking operators should be required to use a single appeals service appointed the Secretary of State. A single appeals service would be a “one stop shop” for parking appeals, meaning that the motorist could appeal a parking charge to the same service regardless of which parking operator issued it.
2. There are currently two trade associations representing parking operators: the British Parking Association (BPA) and the International Parking Community (IPC). At the moment, they both offer separate appeals services for their parking operator members. These appeals services are the Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA) and the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) respectively.
3. Section 7 of the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 gives the Secretary of State the power to appoint a single appeals service to handle appeals against private parking charges, if the Code of Practice requires it.
4. A majority of respondents (66%) who answered Q1 were in favour of a single appeals service, while 11% neither agreed or disagreed and 23% were against. Some respondents (40%) felt that it was important to have consistency in how appeals are dealt with in parking cases. This was cited by 47% of those who agreed with a single appeals service and 38% of those who neither agreed nor disagreed.
5. Others responding to this question proposed that creating a single appeals service would ensure a fairer system. In particular they said it would be fairer for motorists and those who may have made genuine mistakes. This was mentioned by 33% those who agreed with the notion of a single appeals service.
6. A small number of respondents (17%) proposed that having a single appeals service raised concerns around competition. They stated that multiple services help improve standards, while also allowing for a diversity of opinion to be present for those appealing. This was cited by 28% of those who had no strong preference and 57% those who disagreed with the single appeals service.
7. The government supports the idea of a single appeals service and intends that the Code of Practice will require the use of an appeals service appointed by the Secretary of State.
8. We do not agree that multiple services will help to improve standards. In the private parking sector, it is the operator not the motorist who chooses the appeals service (the appeals service that is used is determined by which trade association the operator belongs to rather than any consumer choice.) Moreover, a motorist often does not have a choice of car park but is also unable to choose between parking operators, as the latter is employed by the car park owner. In this context, multiple appeals services could create a market failure, incentivising the creation of new appeals services offering more advantageous terms to operators but lower quality and less favourable outcomes for motorists.
9. Instead, a single appeals service will be a guarantee of fairness, consistency and simplicity for all. As part of this, we will ensure that one of the objectives of the single appeals service will be effectiveness and efficiency, as the costs of the service may ultimately be passed on to consumers.
10. We support preserving the current principle that the appeals service should be free to use for motorists and we also recognise that it must be cost-effective for the industry.
11. We intend to conduct further pre-market engagement in spring 2021 before finalising our delivery options for the appeals service. This will include running a product Discovery to better research the needs of the users of the service, which will ensure a high-quality service in which motorists and the industry can have full confidence.
Chapter 2: Enforcing the Code of Practice
Q3 Please provide any comments you have on the proposal to enforce the Code by combining the ATA’s existing audit procedures with additional safeguards.
Q4 Please outline any alternative means by which the Code could be monitored and enforced. You may wish to cite evidence from other regulatory frameworks which are relevant.
12. Parking operators must belong to an operated Approved Operator Scheme (AOS) run by an Accredited Trade Association (ATA) in order to have the ability to request data from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) vehicle register in order to pursue parking charges. If they breach the Code, they risk losing their ability request DVLA data, and therefore will not be able to enforce parking charges through the post where they have no other means of identifying the driver or registered keeper of the vehicle in question.
13. Under the current system of self-regulation, the ATAs are responsible for auditing their members’ compliance with the voluntary industry produced Codes of Practice.
14. In the consultation, we proposed to build on the current system of self-regulation, which involves the parking trade associations auditing their members’ compliance with the existing voluntary codes of practice. Our proposal was to create additional safeguards by engaging the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) to independently assess the ATAs.
15. This would provide greater assurance to the Secretary of State that the ATAs have robust processes to audit their operators’ compliance with the Code of Practice. This will ensure that the Code of Practice leads to higher standards, benefiting motorists, landowners and the industry as a whole.
16. Responses to this section of the consultation were diverse. However, there were several themes that emerged. 27% of respondents to this question suggested that it was important for operators to be audited regularly. 19% agreed that having additional safeguards was a good idea and 18% saw that the additional safeguards being suggested were necessary to ensure that operators were compliant and that non-compliant companies were identified. However, some respondents to this question (14%) felt that the current practices were sufficient.
17. We intend to proceed with our proposal to build on and strengthen the system of ATA auditing.
18. Parking operators will only be able to request data from the DVLA to enforce parking charges if the Secretary of State is satisfied that the ATA itself has robust processes for auditing operators’ compliance with the Code.
19. To be satisfied, we will expect the trade associations to undergo accreditation by UKAS as Conformity Assessment Bodies. Government will produce a Certification Scheme, based on the Code of Practice, which will outline how in practice the requirements of the Code should be measured, tested and assessed. For example, how prospective assessment bodies will evaluate if the content and placing of signage is compliant with the Code, whether the text of parking charge notices meets the new requirements and how the length of consideration and grace periods on a particular site are determined and assessed.
20. Then, UKAS, as an independent body, will assess whether the trade associations have the necessary processes in place to ensure that parking operators comply with the Code. The UKAS accreditation process will involve regular audits and inspections and will provide greater guarantees to government that the new system is robust and rigorous.
21. Government will write the Certification Scheme in consultation with key stakeholders. We expect the Scheme to be completed within 2021, with prospective conformity assessment bodies receiving UKAS accreditation by early 2022, subject to a successful evaluation.
22. Once the new accreditation system is in place, the Secretary of State will designate those parking trade associations who have been accredited by UKAS as Accredited Parking Associations, for the purposes of the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019, which will entitle their members to request access to data from the DVLA.
Chapter 3: Scrutiny and Oversight Board
Q5 Please provide any feedback you have on the proposed governance arrangements for monitoring the new Code of Practice.
23. In addition to the system of accredited certification by UKAS, the government proposed in the consultation to establish a Scrutiny and Oversight Board, comprising of representatives from MHCLG, DVLA, Devolved Administrations and industry.
24. The Board would oversee the operation of the new oversight system and monitor its effectiveness, including through the gathering and use of relevant data on the private parking sector.
25. Most respondents (66%) approved of the proposed governance arrangements. Some of the primary reasons given were that it would raise standards, introduce greater independence and would improve the public perception of the parking industry. Only 7% of respondents were disapproving of the proposed arrangements, with some feeling that there was already sufficient oversight in the industry through the ATAs and the DVLA.
26. Some respondents (21%) mentioned that they agreed with some or all the functions of the Board and felt they were comprehensive in scope. A similar proportion (20%) mentioned that they agreed with the information and data that was suggested the Board could review. A popular reason given for support was that information would have a positive impact on standards and governance. 20% of responses stressed the importance of having a transparent and independent Board, as this would provide the best scrutiny.
27. A small proportion of respondents (9%) expressed concerns about data collection in the reviewing process. Some (7%) of these suggested further monitoring whilst others (3%) respondents expressed worry over the data which was collected. A popular suggestion for further data collection was the number of claims bought to court by the parking operator in question.
28. Some responses (9%) felt that the representation of the Board was crucial to ensure the process was fair. The most common of these (mentioned by 5% of the total responses) was the feeling that motorists, or organisations representing motorists, must be included on the board.
29. Government intends to appoint a Scrutiny and Oversight Board. It will be an advisory panel to MHCLG and will carry out the functions proposed in the consultation.
30. Then, UKAS, as an independent body, will assess whether the trade associations have the necessary processes in place to ensure that parking operators comply with the Code. The UKAS accreditation process will involve regular audits and inspections and will provide greater guarantees to government that the new system is robust and rigorous.
31. In addition to those functions outlined in the consultation, we intend for the Board to advise the government on the operation of the Code of Practice and the Certification Scheme and provide recommendations on whether these need to be updated. We anticipate that the Board would review the Code of Practice every two years to ensure that it is up to date with developments in the industry, and the Scheme when required.
32. We intend for the Board to be composed of representatives from MHCLG, DVLA, Devolved Administrations and industry. In addition, in reflection of respondents’ views that motorists should be represented, we will appoint a suitable organisation to the Board to give expression to this interest. We also intend for the appeals service to have representation on the Board to improve information and data flows, ensuring efficient monitoring of the sector.
33. In relation to the data and information collected by the Board, government is preparing a data strategy for the enforcement of the Code. It will provide an outline of relevant data and identify opportunities to maximise the value of that data, reflecting on the principles in the National Data Strategy.
Continued...