Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'bpa'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums

Categories

  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips
  • chilleddrivingtuition

Categories

  • The Youth Academy
    • The Youth Consumer Service
  • Miscellaneous

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Location

Found 20 results

  1. As per this post on the Parking Pranksters blog. You really couldn't make it up! Unless you're the BPA of course, then you can make up anything you'd like
  2. My sis in law has just received a PCN in the post. The cahrge is the usual £100 reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days. At the bottom of the letter it has the IPC logo but on the signs they still display the BPA logo. The signage in the piece of land where she parked consists of 3 A0 sized signs fixed to the wall of the building in front, there is no entrance sign. The other potential problem is that the PCN is addressed to her late husband who has only recently been buried. Does anybody have any suggestions of where to go from here..... Than
  3. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/290903/response/710349/attach/html/2/Green%20response%20FOI%202015%2057.pdf.html https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/money_owed_by_the_british_parkin#comment-62932 Revealed first on the Pranksters comments section: http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/parkingeye-anpr-blunders-again.html#comment-form
  4. How will things be affected if an Enforcement company sales Director becomes Vice Chair of the BPA? Do you want to know more? if so catch up on this here http://rossandroberts.com/about-us/news/featured/bpa-south-west-group-elects-adrian-lardner-as-vice-chair/ "Adrian Lardner, Ross & Roberts’ Sales & Marketing Director has been elected as Vice Chair of the British Parking Association’s (BPA) South West Group."
  5. As has been previously mentioned on here ANPR have now been given the boot by the BPA Ltd. This is their press release:- http://britishparking.co.uk/News/bpa-terminates-membership-of-anpr-limited And about time too!
  6. Version 5 of the BPA Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice has now been published. Among smaller changes and tweaks, this removes the requirement for 'charges' to reflect a Genuine Pre-Estimate of Loss (I think you'd still win with this as a basis for defence in court) and replaces it with the words "Commercially Justified". Which is a giant can of worms if you ask me. http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS_Code_of_Practice_October_2014_update_V5.pdf
  7. The Prankster has blogged about a British Parking Association advisory panel meeting; http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/bpa-drop-requirement-for-charge-to-be.html
  8. Should the BPA logo appear on their letter if they are truly a member does anyone know? Cheers Paul
  9. Parking News-issue 324 October. Private car parking FINES... http://portfolio.cpl.co.uk/Parking-News/324/18/ '£93m paid in private car parking FINES in 2011 according to DVLA'
  10. The following is a link to an excellent press story featured today regarding the frankly pathetic shambles of private parking enforcement and proof once again that "cowboy clampers" have indeed turned into "cowboy ticketers" . The article also states that apparently POPLA are struggling with appeals and that DVLA have made a fortune from selling personal data. As you will also see, BPA are confirming that CEL are under "investigation" for their failure to abide by the BPA's "recommendations" by capping the maximum charge of their tickets at £100 !!! Only a few days ago local
  11. It would seem that the "independent" POPLA appeals body is not "independent" after all !!! This morning I was sent a link to a parking "blog" which displays copies of emails obtained under the Feedom of Information Act which appears to demonstrate that POPLA have been secretly holding "coaching sessions" with parking companies In London and Birmingham. These coaching sessions are designed to HELP the parking companies to WIN POPLA appeals !!! http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/popla-caught-secretly-coaching-parking.html
  12. A few days ago I complained to the BPA about Parking Eye's letters which try to justify they so-called pre-estimate of loss by including all their day-to-day running expenses and fixed costs. Believe it or not, this is the idiotic reply I received back:- Thank you for your e-mail. Please be advised Parking Eye are within their rights in regards to their parking charge notices and their pre-estimate of loss. Parking Eye would have calculated the sum as a genuine pre-estimate of their losses as they incur significant costs in managing the parking location to ensure compliance t
  13. Rarely audited, rarely inspected – no wonder private car parks are a rip-off [8 April 2013] The woeful level of inspection of signage at car parks has been laid bare by an admission from the British Parking Association that its annual audit of 163 private parking members includes a mandatory minimum of only ONE car park being inspected per member. So of the roughly 17,000 private car parks in the UK, all festooned with signs and markings, it’s quite possible that only about 200 are ever seen by the BPA’s supposedly independent external scrutineers, who have admitted to P
  14. I've just noticed this:- Of course, it is true, they are a "not for profit" ... but at the same time, it is not true - because they are a non-independent organisation which is set up to ensure the interests of the parking industry members. The BPA is set up with the intention of fronting and protecting a highly profitable industry. There is no altruism about them. The exist for the profits of their members. Their members join them and support them in order to ensure their continuing profitability. So, "not for profit"? ... Yes - but at the same
  15. Of course, POPLA is not independent of the BPA or of the industry in general. However, one of its effects will be to persuade people of a legitimacy of the private parking industry and of the BPA. It will also make many people feel that maybe a POPLA decision validates or legitimates the original penalty which has been foisted upon the motorist - and that if they lose their "appeal" then they should put their hands up and pay. POPLA is not independent The decisions I have seen are flawed both in their procedure and in their rationale. I would not accept the statistics claimed by the
  16. Posted by PPCguy on Pepipoo Well guys some of you may know me form on here and MSE. Just come over to report some unrest in the private parking industry. As you know I manage a private parking company. Over the last few days there has been a large deal of unrest coming from some of the smaller companies in the industry over the way they are treated by the BPA and and the way in which this treatment differs from how the big boys are treated, You may or may not be aware of an email from a person at the BPA named Kelvin which is of the following content: As we c
  17. There is a very interesting new post on the British Parking Association website regarding the introduction of keeper liability under the Protection of Freedoms Act and the new"independent appeals service" . Correct me if I'm wrong but it appears to have more bullet holes than Rab C Nesbitt's String vest. £27.00 + vat per appeal, with the outcome only binding on the Private Parking Company.
  18. Compliments of Nev - a tireless worker for the rights of motorists in the UK I have an idea that the BPA at some point claimed that there about 36,000 cases per year? Maybe someone can correct me Data (2).xls
  19. You may be aware that there is a clause in a bill before parliament at the moment that seems to be going unchallenged. Part 3, Chapter 2, Clause 56 of The Protection of Freedoms is designed to make the registered keeper liable for any private parking fines where it is not possible to identify the driver responsible for the parking infringement. This clause has the backing of, and heavy lobbying from, the British Parking Association due to the revenue stream it will generate for its members. The premis of innocent until proven guilty will be removed from a purely civil matter using he
×
×
  • Create New...