Government proposes to ban the use of CCTV and ANPR in Civil Parking Enforcement !!!

[tomtubby]

Last September I wrote on the forum about a surprise joint press statement that had been released on behalf of DCLG and the DfT which featured in the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail and this announced a series of proposal for consulatation to reform parking rules in order to support local shops and to help with the 'cost of living'

 

With regards to bailiffs, the press release announced that further reforms would include:

 

Stopping CCTV being used for one street parking enforcement

 

Updating parking enforcement guidance to support local shops

 

Tackling wrongly issued fines

 

AND:

 

Stopping unacceptable parking fine collection practices

 

UPDATE:

 

The parking and enforcement industry are in a state of shock today after the government sprung an amendment into the Deregulation Bill.

 

The explanatory statement states as follows:

 

"This new clause deals with the enforcement of parking contraventions in England under Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004. It provides that, subject to certain exceptions, regulations under section 78 must provide for notification of a penalty charge to be given by a notice affixed to the vehicle(which means that a civil enforcement officer must be present to affix the notice).

 

It also confers a power which would enable regulations to be made to restrict the use of CCTV and other devices in parking enforcement"

[tomtubby]

The following is a copy of the announcment last night from the British Parking Association:

 

 

Government proposal to ban CCTV at odds with Minister’s endorsement

 

 

 

19 June 2014

 

 

 

The BPA is surprised at Government proposals to ban CCTV and ANPR use in Civil Parking Enforcement as part of an amendment to the Deregulation Bill. This is at complete odds with a speech made at Parkex (10th June) by Transport Minister Robert Goodwill.

 

He stressed how essential it is for the public to have confidence that CCTV should be used to promote safety and tackle congestion and recognised there was a strong case to retain CCTV camera enforcement in four areas: around schools, in bus lanes, at bus stops, and on red-routes.

 

Kelvin Reynolds, BPA Director of Policy and Public Affairs said ‘We are pleased with the Minister’s recognition that CCTV has its uses and agree that better regulation is needed. The British Parking Association, along with stakeholders including the Local Government Association; Freight Transport Association; Living Streets; Disabled Motoring UK; Parliamentary Advisory for Transport Safety and Guide Dogs for the Blind has made an offer to work with Government in an open letter, to better define and codify the use of CCTV & ANPR cameras through Statutory and Operational Guidance.

 

‘The Government has sprung this amendment on everyone with little notice and without publishing either an analysis of the consultation responses or the Government view. The proposed approach is heavy handed by a Government which is seeking to deregulate. Ironically, it is using the Deregulation Bill to impose further regulation on local government’.

 

The BPA believes Government must show a commitment to the exemptions identified by the Minister but must also understand that CCTV may be appropriate in other situations.

We understand the desire for better regulation but the BPA will be working on behalf its members to ensure that the benefits of CCTV and other camera enforcement are not compromised or lost because of this hasty proposal"

[renegadeimp]

Aww. The BPA's running scared because they wont make any money.

[brassnecked]

Ouch, the BPA are squealing like a stuck pig/ Expect them to squeal that there will be mayhem in the streets and car parks with cars parked everywhere, we won't be able to move for all the cars parked over their allowed time, in bus lanes and on the streets they will cry.

 

The BPA will try to lobby to keep their cash generator car park ANPR

 

Hopefully the iniquitous Bailiff/EA ANPR will similarly be banned, as it is a major cause of problems for new owners of ticketed cars.

[renegadeimp]

Bet the government backtracks or adds clauses that make this amendment defunct.

[ploddertom]

There really is a Santa Claus.

[unclebulgaria67]

There really is a Santa Claus.

 

Politicians are aware that the public don't like being treated like sh1t and councils are targeting motorists to increase revenues. I think Eric Pickles has made such a comment about this. If politicians didn't react, they would be ignoring their constituents, who no doubt write to them all of the time about this issue. Shop keepers in particular would not be very happy with the current situation, where motorists now don't visit the high street, because of the parking/ticketing situation.

[HCEOs]

Who would know whether an EA driving round the streets is using his ANPR or his own eyes though?

[wonkeydonkey]

Shop keepers in particular would not be very happy with the current situation, where motorists now don't visit the high street, because of the parking/ticketing situation.

 

I recently visited South Shields in Tyne and Wear, not been there for years but where i grew up many moons ago. It used to have a bustling high street leading to the market square which on market days was heaving with people.

 

I could hardly believe my eyes at the rot and decay. It was no longer a case of which shop or store to choose to purchase from, it was more a case of trying to find a shop that was still trading.

 

Ok so we used to have to dodge the slow moving traffic when crossing from one side of the street to the other to browse those lovely shop windows but at least it added atmosphere to the excursion to the High Street.

 

Parking restrictions and the penalties collected by way of them, destroyed the High Street's and the cost of bringing those high streets back would ultimately fall on the tax payer...so what do they do...increase parking charges and penalties!!!

[tomtubby]

 

The BPA will try to lobby to keep their cash generator car park ANPR

 

Hopefully the iniquitous Bailiff/EA ANPR will similarly be banned, as it is a major cause of problems for new owners of ticketed cars.

 

 

.

The 'lobbying' has already taken place and this was the purpose of the Consultation procedure a few months ago. We also submitted our response to the Consultation and concentrated mainly on the use ANPR (or rather misuse of ANPR) during bailiff enforcement.

 

The BPA are clearly very shocked to hear of the amendment being included in the Deregulation Bill (which will be heard on Monday) and the reason for this, concerns the speech made at last weeks Parkex conference by the Transport Minister Robert Goodwill. I was actually at Parkex and heard the Minister discussing CCTV and I know that some in the audience 'read into the speech' that the government would very likely 'water down' any changes to CCTV use in regards to parking enforcement. They may well have been wrong!!

 

Most people here on the forum would be unaware that almost all local authorities are members of the BPA and all bailiff companies are also members. In regards to private parking companies (such as Parking Eye eye) they are NOT allowed to access DVLA records unless they are BPA members.

[mikeymack2002]

So what will this mean now for the SPY CAR ?

[tomtubby]

So what will this mean now for the SPY CAR ?

 

.

The joint press release had a quote from Eric Pickles stating that parking “spy cars” are just “one example of a step too far" !!!

 

I strongly believe that we will see them banned from use.

[Michael Browne]

.

The joint press release had a quote from Eric Pickles stating that parking “spy cars” are just “one example of a step too far" !!!

 

I strongly believe that we will see them banned from use.

 

Only for parking contraventions, they will still be able to use them for moving traffic offences, but clearly the loss of income generated from parking will make them less viable financially

[lookinforinfo]

It should also mean that Parking Eye will now have to ticket cars that overstay their allotted time in car parks etc probably making it uneconomic.

[Michael Browne]

It should also mean that Parking Eye will now have to ticket cars that overstay their allotted time in car parks etc probably making it uneconomic.

 

This doesn't apply to private car parks, it's on-street council cctv parking enforcement and even that is subject to certain, as yet unnamed, exceptions

[lookinforinfo]

Sorry Michael, I was going by the statement below-

It provides that, subject to certain exceptions, regulations under section 78 must provide for notification of a penalty charge to be given by a notice affixed to the vehicle(which means that a civil enforcement officer must be present to affix the notice).

 

but of course CEOs do not work for Parking Eye. Hopefully the concept of doing away with CCTV will soon apply to private car parks.

[Fulhamboy]

As a compromise make all parking tickets £10 and if not paid within 14 days up it to £20.

Then everybody would be more willing to cough up , and if the local authorities are that desperate for the money they should pursue the non payers and not be allowed to involve the bailiffs . Its a parking ticket do they think people deliberately go out of their way to

get tickets . In my borough we have King Street which is a main shopping area .

It has a stealth camera trained on it. If you stop to let someone out or pick someone up kerching .IF these changes come about I will streak naked down this road

[tomtubby]

The amendments are to Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Full details in the following link:

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]51675[/ATTACH]

[brassnecked]

No good for Wales then as it specifies England so the likes of Cardiff Council can fleece away regardless.

 

There are already issues with overzealous and aggressive action by CEO in Welsh holiday resorts to the level of driving visitors away, especially North Wales, Rhyl has an issue with extremely aggressive Wardens If this is England specific it will be time to have a pop at the Welsh Government at their non stop jolly in Cardiff Bay.

[tomtubby]

B/N

 

I confess that I hadn't noticed that the amendment only applies to England. Interesting.

 

Once the amendments are made there will be intense lobbying regarding the actual 'exemptions'.

 

With regards to ANPR I do know that the same dept that are steering this amendment are aware that the Metropolitan Police have suspended their involvement in police and bailiff 'Roadside Operations' .

 

The 'Parking Mad' series highlighted some very serious concerns about ANPR and various government agencies share that concern.

 

The BPA made a huge error in approaching Whyte & Co to participate in the Parking Mad series.

[brassnecked]

TT I was concerned by the wording that specifically said England as they usually apply automatically to England and Wales, I will check with my MP David Jones who is also Welsh Minister, and put any reply on this thread

 

Parking Mad may be the final nail in the coffin of EA ANPR, we can but hope, it is obnoxious that a new owner can lose their car, almost without any comeback against the bailiff/EA for a previous owners PCN. I feel that it is in practice afundamental breach of Human Rights both the UK Act and the ECHR Articles, as it is the state depriving an innocent of their property for an act or omission by a totally unconnected party, and apparent rights to enjoyment of their property,.

 

Just needs an aggrieved innocent third party motorist who lost their car to Whyte & Co or JBW as a result of this ANPR to get a case taken by a pro bono lawyer and sue for the losses both actual and consequential. The EA, the LA and MET would be joint defendants I feel.

[tomtubby]

The initial announcement from Eric Pickles was on 26th September last year and I started a thread on that day with details. It was only this morning that I noticed that over 8,000 visitors had viewed that thread. I have reposted it for information purposes. The link is here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?404313-Eric-Pickles-seeking-to-amend-the-law-to-stop-bailiffs-collecting-parking-fines-!!!!

[tomtubby]

More from Eric Pickles today:

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2664240/Outlawed-The-spy-cars-automatically-issue-parking-fines-totalling-300million-protest-privacy-campaigners.html

[SabreSheep]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27952341

[Michael Browne]

Government bans use of CCTV 'spy cars' for on-street parking

 

 

 

In a victory for drivers and shoppers, the government will make it illegal to use closed circuit television (CCTV) ‘spy cars’ alone to enforce on-street parking ending the plague of parking tickets by post, Communities Secretary Eric Pickles and Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin announced today (21 June 2014).

 

The announcement is one of a range of measures that will give hard working people and local shops a fairer deal by reining-in over-zealous parking enforcement practices, which often force people to shop in out-of-town centres or online.

 

The long-called for ban will now become law through the Deregulation Bill, following a 3-month consultation. Tickets will have to be fixed to the windscreen by parking wardens, making it illegal for councils to issue penalty charge notices to drivers using just the CCTV spy cars that currently patrol roads for on-street parking enforcement.

 

Parking officers will now carry out all essential enforcement, limiting the use of CCTV to issue tickets by post to critical routes such as schools, bus lanes, bus stops and red routes where public transport must be kept moving for safety reasons.

 

The other measures designed to help local shops, support drivers and give communities a greater say on parking policies include:

 

• trialling a 25% discount for motorists who lose an appeal against a parking ticket at tribunal on the full price of their parking ticket
  
• changing guidance so motorists parking at an out-of-order meter are not fined if there are no alternative ways to pay
  
• introducing a new right to allow local residents and local firms to demand a review of parking in their area, including charges and the use of yellow lines
  
• reforming operational parking guidance so it is less heavy handed with motorists, prevents over-aggressive action by bailiffs, positively supports local shops and clearly reinforces the prohibition against parking being used to generate profit
  
• proposing a widening of the powers of parking adjudicators. This could include, for example, measures to protect drivers where adjudicators have repeatedly identified a problem at a specific location, such as inadequate signage, and parking tickets have repeatedly been issued - in such circumstances, potential measures could see adjudicators allowed to direct an authority to stop issuing tickets or direct the authority to change the signage, or indeed both
  
• updating guidance so the public know when they can be awarded costs at tribunals
  
• increasing parking transparency so councils are required to publish how income from parking charges is being used, including a new statutory Transparency Code
  
• maintaining a freeze on parking penalty charges for the remainder of this Parliament