Keeper Liability Impact Assessment due for review January 2016

[armadillo71]

Keeper Liability Impact Assessment due for review January 2016

 

In 2011 an impact assessment was undertaken by the government to help decide whether to introduce a law regarding keeper liability.*That impact assessment is available online here, and comes up for review in January 2016.

 

In this blog The Prankster takes a look at the impact assessment in light of the data available since the keeper liability act was passed.

 

The first question is whether the act is necessary at all. If we look at keeper data released toparking companies in 2014*by the DVLA we see the following are the top 5 most unsuccessful companies at managing car parks properly:

 

975352 ParkingEye

317593 ICES (Smart Parking)

291941 Ranger Services (Highview, CP Plus)

152335 Excel

151027 Euro Car Parks

 

Of these, only the first and last (ParkingEye and Euro car parks) use the keeper liability legislation. The others all issue deliberately non-compliant notices to keeper and do not use keeper liability legislation; they pursue the keeper on the basis that they are likely to be the driver.

 

The key question is; has the number of tickets increased because motorists have become much more badly behaved, or is this because parking companies have introduced ingenious schemes which are hard to obey so they can milk the motorist? The answer is obvious.

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/keeper-liability-impact-assessment-due.html

[silverfox1961]

Part of my daily ritual is to head for PPs website.

 

Since the Beavis (non) judgement, lets hope that the impact assessment starts making inroads to curb the 'sharp practices' used by the PPCs, Stop the BPA changing the rules and make the IPC behave itself over appeals. Oh yes, and to bar Gladstones from appointing assessors and taking court action on behalf of its members.

 

Hopefully, they will also discuss the level of penalties.

[ericsbrother]

All it needs is for someone with enough money (or none at all and use legal aid) to go for a judicial review and the IPC is sunk. Undoubtedly they know it and Gladstones will claim they are just obeying orders so not culpable in their dreadful behaviour. Obviously in this country rotten directors just form another company. Say what you like about the greed and excess of US company bosses, at least they go to jail for 99 years when they break the law, no knighthoods for failure.