Jump to content


Keeper Liability Impact Assessment due for review January 2016


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2340 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...