New version of IPC Code of Practice

[FTMDave]

The IPC have a new version of their CoP

https://irp.cdn-website.com/262226a6/files/uploaded/IPC Code of PracticeV9 V4.pdf

Apart from the stomach-churning image of Will trying to make out he's some cool dude from Hollywood, I see they immediately go for -

Anti-social parking, such as the blocking of designated Blue Badge bays, of pedestrian paths, entrances, double parking, parking across multiple bays and the non-payment of parking fees has increased across members’ sites since the end of the Covid lockdown period. Those with large vehicles increasingly seem to believe that the normal rules of society apply to everyone except them, and this is demonstrated not just on the road but through parking.  2024 marks a new era of challenge for the private parking industry as, across the nation, it faces the increasing challenge of a surge in anti-social parking that impacts on the owners and users of Britain’s car parks.

As an industry, we believe that Parking Charge Notices (the private land equivalent of a Penalty Charge Notice, collectively called PCNs) should be raised to a level where the amount that can be charged is a true deterrent to anti-social parking, particularly for the
increasingly large minority of repeat rule-breakers. We urge Government to allow the private and public sectors to raise the cost of PCNs to a level where anti- social parking is deterred. Today, that is no longer the case: PCNs are no longer the deterrent they were
designed to be. 

I must admit I had missed this apocalyptic breaking down of civilization, but thank the heavens that Will is there to stop it.

I'm sure there is no connection at all to the greed of him and his bezzies.

I've been aware of this new CoP for a while, but have been lazy about going through it as it sucks the will to live out of of you, but we should bit by bit.

From a quick flick through I see they have pretended to add bits from the government CoP ...but then made them "advisory" rather than compulsory ... so not really adding them at all.

More later bit by bit

[dx100uk]

1 hour ago, FTMDave said:

Parking Charge Notices (the private land equivalent of a Penalty Charge Notice, collectively called PCNs)

nope not at all (who wrote that - ID10T) one is a fine the other is a speculative invoice...muppet!

1 hour ago, FTMDave said:

We urge Government to allow the private and public sectors to raise the cost of PCNs to a level where anti- social parking is deterred

no i just need more money for my free holiday that all the mugs pay for now, cause no-one bar my pocket see the money if you pay a speculative invoice.

[FTMDave]

Written by Will Hurley - a qualified solicitor!

[lookinforinfo]

One can only imagine that the IPC and BPA inhabit some other planet where good sense is overcome by greed and the inhabitants have infected some of the leaders of car parks in Britain to join in their greed on the spurious grounds of "legitimate interest".  rather then face 

The reason that more PCNs are being issued is twofold. The first one is the ever increasing rules introduced by the parking rogues for motorists  to fall foul of.  They try to charge you £100 for either putting in a wrong reg. number or failing to fill in your reg number inside the store. Despite having paid the entrance fee!! 

The second reason is that with the new Private Parking legislation coming in the rogues know that their gravy train is coming to an end so they are picking on any and every transgression by motorists in the meantime regardless of the legitimacy of the charge. For instance they are sending out PCNs for vehicles overstaying by less than five minutes knowing that the majority will pay up rather than go to Court. And few if any of the others who don't pay will pursue them for breaching their GDPR . Of course none of those cases that don't pay ever end up in Court..........

One only has to look at the usual suspects among the parking fraternity who end up on Trust Pilot and read some of the stories where had the motorists been aware of help from Companies such as us, they could have avoided paying any monies at all.  I would refer to some of these parking companies as crooks if I was allowed to  yet they all come out claiming in overbearingly pious terms how they are saving car park owners money by preventing motorists from breaking T&Cs thus freeing the car parks for more visitors. Absolute balderdash or some similar word.

The fact is that the owners lose more customers who never return to those car parks after being given an unwarranted PCN than ever  were lost by the odd few motorists that ever straddled two parking spaces etc.

 

 

 

[FTMDave]

As I've just had a 6-hour train journey and needed things to occupy my time, I've had a look through the new bits of the CoP.

Of course there's the usual Will & John pretending to improve matters for the motorist before instantly contradicting themselves. However, there are bits that are half decent, and which the PPCs will surely ignore, which we can use in WSs.  These are below.

Bits in red are new, taken from the government CoP.

Bits in blue are new, but not based on the government CoP.

Bits in black had always been there, just not noticed properly by me.

They have also had to accept the government consideration & grace period times.

9.3 Keying errors

Where the terms and conditions require the driver to supply their vehicle registration mark at an on-site machine, by telephone or online, the parking operator must have and follow a documented policy and procedure to avoid issuing or enforcing a parking charge in respect of accidental keying errors, including the adoption of technologies that prevent keying errors e.g. by recording the VRM of vehicles entering the land and rejecting those which don’t match on input, and physical checks of photographic images matched to make, model and colour of the vehicle as recorded by DVLA.

Some common keying errors can be accommodated within the registration system, for example confusing the letter “o” with the numeric symbol “0”; more advanced systems that record the vehicle VRM on entry can be set up to reject VRMs if they do not match those of any vehicle on site.

Schedule 1 Signage

Signs must be readable and understandable at all times, including during the hours of darkness or at dusk, if and when parking enforcement activity takes place at those times.

If parking enforcement takes place outside of daylight hours you should ensure that signs are illuminated or there is sufficient other lighting. Appropriate illumination can be achieved in a variety of ways for example:

1.ensuring sufficient ambient lighting;

2.using reflective material on signage;

3.positioning signs where headlights are likely to illuminate them.

Entrance Signs

Signs at the entrance to a parking area must clearly show the type of parking available and if, when and how any payment is required to be made. If public parking is not welcomed, that must be made clear. If public parking is welcomed, but subject to a tariff, then the existence of the tariff must be made clear.  If one of the standard wordings in Table A.1 applies, then the standard wording should be used.

Changes in Operator’s Terms and Conditions

Where there is any change to any pre-existing terms and conditions that would not be immediately apparent to a person visiting the Car Park and which materially affects the Motorist the Operator should place additional (temporary) notices at the entrance making it clear that new terms and conditions/charges apply, such that regular visitors who may be familiar with the old terms do not inadvertently incur Parking Charges. Notices should be in addition to the signage ordinarily required and left in place for an appropriate period.

Edited March 10 by FTMDave
Horrible layout improved

[lookinforinfo]

Not sure why they have brought out a new one since when the Private parking Code comes in IPC and BPA will become  distant memories thank goodness.

 

[FTMDave]

It's interesting why they have given in and accepted some of the government regulations.

Maybe it's a desperate attempt to show how reasonable they are so the government drops their proposals?

In any case their members will continue to ignore these changes so there is good ammo here for WSs, showing how the PPCs break their own CoP.