Motorists hit with nearly £4m in private parking fines every day
The number of parking fines issued by private parking companies has skyrocketed since they successfully challenged a Conservative bill three years ago that enacted a proper code of practice for handing out fines.
For years, these firms have been accused of profiting off misleading and confusing signs, as well as refusing a grace period to drivers if they do not return to their cars, even if it is not their fault.
Data provided by the RAC shows that the number of requests made by parking management companies to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency for information on offending vehicles has more than tripled since the Tory bill was passed and later watered down. It increased by 13 per cent from 2023.
Firms issued a record 1,640 tickets every hour last year, according to the data. As each ticket can be up to £100, the total daily cost to drivers could be close to £4 million.
The five parking companies that issued 46 per cent of penalty charge notices (PCNs) between them last year were ParkingEye (2,300,360), Euro Car Parks (1,733,493), APCOA Parking (960,482), Horizon Parking (875,833) and Civil Enforcement Ltd (684,864).
The British Parking Association (BPA), which represents the parking and traffic management sector, says the rise is a reflection of the growing number of sites, as opposed to an increase in the number of tickets being handed out. They claim that only 0.3 per cent of private land parking events result in a parking charge.
But the RAC has disputed these claims and called for the Labour government to reintroduce laws cracking down on the penalty practice.
RAC head of policy Simon Williams said: 'Too many unfair tickets are still being handed out by operators who haven't been forced to adhere to stricter rules, and too many drivers are still being hounded by debt collection companies.
'And, we still don't have a single, truly independent appeals service that drivers can go to if their initial appeal to the operator concerned is rejected.
'We don't believe the parking industry's argument that PCNs are only at record levels purely because they're managing more car parks.
'We urge the Government to ensure the official code is launched this year with all the protection it was intended to have so that we don't see these figures go even higher in the future.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
29 minutes ago
- Times
Ignorant government plans to tax bookies more could destroy racing
Tax the bookmakers more. It's a policy sure to garner public support, isn't it? The problem is not the idea of taxing the betting industry at a higher level, it is the way that the government is proposing to do it. It is not far-fetched to say that the changes, if introduced in the autumn statement, could be the death knell for horse racing in Britain. The government needs cash and the bookmakers are a soft target. The idea is to harmonise tax on bookmakers' profits on all their income streams. At the moment there is a division between tax paid on online casino profits (21 per cent goes to the government) and sports/racing betting (paid at 15 per cent). The suggestion is to charge 21 per cent across the board. There are exceptions, such as George Freeman (Conservative, Mid Norfolk) and Sally Jameson (Labour, Doncaster Central), but many MPs do not appear to understand the differences between betting on sports, which involves an element of skill, compared with casino betting, where bookmakers cannot lose. They also appear to be oblivious of the damage it will do to the racing industry, which provides jobs for 85,000 people. A further 10 per cent of bookmakers' profits from bets placed on horse racing are paid back to the sport. This levy came into force when betting shops were legalised in 1961 as a means to help fund the sport. It was introduced to combat the fact that fewer people would go racing once off-course betting was permitted, while also recognising the symbiotic relationship of the racing and betting industries. As a result, though, betting on racing is less profitable for bookmakers, making them keen to push punters towards higher-margin products, with online casinos being top of their list. The reason that racing will be badly hit by the proposed tax changes is that it will make bookmakers even less keen to promote betting on the sport, which provides the lifeblood of the industry. Modelling commissioned by the British Horseracing Authority suggested that increasing tax on betting on racing to 21 per cent, to level it up with betting on online casinos, would cost the sport £66million a year in lost income from levy, media rights and sponsorship. That would be ruinous for a sport that is already struggling. A hike in tax on online casino betting would make more sense and could generate the same level of revenue for the government. There is zero skill in betting on online casinos — bookmakers take a fixed margin, set by themselves, on a product on which they literally cannot lose in the long run. A higher level of tax on online casinos would have the added bonus of discouraging bookmakers from promoting a product that causes the majority of problem gambling. The Gambling Commission has already inflicted damage to racing's finances. In 2023 it produced a white paper suggesting that bookmakers should 'check for financial vulnerability' if a gambler lost either £125 in a month or £500 in a year. Bookmakers saw the proposals and, keen to avoid being hit with large fines, started making intrusive checks on their customers' financial situations to the extent that many punters now use offshore gambling companies that provide no income for racing or the government purse. The latter point is not hearsay — betting on racing has dropped 16 per cent in three years and polling carried out by YouGov for the Betting and Gaming Council recently found that 14 per cent of punters admitted to gambling on a black-market site. The public, many of whom are only cognisant of the biggest events, will perhaps believe that racing is a wealthy sport that can well afford the hit. That is a misconception. Flat racing in Britain has been kept competitive at an international level by the largesse of wealthy foreign owners, primarily from the Middle East. Even so, it is struggling at the top end, with prize money that compares badly with other leading racing nations. Much of the best bloodstock that is bred in Britain has been heading overseas for some time and it is now approaching a tipping point where British breeders will not be able to compete with similar operations abroad. Prize money at the bottom level is so poor that a horse can win eight races in a year and still not cover its costs. The vast majority of trainers and jockeys are struggling to make a living. The effects of overtaxing racing can be seen from recent events in India. In 2017 the government introduced a goods and services tax on money bet on racing at a rate of 28 per cent. Punters paid the price and as their returns dwindled many turned to illegal bookmakers who paid no tax. Government revenues from racing more than halved in five years. British racing has been revered throughout the world for decades. Its history has maintained its place in the minds of leading owners but the point is fast approaching where that is no longer the case. If the sport is to continue to provide work for so many, and continue to attract inward investment to the UK, the government needs to rethink its proposed tax changes.
BBC News
29 minutes ago
- BBC News
Motorcyclist seriously injured on country lane near Ripon
A motorcyclist has been airlifted to hospital after suffering serious injuries in a crash with a 50-year-old man from Boroughbridge was riding near Ripon when his Kawasaki motorcycle collided with a Kia Niro on Sunday three occupants of the grey Kia were Yorkshire Police appealed for witnesses to the incident on a minor road between Pateley Bridge and Kirkby Malzeard at about 10:25 BST. Listen to highlights from North Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Plans to convert empty units into migrant housing in deprived Hampshire town are axed after furious local protests
Plans to convert empty units into migrant housing within a deprived town have been axed after thousands of locals protested against the proposals. The Home Office planned to relocate 35 asylum seekers to a new development in Waterlooville, Hampshire, in a bid to lower the numbers in hotels and 'disperse' migrants across UK towns and cities. But nearby residents argued the new arrivals could bring 'chaos' to their already 'dead' community hub following unrest at other migrant sites in recent weeks. Havant Borough Council has now said the Home Office confirmed the proposals will not go ahead. Suella Braverman, MP for Fareham and Waterlooville, previously dubbed the plans 'wholly inappropriate' and argued they would send the area's regeneration scheme 'backwards'. The Home Office previously said the blocks would be 'best suited for the use of couples, or single parents with young children. There is one single flat which would most likely be utilised for a single adult female'. On July 30, around two thousand people packed into Waterlooville precinct to protest against the plans. The area used to be a 'thriving' high street but lost many big name stores including Waitrose, Wilko, Game and Peacocks in recent years - with much of the footfall being 'taken' by a nearby retail park. Now, the 'barren' high street still houses a Wetherspoons but little else, and some residents have feared the lack of life in the town centre would lead to migrant men loitering aimlessly. The development was a newly converted block of 19 flats called Waterloo House. It is owned by Mountley Group whose Director, Hersch Schneck, also owns a migrant hotel in nearby Cosham. At the top of the market, the flats could fetch £250,000 each but falling house prices mean taking them off the market and entering into a deal with Clearsprings, a company which procures accommodation for asylum seekers on behalf of the Home Office, could have been a far more profitable move for Mountley Group. That's because the government could offer top of the market fees in order to get migrants into housing. As well as private rentals, the Home Office has been seeking medium-sized sites such as former student accommodation and old tower blocks to house migrants. The flats are located above a bric a brac store called The Junk Emporium which was once a Peacocks clothing store and before that, a Tesco. Havant Borough Council said in a statement: 'The Home Office considered the consultation response from HBC alongside other evidence and has decided not to purchase the property as the accommodation has been deemed unsuitable for asylum dispersal accommodation.'
