Examination of Witnesses (Questions 220
- 239)
WEDNESDAY 14 DECEMBER 2005
MR EDMUND
KING, MR
PAUL WATTERS,
MR CHRIS
WELSH AND
MR MIKE
BRACEY
Q220 Chairman: I was going to ask
Mr Bracey about that. Tell me about the specific problems for
breweries.
Mr Bracey: Well, the brewery problem
obviously very simply is health and safety. We must park outside
the entrance to the pub. We cannot park across the road and we
cannot park down the road because we cannot wheel kegs or push
kegs across a road or push them up the road. Do not forget, a
22-gallon keg weighs 123 kilograms and, therefore, we have got
to park adjacent to the actual entrance. Now, if, for example,
it is on this side of the road and there is a double-yellow line
with double blips and the parking is on the other side, we cannot
do it. We cannot do it. We have got to park adjacent or else who
is going to take responsibility for the accidents that will occur
when you are rolling the containers? It is a very serious problem
and it is costing my members at the present moment £700,000
a year.
Q221 Chairman: What have you done
about that?
Mr Bracey: Well, we have had a
very, very good session with Westminster. When I got involved
in this in April 2004, they issued my members with 872 PCNs in
April 2004. I started talking to Kevin Goad and other people within
Westminster Council and we worked very hard, both sides. The brewers
have looked at their delivery windows and they have looked at
where they can change deliveries from, say, 12 o'clock to eight
o'clock. The other thing you have got to bear in mind with the
brewers again is the noise. We cannot just go at six o'clock in
the morning and start delivering kegs because of again the noise
factor with neighbours around the area, so we have that factor
as well to consider, so really our delivery window becomes very
narrow and obviously it is a time when no one wants to see us
on the roads.
Q222 Chairman: Are you all suggesting
in effect that raising revenue through parking enforcement has
influenced local authority parking strategies?
Mr Watters: I think without doubt.
I think that when the new regime started, there was an emphasis
on ticket issue. Authorities were enforcing, for example, footway
parking bans in the middle of the night in some boroughs of London
because the tickets were there for the having, as it were, and
the fact that the cars were on pavements to let emergency vehicles
through was sensible in terms of local environment, but—
Q223 Chairman: Yes, but if you are
going to have a medical emergency, it does not always happen nine
to five, I am afraid.
Mr Watters: No, and I think that
when it first started, it hit people like a tonne of bricks and
I think it could have been introduced in a much more gradual way
and really have started to get the culture right in communities
about the parking rules.
Q224 Chairman: You mean how to love
your parking attendant?
Mr Watters: Well, it is hardly
that at the moment and I think it is the revenue that has lost
the argument with the public. That is the concern.
Q225 Chairman: Let's be quite clear
about it. That was immediate, but are you saying it is still the
same or are you saying it is better or are you saying there is
a modus vivendi which has been worked out between the motorists
and the authorities?
Mr Watters: I think it is getting
better, but it is from a very low base and an awful lot more needs
to be done.
Q226 Mr Scott: What in particular
would you like to see improved through statutory guidance?
Mr Welsh: We are very clear on
that. The Department for Transport at the moment is undertaking
a review of the decriminalisation with a view to spreading that
out right across the country. What we are asking the Department
to do is issue specific guidance to local authorities on how they
should apply the parking regime. Alongside that, we would also
ask them to ensure that local authorities undertake a review of
loading and unloading facilities so that industry is able to deliver
to the high street.
Q227 Mr Scott: Mr Bracey, what measures
would you like to help breweries and the logistics of vehicles
delivering? You mentioned further problems, but what would you
suggest to solve them?
Mr Bracey: I think, if I am pragmatic
about this and really honest, looking at an example we have had
with Westminster, the brewers themselves have worked very hard,
as I said, changed their delivery windows, but there is a lot
more to it. Obviously you have got to get people to open the pubs
up and again in the Soho area where they work until three o'clock
in the morning, they do not necessarily want to be up at six,
seven or eight o'clock even to let you in, they do not want to
come until 12 o'clock, so we have worked very hard at looking
at the actual windows there. We have worked very hard with Westminster
and they have changed parking restrictions for us to let us park
adjacent to the buildings, but I think, if I am pragmatic, there
is going to be a point where it is as far as anybody can go, as
far as we are concerned. I do not expect miracles; we will not
be able to park legally outside every single pub. One thing I
would ask though, which I am very concerned about, is that the
banks and buildings which are being converted now from what they
were to pubs, no one, when they are giving planning permission,
ever looks at whether you can park outside and I think that is
critical. I have been to some of the conversions in London and
dangerous is not the word for it. It is ludicrous and I honestly
believe that when planning permission is being given, parking
outside and delivery facilities should be on top of the list.
Q228 Chairman: Alternatively, don't
let anybody drink beer!
Mr Bracey: No, I think not. I
was not actually suggesting that. I think we keep London quite
well stocked up with beer for the tourists and the workers. Seriously,
some of the conversions, if you go out and see them, and I could
take you round and show you, they are frightening, and that is
a key point. There is going to be a point, and I do not know the
answer, to be honest with you, but we will have to park where
we should not park or we will not deliver and then you do get
the point you have just made, that pubs will not get beer.
Q229 Mr Scott: I do not think anyone
is suggesting we do not have beer in pubs! Mr Watters?
Mr Watters: I think the statutory
guidance is the best opportunity for ten years to actually restore
public confidence in the new decriminalised parking regime, but
I think it has got to promise things like targeting the system
at evaders because there is nothing worse than someone on a meter
getting clobbered and the person next to it not being clobbered,
yet they have got ten unpaid tickets. I think we have been pressing
for a decade in London to have a persistent offender database
so that ordinary motorists who may fall foul once see that the
hard offender is getting dealt with more harshly. Perhaps we even
need to look at sort of variable-offence penalty levels so that
it matches the crime, as it were. To be a few minutes over and
get a £100 PCN is quite tough. Under the old system, we did
have the excess charge and then a penalty, so there are advantages,
and I think the guidance will restore confidence, providing also
that the signs and lines match the restriction. There seems to
be very little checking before we have the ticket issued and often
the ticket does not stack up.
Mr King: I think the guidance
should also look at some of the back-office functions and not
just the front office and the attendants because when parking
complaints actually get through to the appeal process, the final
stage, 27% of those are uncontested by the local authority and
in some local authorities, for instance, in Birmingham 59% are
uncontested and where I live in St Albans, 67% are uncontested.
Now, that suggests that the local authority has allowed the complaint,
has not really looked at the complaint, has waited until the final
moment and then rejected it, but in the meantime the motorist
has had to go through that process. I think that is where motorists
feel that the whole system lets them down and I think if local
authorities were instructed to look at complaints in more detail
through the guidance at an earlier stage, I certainly think that
would help.
Q230 Mrs Ellman: Mr King, just following
that point up, who do you think should be responsible for motorists
getting better information about how to make representations?
Mr King: Well, I think information
is actually crucial throughout this whole subject and part of
the problem is the lack of clarity, the lack of plain English
from the signing all the way through to even what is on the back
of the parking ticket. Once the motorist gets to the final appeals
process, I actually think that works very well, but there are
a lot of cases that should not get there and I think the local
authority should make it much easier, that if someone has got
a complaint, and I did one on Radio Norfolk yesterday, a lady
tourist who had bought a pay-and-display ticket, put it on the
window, there was probably condensation on the window, it dropped
into the footwell of the car, she got a fine, she tried to chase
it up and in the end she paid the fine because she was worried
about it going further. Now, commonsense should be applied. She
had a ticket, she had purchased the ticket. If she has purchased
the ticket, she is not defrauding the system. There are too many
cases like that, so I think we need more clarity and simple guidelines.
Mr Welsh: That has been a very
serious issue for us both in London and throughout the rest of
the country and we have worked very, very closely with other industry
groups, like the Brewery Logistics Group, CBI and other business
interests, along with the principal London boroughs that we have
had the major problem with, firstly, to get a clear understanding
of the definition of the rules and, secondly, importantly to provide
best practice advice. We have now come to a common agreement with
the ALG and a number of the individual boroughs to produce a joint
voluntary code of best practice which will give appropriate advice
both to our members, but also to the parking attendants and the
contractors of the parking attendants and really the code is calling
for a harmonised review right across the capital. At the moment
each individual borough has a different definition, has a different
appeals process, that type of thing, and we want obviously to
reach a harmonised regime. We very much hope that that can be
adopted within the statutory guidelines which can then be spread
out across the country because obviously our members are operating
not only in the individual London boroughs, but right across the
country and it is very difficult to give advice to drivers and
delivery staff about the regimes unless we have that common approach.
Q231 Mrs Ellman: Should local authorities
have to produce annual information about the number of penalty
charge notices issued and what has happened to them?
Mr Watters: I think this is essential
really, an annual report with the number of penalties that were
issued and also sort of performance leagues in terms of improvements.
We hear of CCTV enforcement in some London streets resulting in
a huge number of PCNs and I actually question whether that is
too remote because it is actually doing nothing to change the
situation on the ground. Surely, if you do not want the offences
to take place, you have to adopt measures in that street to prevent
people from parking illegally, whether that means a person patrolling,
but to actually remotely issue PCNs does not really seem to be
giving the driver much information. I know the driver should not
park illegally, but it seems to be sort of a headcount rather
than—
Q232 Chairman: I just want to be
clear, Mr Watters. When I asked you earlier on, "Do you think
there is not enough enforcement? Do you think it should be more
strongly enforced?", I got the impression you were saying
no. Now you appear to be saying, "except in those areas where
people are parking illegally".
Mr Watters: Well, it is enforcement
and deterrence. I think it has to go hand in hand, the enforcement
and the deterrence.
Q233 Chairman: I just want to be
clear. You are saying that yes, there is a real case for better
and stronger enforcement?
Mr Watters: Yes, and I think in
our surveys we have some evidence that that is supported, but
it is a question of firm and fair and I think the fairness element
is not understood by the public at the moment.
Q234 Mrs Ellman: In the RAC Foundation's
evidence, you have said that Manchester City Council's parking
regime was "reasonable and proportional", but does that
mean that they are not enforcing it as heavily?
Mr King: No, not at all. What
it actually means is that they have changed their contracts and
the way they apply them. Initially the contracts had figures in
them of expected numbers of tickets and I think that led to abuses
of the system. There was perhaps over-zealous enforcement. What
they are now trying to do is look at general compliance, so looking
at one stretch of road and actually ascertaining how many illegal
parking acts there are there. You do not always have to give out
thousands of tickets to get good compliance. You can have attendants
there, you can have attendants talking, and also things like in
Manchester where they stopped wheel-clamping for people overstaying
on a meter, and that is sensible. What is the purpose of wheel-clamping
if it is overstaying? All you are doing is prolonging, if you
like, the crime. There is no purpose at all. You may wish to charge
a higher amount for the fine, but there is certainly no purpose.
I think Manchester realised that doing it the first way, they
were so inundated with complaints, as were other areas, like Westminster,
that they have looked at their contracts again. The British Parking
Association offers a model contract that is more on general compliance
and I think that is the way ahead and hopefully, and I know you
took evidence from Andy Vaughan from Manchester last week, but
hopefully other local authorities will look to the best practice
that is happening there. It is certainly a more harmonious regime.
They receive less revenue, but there is less conflict.
Q235 Mrs Ellman: Are there any other
local authorities that should be commended? What about the Freight
Transport Association—are there any authorities that you
know of?
Mr Welsh: Well, we do not actually
detect much of a problem throughout the rest of the UK. The over-zealous
enforcement and the real problem we have had is in London, but
we are conscious of the fact that decriminalisation is now going
to be rolled out across the country and we do not want any copycat-type
tactics where clearly many of the local authorities in London
seem to have been using the issuing of parking notices as a milch-cow,
to be perfectly honest, and that would clearly be unacceptable,
particularly as these businesses are really just carrying out
their daily business in trying to deliver to high street retail
premises and other business premises.
Q236 Mrs Ellman: Should local authorities
have penalties imposed on them for incorrectly issuing notices
or behaving unreasonably?
Mr Watters: From the letters I
receive, people spend an enormous amount of time sometimes protesting
their innocence and it probably does cost them quite a lot, but
there is no standard sort of compensation for the time and effort
they have put in. It is interesting to note that adjudicators
are now beginning actually to pay compensation more widely than
they used to and I think that is indicative perhaps of a problem
of people being messed around, as it were, by the paperwork. I
think the back office does have a lot to answer for in some of
the poor image that some authorities are portraying in their parking
service, so certainly compensation is something that should be
looked at, perhaps a standard fee equal to the cost of the penalty
if you win. Why not? Why should you not get as much as they are
threatening to take from you if they are wrong?
Q237 Mrs Ellman: So penalties and
compensation?
Mr Watters: Or just compensation.
Mr Welsh: I think we would really
just require a harmonised and proper appeals procedure for dealing
with this because at the moment many appealers on the industry
side are required to submit their appeals within a very tight
window of 14 days and often they have not got all the paperwork
to be able to do that properly, whereas in order to get a response
from the boroughs, it can be months and months before they actually
get any response. Therefore, in terms of the service that is being
provided here, we would like to see a statutory guidance giving
good indications to local authorities that they must respond within
a certain period, whether it be 21 days or 28 days, because if
we do not have that, then it is a disincentive for a business
that legitimately feels they have been unfairly issued with a
penalty notice actually to do anything about it and it is not
worth appealing because of the process.
Q238 Mrs Ellman: What about a notice
naming and shaming authorities who take too long to deal with
representations or act wrongly in too many cases?
Mr Welsh: I think that what we
would like, and it hinges on one of the other questions which
was asked earlier, is some sort of service-level agreement with
the boroughs where certain standards are set and once you have
got that service-level agreement, you can compare one borough
against another or one authority against another in terms of how
it deals with this.
Mr Watters: I think the Transport
Research Laboratory was looking at a way of benchmarking authorities
because, by using the adjudicator statistics, it gives you a very
limited picture of how authorities are actually performing because
only a very small percentage of appeals go to the official adjudicator
and the majority of representations are made at the early stage
to the council and the outcomes of those are very rarely known,
so we do not get the full picture from the national adjudicators.
Q239 Mrs Ellman: What more should
be done to make sure that local authorities inform people adequately
about the procedures for representation? I mentioned this earlier
and I would like to know.
Mr Watters: I think they should
produce the annual report and I think they should show how they
are achieving better compliance.
| 
