Free Traffic Legal Advice

An apartment I let has a worsening issue with fly parking - ironically the nearby GP surgery and Dentist have introduced parking controls so guess where the displaced people are parking!

The management company are proposing to use Creative Parking, which from some research on 'another' site seem to have morphed a couple of times and and associated with CEL?

I've been 'consulted' - are there any PPCs with even a modicum of morality which someone here would be brave enough to suggest please?

Not a PPC expert by any means and my view that good PPCs are hens teeth is not helpful.
Manual operation not ANPR?
But on the contract side, not only that landlord can get charges cancelled but also the whole contract should it become untenable.
I've seen a few anecdotal stories of places like pubs employing PPCs and being stuck with them due to costly cancellation clauses

It might come at an up-front cost

Probably why the management company aren't considering it

Quote from: cp8759 on October 20, 2023, 05:51:17 pm

It might come at an up-front cost

Probably why the management company aren't considering it

What's wrong with parking bollards, such as https://www.barriersdirect.co.uk/bollards-c1022/parking-bollards-c1223 ?

They are 100% effective at deterring fly-parking, no litigation follows from their use, nobody gets ripped off. Of course there's also no private company that can make ongoing profits either.

If the spaces are not assigned, you just need to get a set with a universal key that can be given to all residents. It might come at an up-front cost, but in the grand scheme of things it's quite modest (many councils charge more for an annual permit) and it's a one-off, and definitely the more moral solution IMO.

I wondered the same, but with numerous visitors, carers, cleaners, deliveries etc etc it would be impossible to manage the key/access arrangements.

The issue doesn't lend itself to a simple answer.

As you've found out, effective parking controls are essential while you have selfish, idle and cheapskate drivers who have no regard for other people's property and the direct, and often indirect, effects on others of their actions. Ironically, the issue of paying for parking has a corollary: what are people prepared to pay for protecting their parking rights?

So a necessary 'evil'?

DWMB2 put it: but the contents of the contract between the landowner and the PPC is probably more important than which PPC it is. We've seen plenty of cases on here and PePiPoo where the tail was wagging the dog, with the landowner unable to get charges cancelled, for example. In any consultation response, you might be keen to recommend that any contracts they sign give them good leeway to get charges cancelled.

So..:
What would be the parameters of the contract e.g. the PPC is paid by the residents to protect their interests or you expect them to do this FOC etc? How many residents? Over what 'customer' base would direct contract costs effectively be charged? IMO, cancelling parking charges is not your first consideration. We're all expectancy theorists(ETs) at heart so, would each resident be prepared to pay £X per year to ensure their rights are protected or run with the risk that they could pay less but with the possibility that their forgetfulness might cost them £Y in parking charges?

Talking of which, the displaced drivers are also ETs, so you would have to think about what level of parking charge would deter? And not just the charge, it's the likelihood of receiving a charge which also feeds into the ET matrix. And what is the problem e.g. long or short-term (commuter parking or parking for shops) because this as much as anything else sets the scene.

And you could ask the other sites why they chose who they did, why and problems encountered.

So, the issue isn't defined by 'least worst PPC'.

To be fair you don't actually need a PPC at all. If someone is trespassing on your land, a couple of photos, form V888 and a £2.50 fee and DVLA will give you the keeper's details.

None are currently marked. There's 64 apartments, mostly single occupancy - but as it's 55 years of age minimum car ownership is lower than 'average'. Spaces at a guess are about 40. Until the GP/Dentist introduced controls there wasn't really an issue so c40 was 'about right'. The overspill from the 'neighbours' has resulted in 15 on average from elsewhere with some blocking the access road which - again due to age - is used by patient transport and ambulances more often than one would ordinarily expect.

I would suggest a PPC could cause quite a few issues with residents making mistakes and then being potentially taken to court. A few posts and padlocks would avoid any issues of this sort.

The issue of visitors is not really an issue, even on a loading restriction you're allowed to stop while you go and get a key or open a barrier to access private property.

.......
I would suggest a PPC could cause quite a few issues with residents making mistakes and then being potentially taken to court. A few posts and padlocks would avoid any issues of this sort.

The issue of visitors is not really an issue, even on a loading restriction you're allowed to stop while you go and get a key or open a barrier to access private property.

I'm favouring this option.
Keys to residents and carers/family would be an option
Or an auto barrier with key code and intercom.... more expensive but still more resident friendly then a PPC.

Or as Andy says, a self ticketing system and a few signs??