New government code of practice aims to stop unfair parking charges

The government has launched a consultation on a new code to stop people being “unfairly penalised” by private car park operators.

It follows concerns raised by drivers including Rosey Hudson, who was asked to pay £1,906 for taking more than five minutes to pay in a car park in Derby.

The government said the new Private Parking Code of Practice “aims to create a fairer, more transparent private parking system”.

The British Parking Association, one of two trade associations that oversees the industry, has said it will work closely with the government throughout the consultation.

Local growth minister and Nottingham North and Kimberley MP Alex Norris said: “From shopping on your local high street to visiting a loved one in hospital, parking is part of everyday life. But too many people are being unfairly penalised.

“That’s why our code will tackle misleading tactics and confusing processes, bringing vital oversight and transparency to raise standards across the board.”

The previous government published a code of practice in February 2022 and it was due to come into effect by the end of 2023.

However, it was withdrawn following legal challenges launched by several parking firms.

This meant the private parking sector has been left to regulate itself, through two accredited trade associations called the British Parking Association (BPA) and International Parking Community (IPC).

Car park operators, which are members of these associations, can obtain drivers’ names and addresses from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) and issue parking charge notices (PCNs) for allegedly breaching terms and conditions.

This has led to drivers being asked to pay hundreds and sometimes thousands of pounds for infringements such as taking too long to pay, or keying in their vehicle registration plates incorrectly.

The government said its new measures would prevent charges caused by issues such as payment machine errors, accidental typos, or poor mobile signal.

However, the AA believes the government’s proposals do not go far enough.

Jack Cousens, head of roads policy, said: “This long-awaited consultation will not please drivers and suggests that government is bending the knee to the private parking industry.”

His concerns include a £100 cap on parking charges, which is higher than the £50 previously proposed.

“We urge all drivers to complete the consultation and submit their views and experiences when dealing with private parking firms,” he said.

“If government can understand the depth of contempt drivers hold against some of these shark-like businesses, maybe it will do more to help innocent drivers.”

Statistics published by the DVLA suggest private car park operators are issuing more PCNs than ever before.

They paid the DVLA for 12.8 million keeper details in the last financial year, which is a 673% increase since 2012.

“While this partly reflects more parking spaces, the current system lacks independent oversight and sufficient transparency,” the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said.

“At present, operators can avoid sanctions for poor practice, leaving motorists vulnerable to unfair or incorrect charges. The new compliance framework will ensure accountability.”

Under the proposals, operators that breach the code may stop being able to get drivers’ details from the DVLA.

The eight-week consultation is due to close on 5 September and people can give their views online.

The BPA said it would work closely with the government throughout the consultation, but said the new code must allow for “proper enforcement”.

“Without proper enforcement, parking quickly becomes a free-for-all, with some people taking advantage at the expense of others,” it said in a statement.

“When spaces are misused, it’s often at the expense of those who need them most, such as disabled people, parents with young children and local residents.

“We believe parking systems must strike a balance: they should deter selfish and anti-social behaviour, but they must also be fair, proportionate, and transparent.”