RoadTransport.com logo
You are in:  News>Industry News

PCN fee tiers penalise operators

Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:56

London boroughs have collected £46.8m extra in parking fines under the new two-tiered parking system than they would have done under the old flat-fee system, the Brewery Logistics Group (BLG) has calculated.

Introduced across London in July 2007, the differential parking system sets some fines at £80, while the more serious offences result in a £120 fine.

With the majority of Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) received by operators falling into the higher level, the two-tier system has increased most operators' PCN bills by 20%.

BLG director Mike Bracey tells MT: "Although the number of PCNs issued between 1 April 2008 and 31 March 2009 fell 11% to 4,689,309, the cost of PCNs has increased tremendously. Indeed, the new two-tier system is costing 10.9% more than if the old system was still in operation.

"This is an additional cost for distribution companies, some of which will inevitably be passed onto businesses, and ultimately, the paying public."

As the new system was introduced as part of the revised Traffic Management Act (TMA), it would be a big undertaking to get it changed. Bracey, however, has written to Louise Ellman, chair of the Transport Select Committee, to request a meeting to discuss the disparities of the new system.

"What I'd like is a three-tiered system that has a middle fee set at £100. This would bring CV operators back to the level they were at before the new system was introduced."

Natalie Chapman, FTA regional policy manager, London, South East & East of England, adds: "On the face of it, differential parking makes sense - you should pay more if you're committing a more serious offence.

"However, when you look at which parking contravention codes are in the higher tier, it has affected CV operators quite harshly."

With the two-tier system now rolled-out nationally, Chapman says that any changes would have to be put to the DfT.

"The TMA has been enforced for 18 months, so it's probably timely to review it. We would look to speak to the DfT about it in conjunction with a number of other issues."

Email a friend

Related Articles

Our Publications

Subscribe to CMSubscribe to MT