There we go again, never let a good story be ruined by the facts.
Parking fines are neither new, stealth or a tax.
I don't think anyone would disagree with the principle that it is in all road users' interest that parking restrictions and other flow arrangements are being controlled, and enforced. After all, without such a system any moron could park their car in front of your drive or my garage exit, or on bus stops etc. It would be a free for all and that is really not in our own interest as fellow road users on public roads.
However, the
new Act is a
recognition that until now, the existing system has been
unfair (MPs called it a "mess"), has elements of a postcode lottery, and has led to
abuse.
Many aspects of the new Act are intended to address those problems. For example, the new Act explicitly
prohibits councils from setting
targets for number of tickers, or income to be raised, etc. Not all councils in England had these, but there have been (rightfully so) complaints about those areas where they were used and the Act now ensures that this is no longer allowed. That can only be good for motorists.
Read the Act carefully, and you'll see that in many respects motorists rights are actually
reinforced. For example, the willy-nilly clamping of vehicles that has been so abused by private companies as a licence to print money, and that has so infuriated motorists, is no longer allowed. Only persistent offenders can from now on be immobilised.
In the past, there was
no difference between offences that actually did not result in immediate disenfranchisement or blocking of traffic (such as overstaying) compared to for example blocking a busy bus lane or parking on a red route. So, the Act introduces two levels of fines, with the lower one (for the lesser offences) outside the London area
lower than they currently are and with
more time to pay. That seems a lot fairer to me. Also, because the fines are now set nationally, councils can no longer impose fines (say for yellow line offences) that are higher than for instance shoplifting - thus contributing to a sense of unfairness. Again, that seems to me a positive thing. And it means that people will know what to expect, rather than find themselves subject to local randomness.
Also of benefit to motorists is that adjudicators can now instruct councils to address shortcomings in their procedures. In the past, when you appealed because the signage was not compliant with the rules, or there was some other problem, your penalty would be cancelled, but the adjudicator could not actually force the council to rectify the incorrect procedure, thus leaving the door open for continued abuse. From now on, the adjudicator will actually be able to force councils to do something about it.
The evidence base has also been cleaned up. Yes, they can now fine you when you drive off (thus closing a loophole - loopholes are unfair to others in that they mean that some people who actually committed the same offence get off without penalty while others who weren't quick or knowledgeable enough to use the loophole get to cough up, that is clearly not a "same justice for all" situation), but they cannot just randomly fine everyone. So, no, they
cannot just note down registration numbers of vehicles passing by and sending them fines. They have to note down the tax disc number and date and offer suitable evidence.
So, in many respects the Act is a good thing in that it recognises that the past system was unfair and unjust, and attempts to do something about that.
However,
the proof is in the pudding and now we will have to see whether or not the Act will succeed in addressing the problems. Many parts of the Act look like offering an improvement, although
there remain potential problems, for example around the independence of adjudicator. If so, it will need further amendment in the future.
Is the new Act perfect? Certainly not. Is it a step in the right direction? Definitely. Does it introduce a "new stealth tax"? Absolutely not.
It's always best to discuss the
facts, not the tabloid headlines that bear little relation to the real world.
