Committee and Date Item Paper

Joint Parking Advisory Group

24 July 2008
6 B
4:30 p.m. Public

Annual Report 2007 \ 2008

Responsible Officer Sandy Harper

e-mail: sandy.harper@shrewsbury.gov.uk Tel: (01743)

281124

Summary
This report provides a summary of the operational performance for the year
April 2007 to March 2008 of the Decriminalised Parking Enforcement (which
from 31 March 2008 is called Civil Parking Enforcement).

Recommendations

A. That Joint Parking Advisory Group notes the contents of this report.

REPORT

Background

1.0 Shropshire County Council applied for powers to operate Decriminalised Parking
Enforcement (DPE) in 2006. This resulted in a change in responsibility from the
Police to the Local Authority for enforcing parking regulations across the County.
A partnership (ParkRight) was formed to include the other districts and boroughs
in the county to include the enforcement of their off-street car parks to achieve a
unified parking enforcement scheme county wide. DPE was introduced to
support the Governments Integrated Transport Strategy; Shropshire County
Council’s Local Transport Plan and in response to the reduced Traffic Warden
Service (then operated by West Mercia Police).

1.1 The Customer Charter was agreed by the Joint Parking Advisory Group in
September 2006 and sets out the values which ParkRight have adopted. Its
objectives have been to :

• Improve traffic management and traffic flows

• Reduce traffic congestion and aid public transport
• Reduce the risk of road accidents and injuries
• Improve the operation and efficiency of parking schemes
• Improve the local economy
• Improve access to shops, services and businesses
• Reduce the impact of vehicles in residential areas.
Joint Parking Advisory Group

2. Parking Enforcement

2.1 ParkRight commenced operations on 27 November 2006. A 2 year Agency

Agreement was drawn up between each of the partner authorities and Shrewsbury &
Atcham Borough Council.

2.2 Initial staff levels were set out in a Business Plan, which was agreed by all
partner authorities, and highlighted the need for 28 Parking Attendants, which were
recruited in a phased approach that was fully achieved in November 2007.

2.3 The business plan also identified the need for 6 back office staff to administer the
process appeals process as required by the Road Traffic Act, 1991, and the
guidance issued by the Department for Transport. This again had been agreed by all
the partner authorities.

2.4 The hours of patrolling have remained flexible to suit the local requirements; but
are usually between 8am and 8pm Monday to Saturday, with reduced hours on
Sundays.

2.5 The hours of contact for the Back Office staff, through the Shrewsbury and
Atcham Borough Council’s Customer Services are Monday to Thursday 8.30am to
5pm and 8.30am to 4pm on Friday. Telephone enquiries are available to be
answered up to 7pm Monday to Thursday and 4.30pm on Friday.

Penalty Charge Notices

3.1 ParkRight deals with the appeal process up to post-Notice to Owner stage and to
ensure fairness the Back Office team is divided between the pre-Notice to Owner
team, who consider informal challenges, and the post-Notice to Owner team, who
deal with formal appeals and appeals that go to adjudication. This is inline with the
recommendations of the Department for Transport.

3.1 The period 2007/2008 is the first full year of figures available for the service.

3.2 There have been 29,542 Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) issued, including 852
warning notices (2.9% of all the notices)) during the period. The overall number
of PCNs is less than anticipated the 38,610 in the business case. Of the Penalty
Charge Notices issued;
• 75.93% have been paid,
• 11.56% have been cancelled for various reasons
• 12.51% are still in processing at period end.
This is slightly better than the assumptions in the business case, which assumed
25% would not be paid at all.

3.3 Payment received ratios are;

• within 14 days 71.77%.
• within 28 days 8.19%

Contact: Sandy Harper on (01743) 281000 2

Joint Parking Advisory Group

• within 56 days 11.76%

• over 56 days 8.27%
These are slightly worse than anticipated in the business case which assumed
75% would be paid at the discount rate within 14 days.

3.4 In the period there were;

• 5,999 (20.9% of all penalty charge notices) pre-Notice to Owner (NTO)
informal challenges received.
• 656 (2.3% of all penalty charge notices) were allowed, these are first
stage informal appeals.

3.5 There were 155 appeals (0.5% of all penalty charge notices) registered with the
National Parking Adjudication Service during the period. Of which;
• 34 (0.12% of all penalty charge notices and 21.94% of appeals) were
allowed, 4 of these were hire companies
• 43 were not contested or withdrawn (27.74% of appeals)
• 60 were dismissed by the adjudicator (38.71% of appeals)
• 3 (1.94% of appeals) were resolved by consent.
• 15 (9.67% of appeals) are still awaiting a decision.

3.6 The year from April 2007 was one of “learning the job” and dealing with the
problems and issues experienced by motorists who had not experienced parking
enforcement in their area prior to ParkRight starting.

3.7 The Notice Processing Office and Shrewsbury and Atcham Customer Services
staff have coped extremely well with the pressure of telephone calls and written
correspondence that has now eased off to a more manageable level although
the progression of cases to bailiff stage has increased the amount of work
dealing with Statutory Declarations and the process of second NTO’s and
appeals to the adjudication service resulting from this.

3.8 The Penalty Charge management software has worked well and we
have received excellent support from the Chipside project officer. In particular
the changeover from the 1991 Act to the 2004 Traffic Management Act
provisions on the 30th March 2008 which involved the whole country in a large
amount of work in a very short time.

3.9 The Parking Attendants handheld ticketing machines continue to perform well.

3.10 The majority of complaints received by ParkRight during the period referred to
waivers, residents parking and the increased expectation of the public about
the extent of the DPE powers. These are very similar to those received in the
first part year of operation.

3.11 Implementation of the service and the provision of the additional Parking
Attendants has been successful, with only 2 leaving the job within a couple of
weeks of starting.

3.12 In general the majority of the ordinary motoring public have accepted the

Contact: Sandy Harper on (01743) 281000 3

Joint Parking Advisory Group

necessity for enforcement, and some very positive feedback has been received
in complimentary letters in respect of freeing-up of loading bays, disabled
parking areas, and a greater ease in finding a legal on-street parking place
close to where they want to be. Not unexpectedly the residents of the County
have shown a greater compliance with the regulations than was predicted in
the feasibility study.

Staff

4.1 In the light of experience in operating the service it has been necessary
to consider an amendment to the staffing plan for the NPO. Experience has
shown that it has been effective to allow the first stage appeals to be dealt with
by the Admin Officers, with subsequent appeals being moved forward to the
Appeals Officers. Additionally we have, in discussion with the Customer
Services Manager been using the Customer Services Team at the Guildhall,
Shrewsbury to deal with incoming calls, dealing as far as possible with
customer enquiries, and passing on to ParkRight only those specific queries
that the Customer Services Team cannot deal with. This has provided to be of
benefit both to ParkRight, Customer Services and to the customer, with calls
being answered more quickly. The changes were cost neutral.

Income and Costs

5.1 A total income of £835,000 was received from PCN’s in the reporting period.

5.2 A summary of the costs is provided below. These were less than the business
plan figure of £ 966,800

2007/08 Gross Expenditure

Notice Enforcement Total

Processing
Office
£000 £000 £000
Salaries 169 510 679
Other running costs
Premises costs 28 - 28
Equipment 16 12 28
Printing and stationary 22 - 22
MPAS/TEC registration 40 - 40
fees
Postages and telephones 18 - 18
IT maintenance and 9 - 9
software
Transport - 32 32
SABC central charges 23 10 33
Gross expenditure 325 564 889

Contact: Sandy Harper on (01743) 281000 4

Joint Parking Advisory Group

The Future

6.1. An end of contract review of the ParkRight service is being carried out by
Shropshire County Council and Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council which
will be reported separately.

List of Background Papers (This MUST be completed for all reports, but does
not include items containing exempt or confidential information)
Report on ParkRight performance provided to the 14 January 2008 JPAG.
Human Rights Act Appraisal
CPE is likely to lead to an increased accessibility and enforcement in Shropshire.
This may have some implications for the Human Rights Act 1998. In particular in
relation Article 1 of the first Protocol and Articles 8 and 14 of the Convention. These
provide as follows:

d) Article 1 – “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment

of his possessions. No-one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the
public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the
general principles of international law. The preceding provisions shall not,
however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it
deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the
general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or
penalties.”

e) Article 8 – “Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his
home and his correspondence. There should be no interference by a public
authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with
the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national
security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the
prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for
the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

f) Article 14 – “The enjoyment of the rights and freedom set forth in this
Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as
sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or
social origin, associations with a national minority, property, birth or other
status.”

6. The Human Rights Act effectively introduces a statutory obligation on public

authorities such as the County Council to act consistently with the Convention
on rights. At the same time, it needs to be appreciated that the rights set out
above are conditional rather than absolute, and that individual rights can be
justifiably interfered with if this is in the interests of the public generally. In
deciding whether or not private rights can be justifiably interfered with on the
basis of public interests, it is necessary to reach a fair balance between
private / personal rights and the consequences for the wider public of a Traffic
Regulation Order being enforced. The ‘fair balance’ test is really another way

Contact: Sandy Harper on (01743) 281000 5

Joint Parking Advisory Group

of recognising that decisions which a public authority takes have to be

proportionate.

8. The County Council as a Public Authority has to balance the general needs of
the community to have highways unimpeded by illegally parked vehicles
against the general needs of the community and the protection of the rights of
the individual.

Environmental Appraisal

There is potential positive environmental impacts from the reduction in the

congestion and discouraging illegal and inconsiderate parking by enforcement of
traffic regulation orders..

Risk Management Appraisal

Community / Consultations Appraisal

Chair of Joint Parking Advisory Group

Cllr John Everall

Local Member
All

Appendices

Contact: Sandy Harper on (01743) 281000 6