Parking Charges Consultation

[AylwardS]

Parking Penalty Charges are being consulted on. Charges were last reviewed in 2010 and the number of penalty charges issued have increased so a reason for the consultation is it may no longer be the deterrent it was.

The consultation is on the charges that apply when a penalty is issued not actual penalties. An increase in anything is not going to be welcome at this time but generally you can avoid a penalty charge by not doing whatever attracts one and they are needed. I can’t believe anyone has driven or walked in London and not thought “that car shouldn’t be doing that”.

If you’d like to respond the consultation runs until 23 October and can be found at

https://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/LondonParkingChargesConsultation

[malumbu]

There's a general point on consistency and fairness.  The two cars and a delivery BM vehicle this morning on the zig zags by the Turkish Supermarket on Forest Hill Road are highly unlikely to get a penalty notice.  Yes I understand that this is not strictly a parking offence as in terms of controlled/paid parking but it pees me off more than someone parking longer than they paid for.  Oh dear I am getting on my entitled drivers hobby horse so will shut up.

[Spartacus]

55 minutes ago, AylwardS said:

Parking Penalty Charges are being consulted on. Charges were last reviewed in 2010 and the number of penalty charges issued have increased so a reason for the consultation is it may no longer be the deterrent it once was.

An alternative theory is that restricted parking spaces (roll out of CPZ's for example) explains the increase in penalty charges. 

It feels like the council rewarding themselves with more income because they have made it harder to park without getting a charge. 

[march46]

Thank-you for sharing @AylwardS. With so much anti-social & dangerous parking in Dulwich it is good news.
 

“The number of people receiving penalty charges has increased by 50% over the last 12 years and we are concerned that the current penalty levels are not set high enough to act as a deterrent.” 

[first mate]

@march46

To get the facts straight, this is not just about parking penalties but traffic enforcement as well as parking. In the last 12 years we have seen a rise in cameras, in some cases with poor signage, and wholesale traffic circulation redesign. It is not therefore surprising there has been a rise in penalties. But, the real reason for the desired rise is contained in the text below

"The impact of inflation on penalty levels has meant that there has been a reduction in the real value of penalty charges over time."

This is a nonsense argument. We are in a cost of living crisis and people continue to use their cars because very often they need to. Fines are higher because the system is designed to elicit fines.

I do wonder if the real reason, implicit in the bolded text, is that Southwark had projections on what they could rake in and this has not been met, despite roads being in surplus.

 

Full Text

"Parking, bus lane and moving traffic penalty charges have not been reviewed since 2010 and many of the charges have not changed since 2007.

The number of people receiving penalty charges has increased by 50% over the last 12 years and we are concerned that the current penalty levels are not set high enough to act as a deterrent.

The impact of inflation on penalty levels has meant that there has been a reduction in the real value of penalty charges over time.

Local government, the Mayor and central government share the same aims: to increase active travel, improve road safety and reduce emissions (both air quality and carbon).

Effective management of parking and traffic movement can contribute towards this.

Transport for London has similar responsibilities to London boroughs for setting charges on their own roads (Red Routes). In 2021, Transport for London increased parking, bus lane and moving traffic penalty charges on the roads they manage from £130 to £160.

Many parking, bus lane and moving traffic contraventions are dangerous and have impacts on the safety of other road users, how they travel and access public transport services in London.

[Rockets]

25 minutes ago, first mate said:

"The impact of inflation on penalty levels has meant that there has been a reduction in the real value of penalty charges over time."

But this is a council that does nothing more than to bleat on about the cost of living crisis and inflationary pressures on the money in people's pockets and then come up with this. They are such hypocrites. 

I think it only fair that they publish where that 50% increase has come from and I bet you it is from poorly sign posted LTN cameras.

 

But always remember, anything this council does in relation to cars is because they think that if you own one you must be super rich and they are trying to rebalance the social injustice of that!

[malumbu]

Hope you will all be responding to the consultation.  The point on cost of living and continued car use is not a good one as if we looked at whole life motoring costs many of us would switch to alternative modes walking/cycling/public transport/Uber/car clubs/car hire/lifts.  The latter four scupper this whole idea of I need a car for convenience.  For many in urban area car ownership is a habit, or worse still a status symbol, rather than a necessity.

Ps love the bloke on question time from Somerset last week when they were talking about HS2 cancellation and new regional rail projects.  He forgot the wonderful links that Brunel introduced with fast connections between the capital, Taunton, Yeovil, Bridgewater, Castle Cary and the like.

Thanks to the usual suspects for extending this discussion to unnecessary motoring and entitled motorists.  Not sure on the continued criticism of the local authority. Surely there must be something you like about Southwark? 

Edited October 8, 2023 by malumbu

[first mate]

Again, just your view Malumbu. You continue with the idea that people drive cars because they are lazy, rather like the urban myth peddled some time ago that local car drivers were all popping out in the motor just to get a latte. Most of us knew this was not true and simply made up to push the anti car/pro cycling agenda.

There is the odd person that is indeed lazy, however most people drive because they cannot effectively manage their family, work and day without the use of a motorised vehicle, at least some of the time- and no car shares and hire cars are not t(e great solution you make them out to be. Seriously, if it was really as simple and easy as you make out, people would be selling cars in their droves.

You often refer to human behaviour as a motivator and maintenance factor in car ownership but your insistence that it is all about habit and laziness is just overly simplistic and black and white. 

[Chick]

On 08/10/2023 at 10:31, malumbu said:

Hope you will all be responding to the consultation.  The point on cost of living and continued car use is not a good one as if we looked at whole life motoring costs many of us would switch to alternative modes walking/cycling/public transport/Uber/car clubs/car hire/lifts.  The latter four scupper this whole idea of I need a car for convenience.  For many in urban area car ownership is a habit, or worse still a status symbol, rather than a necessity.

Ps love the bloke on question time from Somerset last week when they were talking about HS2 cancellation and new regional rail projects.  He forgot the wonderful links that Brunel introduced with fast connections between the capital, Taunton, Yeovil, Bridgewater, Castle Cary and the like.

Thanks to the usual suspects for extending this discussion to unnecessary motoring and entitled motorists.  Not sure on the continued criticism of the local authority. Surely there must be something you like about Southwark? 

No

[malumbu]

No what?  No I don't want to debate the issue on a chat forum?  

[alice]

No, I suppose to the only question you asked. 

[Chick]

Pretty pissed off with Southwark clobbering motorist's.  Now Khan wants to charge for using the Blackwall tunnel which we have paid for through taxes.

[CPR Dave]

I genuinely don't understand how people are still surprised that the Labour Party want to tax and spend.

It's all they've ever done.

 

[malumbu]

We have a massive tax burden under this government, why not pick on them?  Don't have a lot of sympathy for motorists, even if I am one myself.

Just watching the news and the extreme weather in Scotland.  Ok so a reduction in driving in London isn't going to address climate change on its own.  But London, Britain and world wake up, we've got to change are attitude to travel, energy, agriculture etc

[Pro uno builders]

On 08/10/2023 at 10:31, malumbu said:

Hope you will all be responding to the consultation.  The point on cost of living and continued car use is not a good one as if we looked at whole life motoring costs many of us would switch to alternative modes walking/cycling/public transport/Uber/car clubs/car hire/lifts.  The latter four scupper this whole idea of I need a car for convenience.  For many in urban area car ownership is a habit, or worse still a status symbol, rather than a necessity.

Ps love the bloke on question time from Somerset last week when they were talking about HS2 cancellation and new regional rail projects.  He forgot the wonderful links that Brunel introduced with fast connections between the capital, Taunton, Yeovil, Bridgewater, Castle Cary and the like.

Thanks to the usual suspects for extending this discussion to unnecessary motoring and entitled motorists.  Not sure on the continued criticism of the local authority. Surely there must be something you like about Southwark? 

Having a car is a status ?!

Let's jump on horses or walk everywhere to make a point 

Is having Internet a status 

Having electricity a status 

Buying a house maybe is a status ?

Having the latest iPhone or most expensive Samsung?

Or Having 3 cars 

Or being driven in a royce rolce

Or having 10 houses 

Or a Yacht 

Maybe a helicopter or a private jet ...

which one of the above means Maintaining status 

Car is something that have been invented to speed up the journey from a to b without the need to use public transport or power of feet ...

It's not a status

Maintaining status or claiming up the ladder of life is what life is about not all of us want or can cycle in the rain or be in overcrowded buses full of screaming kids...

You're full of poo 

All this shit is nothing but corruption on the upper levels of government 

All this is nothing but "Paid for" decisions to let tfl , uber, bike and scooter hire and more to generate income in return for envelopes full of cash delivered to bank accounts opened for MPs PMs under aliases in tax heavens ... 

Let the rich get richer and poor stay poor or be poorer ...

That's not a status 

That's the statement 

Edited October 23, 2023 by Pro uno builders

[malumbu]

Wrote this on Friday, thought I'd posted it. But obs still relevant. 

Just watching the news and the extreme weather in Scotland.  Ok so a reduction in driving in London isn't going to address climate change on its own.  But London, Britain and world wake up, we've got to change are attitude to travel, energy, agriculture etc

As for the ranty post above - that's not a snipe but a factual comment.  Not all of us need a car.  Many more could manage without a car or use it less.  Not sure of your personal situation.  You are welcome to your views but don't know how you equate what I say with the rich will get richer.  Obviously misjudged my political beliefs.  You've brightened up the debate - that's a compliment not a sarky or patronising comment.

[first mate]

And again, the fact that people are not giving up their cars in the numbers expected/hoped for, despite this council piling the penalties and pressures high is telling us something. It is not the black and white simple solution you make it out to be.