Sir, There is minimal regulation of private car parks and clamping in this country and the British Parking Association (BPA) wants to see better regulation to protect the consumer against unfair or disproportionate practices (“Rogue clampers to help set the code on fair parking”, April 30). This is why we established a scheme, members of which must comply with a code of practice that provides such protection. Last week we launched for consultation a revised and more robust code, which is available to view and comment on at www.britishparking.co.uk.

Without our self-regulation of private car parks, there would be none. The consumer would undoubtedly be worse off. In running such a scheme, we hope to work with companies to improve their practices. Indeed, this is what we hope to achieve with Parking Control Management, the company mentioned in the article. PCM has a deadline (which has not yet been reached) to respond to the complaints that have been passed to us, but it seems that the AA (who made the complaint) did not feel able to wait to hear the outcome.

Ben Webster is right that we have established a board to hold the scheme to account and members of the scheme will be members of the board. He omits to mention that for the first time, representatives of motoring and consumer groups — such as the RAC Foundation — will also be on that board to ensure that what is delivered is improved still further. Curiously, the AA, which commented in your article, declined to join the board, which would have given it the opportunity to hold scheme members to direct account.

I do not say that the current situation is perfect; far from it. There is a long way to go in developing our scheme to provide better and fairer parking enforcement, including the establishment of an independent appeals service. What we need is a consensus in support of that principle.

Patrick Troy

Chief Executive

British Parking Association

Explore Letters

• Feedback