Parking debt: Protecting the vulnerable by elevating standards

Rohan Krishnarao discusses how debt collection agencies and law firms should operate under the new private parking code of practice

The British Parking Association (BPA) and the International Parking Community have published the Private Parking Sector Single Sector Code of Practice. This represents a proactive and modern desire on the part of the private parking industry to drive forward positive behaviours and provide balance to the public narrative.

Will Hurley, IPC chief executive officer, says: “This new code will create positive change across the UK, enhancing the protection of the most vulnerable in society, whilst creating consistency and clarity for motorists and continuing to elevate standards across the sector.”

(My emphasis)

By now all BPA and IPC operators in this sector will be aware, at least in principle, of their updated obligations. From clearer parameters for appeal, to grace periods and for signage, the Code of Practice is a comprehensive, 55-page guide to the future conduct of private parking.

But what does this mean for the recovery and collection of those unpaid parking charges? Andrew Pester, BPA chief executive, said the aim was for “fairer and more consistent parking standards for motorists [and a] push for a positive outcome for all”.

The Code of Practice deals with the recovery of parking charges in only one single page (page 24). As one might expect, the guidance is therefore fairly limited, probably because it is expected that parking operators and their agents (debt collection agencies – DCAs – and law firms) will act appropriately in accordance with the whole of the Code of Practice.

A new landscape? Collecting parking charges through debt collection and litigation

Those fundamental principles of fairness and positive outcomes proposed by Messrs Hurley and Pester are more resonant of regulated collections sectors such as financial services or legal collections, where customer outcomes and the protection of the vulnerable has been sacrosanct for many years. They seem to represent a significant shift-change in how the industry intends to move forward in its treatment of parking customers. And they are welcomed.

The critics

For those elevated principles to be met they require the embedding of cultures and behaviours within DCAs an law firms which some of the industry’s critics (such as those on the Money Saving Expert forum) say are severely lacking:

• “Very stupid AND incorrigible scammers”
• “The Trade Bodies are fairly useless and certainly don't exist to support consumers”
• “Who cares about what the BPA & IPC say in their cloud cuckoo land...”
• “The IAS is a Kangaroo court”
• “We should be forcing these roboclaim shy***rs to actually do some work”.

If this is the narrative being fed to a website which has over 16 million visitors per month, no wonder then anything we can do to improve the industry’s reputation is clearly going to be of value.

DCAs and law firms

So how should DCAs and law firms operate in this new landscape? Yes, we should all have the systems in place to operate ‘effectively’ in collecting the charges, but do we also have the behaviours in place to ensure positive outcomes and to protect the vulnerable? Can we even define what is meant by a ‘positive outcome’ or who should be regarded as ‘vulnerable’? Then, how do we measure that and report back to our clients?

Behaviours are embedded over time and measured through strict compliance monitoring, often related more to the attitude and empathy of collections agents as opposed to how much cash they collect.

This might seem alien to many, especially in the private parking sector, however, it is clear that behaviours must reflect the individual expectations of each sector code of conduct and must be measurable and demonstrable.

At BW Legal, as solicitors, we have been mandatorily regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) since our inception. This brings high expectations in terms of appropriate outcomes and elevated standards. We have also been dual regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) since 2014, entirely as a matter of choice, because we believe in the same principles as Messrs Hurley and Pester.

Having worked with highly regulated debt (such as financial services, telecommunications, debt purchaser and utilities) with some of the most vulnerable customers in England and Wales, we would suggest that some or all of the following attributes are going to be helpful in meeting the wishes of Will Hurley and Andrew Pester.

Understand the brief: How are we defining ‘vulnerable’ or ‘fair’?

Big question. No definitive answer. The FCA would regard a vulnerable person as someone who, due to their personal circumstances, is especially susceptible to harm, particularly when a firm is not acting with appropriate levels of care.

At BW Legal we have multiple policies and processes in place to deal with vulnerable motorists, despite parking charges not being regulated or subject to FCA policies. We understand that all customers are at risk of becoming vulnerable and this risk is increased by drivers such as health, life events, customer resilience and capability.

We use methods such as: TEXAS and IDEA (to identify and support vulnerable customers), BRUCE (for recognising mental capacity limitations); BLAKE (for high risk situations, such as customers who may be at risk of suicide); and CARERS where we are informed by a third party of the customer’s vulnerability.

Where evidence of vulnerability is identified, we immediately place a hold the case and (subject to the customer providing consent) we appraise our client and make recommendations regarding the next steps of the customer journey.

As to the question of fairness, the starting point would be to ensure that each and every contact with a parking customer is conducted in compliance with the Code of Practice.

Be experts in the subject matter and implement

Every single aspect of this new Code of Practice needs to be considered when setting up the processes for the collection of private parking debt. Every process, every customer and client query, need to be capable of being measured against the Code of Practice, to comply with it and give rise to an audit trail in each and every case.

Thereafter, the processes will need to be sufficiently bespoke to handle the nuances of each and every parking operator’s terms and conditions (T&Cs) and general approach. Otherwise, it will be impossible to define whether an outcome has been ‘fair’.

Get the basics right

Page 24 of the Code of Practice places certain requirements on DCAs and law firms. It would be far better to go the extra mile and ensure accurate address verification at the outset. DVLA might not always be accurate. Ensure the pre-action requirements of debt recovery are properly explained – always

Then contact the parking customers through multiple channels (providing full details of the parking charge notice) at every stage. In doing so, continually let them know of their options to receive debt management or legal advice – otherwise known as ‘signposting’. There are a plethora of organisations we signpost customers (including carers and authorised third parties) to, including debt charities, organisations dealing with bereavements, addiction and other vulnerabilities.  

Invest significantly in systems and people

Parking charges is a high-volume sector. Prior to the Code of Practice, the only concrete expectation placed on external agents was cash recovery. Now we must be able to do that cost effectively with multiple layers of non-cash related expectations around treating customers appropriately.

This takes time: and the customer journey now must be reflective of fair treatment and fair outcomes. Technology is likely to be critical to meet these new expectations. Self-service customer portals and other automated but bespoke technology will help ensure compliance and more effective collections. Dispute resolution, review of payment options, or various forms of chat will need to be automated to ensure cost effective and compliant collections.

Be capable of handling disputes and queries

When ‘fair outcomes’ become a priority, then much more focus will be placed upon a firm’s ability to handle high volumes of queries. API integration with client systems would be regarded as a gold standard solution: the ability for DCAs/Law firms to self-serve in terms of obtaining client instructions.

From the extraction of all notices, images and correspondence from client systems instantly so that call agents and customer support teams can send documentation to the motorist during the course of a call or chat.

A welcome shift in approach

A focus on fairness, positive outcomes, better standards and the appropriate treatment of individuals is a huge step forward for the private parking sector. Yes, it creates a more positive narrative in terms of public perception – but ultimately it is the right and proper thing to do.

In terms of how those principles are interpreted and actioned by DCAs and law firms will be interesting to watch. Certainly, those firms with a strong track record in FCA regulated collections will be fully accustomed to dealing with customers on that basis and are unlikely to need to alter their business models or structures to adapt to what will become a much more rigorous and customer-centric approach to the recovery of unpaid private parking charges.
 
Rohan Krishnarao is head of litigation at BW Legal Solicitors

Rohan Krishnarao is a solicitor. He sits as part of the IPC’s Accredited Service Provider Interest Group and oversees the BW Legal responsible for prominent decisions for the parking sector, such as VCS v Ward (which allowed operators to pursue “no stopping contraventions” under the same legal principles as ParkingEye v Beavis), Britannia v Semark -Jullien (which put a stop to courts striking out parking claims around the country for being an abuse of process).

BW Legal is a debt collection law firm regulated by the SRA and FCA. It has over 300 staff operating from a single site. BW Legal holds many ISO accreditations including ISO22458 which is the international standard providing guidance for organisations on how to design and deliver fair, flexible and inclusive services with positive outcomes for consumers in vulnerable situations.
www.bwlegal.co.uk
 
Contact information
E-mail: rkrishnarao@bwlegal.co.uk
Tel: 0113 468 2872