AOS – moving in the
In the May issue of Parking News, Penny Winder commented on the BPA’s Approved Operator Scheme. Here, David Blake replies with a strong defence of the scheme
I
read with interest the article by Penny Winder of Alpha Parking on the Opinions page of Parking News May 2010. T e observations and
opinions proff ered certainly provided food for thought in an area that has grabbed the headlines over the last few years for all the wrong reasons.
Signs and lines
Under the AOS Code of Practice all operators must ensure the public are aware they are on private land. The number and placement of signage is open to interpretation, but the industry is aware that the BPA, SIA, trading standards and the county courts demand that proof of adequate signage is provided. The AOS and the Code of Practice puts the responsibility on the operator; ignorance is no excuse. There have been precedents set, with rulings that operators must prove that signage is prominent and in suffi cient numbers to ensure the public can be reasonably expected to see it.
While acknowledging the salient points
raised in the article, as a member of the AOS board I would like to answer some of the questions raised by Penny. T ese focused on problems in the areas of: training; audits;
terminology and procedure; signage and lines; sanctions; and penalty points.
Audits
The Scheme is similar to the established SIA two-day format and encompasses small to medium enterprises (SMEs) as well as large companies. The auditor, Insight Certifi cation, already works within the parking industry auditing immobilisation and removals companies for the SIA. The issue of larger companies and their non-compliance in certain areas would be treated exactly the same as an SIA or ISO 9000 audit. Exceptions would be highlighted and the companies given a mutually agreed action timetable. The process may not work perfectly at fi rst but open dialogue between the operators and the auditing body, and a sensible approach to timescales and remedial action, should ensure compliance.
The AOS and the Code of Practice places the responsibility clearly on the operator
Terminology and procedure
This is an area where it is inevitable that there will be some cross-fertilisation of terms and procedures. CPE is an on-street package governed by the Road Traffi c Act 1991, while the AOS relates to private land and is not legislated. The dilemma is that all private operators are compared to on-street processes and procedures, and are often accused of masquerading as on-street operators. The terminology used in the codes is quite clear and any confusion can be cleared up through the support channels of the SIA, BPA, DVLA and the operators themselves.
28 JULY 2010
www.britishparking.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60