At the recent $SPZ AGM, CEO Paul spoke about the latest round of Government consultation on the UK Code of Practice for Private Car Parking. Consultation completed in September 2025, and Paul indicated he expected a 3-4 month timeline for the Government to issue its response, which he expects would then lead to a further round of consultation.

In everything that follows in this Straw, it is important to recognise that $SPZ was key in shaping the existing, voluntary, industry-led Code of Practice, and that $SPZ aims to operate to the highest standards of compliance with this code.

Because of the importance of the UK market to the value of $SPZ, I have (with the help of my BA) undertaken a deep dive into what various UK consumer advoccay bodies have been publishing regarding their submissions to the consultation process.

Here are the key themes put forward by consumer advocates. Overall a common theme run through the consumer advovacy is a drive for a move from a voluntary code of practice, to a compulsory code with oversight and enforcement (i.e. Regulation).

1. Cap on Fines

• Strong calls to reduce the standard parking charge cap to £50 for minor or routine cases.
• Some support for retaining a £100 maximum only in the most serious cases, not as a default.
• Emphasis that fines should be proportionate to the breach.

2. Ban or Limit Excessive Fees

• Broad opposition to high debt recovery fees (e.g., £70 add-ons), viewed as punitive and unjustified.
• Warnings that such fees damage trust and should be banned or significantly restricted.

3. Transparency and Data Reporting

• Requests for mandatory publication of statistics on tickets, appeals, complaints, and cancellations.
• Advocacy for full transparency to build accountability and public confidence.

4. Fair Appeals Process

• Strong support for a single, independent appeals service to replace the current fragmented system.
• Appeals should be accessible, impartial, and offer fair resolution, including clear rules for mitigating circumstances.
• Recommendations that some types of tickets (e.g., minor keying errors or technical issues) should be automatically cancelled.

5. Oversight and Enforcement

• Demand for a robust and independent scrutiny and oversight body with enforcement powers.
• Suggestion that non-compliant operators should lose access to DVLA data.

6. Signage, Terms and Payment Clarity

• Calls for better, clearer signage and communication of terms to prevent drivers from unwittingly breaching rules.
• Emphasis on fair grace periods and allowances for minor or first-time mistakes.
• Concerns about confusing or exclusionary payment systems (e.g., requiring smartphone apps or exact change).

7. Protection for Disabled Drivers

• Support for strong enforcement against misuse of disabled bays.
• Concern that weakening penalties could undermine accessibility protections.

8. Consumer Education and Rights

• Proposals to include links to government guidance on parking rights in all notices sent to motorists.
• Aim to empower consumers with information to navigate the system confidently.

9. Prompt Implementation of the Code

• Frustration over delays in enacting the statutory Code of Practice despite it being legislated in 2019.
• Urging swift action to stop widespread consumer harm caused by current practices.

The above points are a summary of a much more comprehensive body of research, including sources linked back to key consumer advocacy groups incl. AA, RAC, Which? etc.

What strikes me is the commonality of the themes being advocated across bodies. Clearly there has either been coordination among groups, or collective learning from the last time this process was run, or both. A push for £50 fines for "minor or routine cases" is a common theme.

While many of these points are likley to already be followed by $SPZ. Some, if adopted, could materially impact business performance. E.g., 1. and 2.

Over the next week we will gain some insight into how "on-the-nose" the Starmer Government is with voters, when they issue a pre-Christmas Budget, which is seeking to plug a hole in the public finances. There is a lot of sensitivity in the UK at the moment about cost of living, as they got hit a lot harder than we did in Australia by the post-pandemic inflation spike. (I had an opportunity to "sample" this during my European visit in June/July this year! Ouch.)

Equally, there is quite a high profile among the general public about the PBN process. As a personal, anecdotal data point, I've recently had a visitor from the UK staying with me, and she was quick to point out that her family are careful in keeping all their parking records, so that they can appeal when they get "unjustified penalities". It is something "top of mind" for them.

Importantly, from May next year there are a swath of local government elections, as well as elections for the Welsh and Scottish devolved governments and, at the moment, Reform is leading in the polls. Clearly, the Government will be keen not to do anything to further antagonise the electorate or even to offer some "wins" for "working people".

I will continue to monitor this issue as the next milestone will be when the Government issues its response to the consultation process.

It will be really interesting to get Paul Gillespie's take on this at the upcoming SM Meeting. How much of what consumer advocates are requesting is either already in the code of, if implemented, would not have a material impact? How likely does he think PBN values could be cut? Or, is the Government likely to follow what is likely to emerge in the Budget as freezing the fines for a period of years?

I don't have a view on any of this, other that I think the next few months is a key window in which we should be alert to regulatory risk in the UK. Afterall, we've seen what can happen in QLD and, to a lesser extent, in Denmark.