Car park enforcement handed over to cheaper external team by Cotswold District Council

A "REGRETTABLE" decision to outsource parking enforcement has been made by Cotswold District Council’s cabinet.

Sounds of dismay erupted from the public gallery of last week’s meeting at Trinity Road when a "cold, business case" was made by CDC’s cabinet to hand over off-street parking enforcement to an external contractor.

The move has been made following Gloucestershire County Council’s decision to outsource on-street parking enforcement to the same contractor, APCOA, in December 2012.

It is estimated to save CDC around £83,000, with the service costing £908,614 per year compared with in-house costs of £991,882.

But it could potentially put the jobs of CDC’s current parking team in jeopardy.

"We all collectively recognise and value the expertise of the council’s staff and the excellent service they have provided," Cllr David Fowles, cabinet member for environment, said. "But if we’re looking at the cold business case, I feel we’ve only got one decision to make."

Details of the handover, which will come into force from April 1, are yet to be confirmed. It is unclear yet how staff and services will be transferred and if drivers will still be able to pay parking fines at the Trinity Road office.

Addressing the council’s parking staff, CDC leader Cllr Lynden Stowe said: "I hope it will all be as seamless as possible and you find that it doesn’t impact on your lives."

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:23am Tue 29 Jan 13

Lord_Austin says...

Although I wouldn't wish redundancy upon anyone, the current team of "carpark enforcement" are rude, nasty creatures who have shown to enjoy ticketing people when perhaps a warning could have been better. An example of this being an elderly couple who had parked next to me. They came back 1 minute late. Now if you're looking at it black and white, then yes. Ticket them. But a simple chat - next time leave more time - could have persevered. Yet the horrible wench decided to ticket them and then laugh. Although I guess it means more money for the council, who will lick their lips at the prospect of fining poor, old people.
Although I wouldn't wish redundancy upon anyone, the current team of "carpark enforcement" are rude, nasty creatures who have shown to enjoy ticketing people when perhaps a warning could have been better. An example of this being an elderly couple who had parked next to me. They came back 1 minute late. Now if you're looking at it black and white, then yes. Ticket them. But a simple chat - next time leave more time - could have persevered. Yet the horrible wench decided to ticket them and then laugh. Although I guess it means more money for the council, who will lick their lips at the prospect of fining poor, old people. Lord_Austin

10:12am Tue 29 Jan 13

Council Taxpayer says...

The purpose of council car parking is to facilitate the free movement of traffic in our towns and not to raise revenue but CDC, along with numerous other local authorities, appears to have forgotten that rule.
We need to establish whether these new contractors will be given targets to meet to justify the money the council pays them. If that is the case, then we can expect more of the incidents reported by Lord Austin.
The Tory administration at CDC is making no friends with its misguided mugging of local motorists. If people are disgruntled, they can demonstrate their discontent at the ballot box with the county council elections coming up this Spring. Don't forget that the leader of CDC, Cllr Stowe, also has a GCC seat to defend so voters can send him a clear message.
The purpose of council car parking is to facilitate the free movement of traffic in our towns and not to raise revenue but CDC, along with numerous other local authorities, appears to have forgotten that rule. We need to establish whether these new contractors will be given targets to meet to justify the money the council pays them. If that is the case, then we can expect more of the incidents reported by Lord Austin. The Tory administration at CDC is making no friends with its misguided mugging of local motorists. If people are disgruntled, they can demonstrate their discontent at the ballot box with the county council elections coming up this Spring. Don't forget that the leader of CDC, Cllr Stowe, also has a GCC seat to defend so voters can send him a clear message. Council Taxpayer

1:44pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Iansky says...

If the council pull their fingers out and work with the Town Council to clearly identify the car parking facilities then apply common sense(as if) in pricing structures, there will be 2 positive effects:
1. The current dramatic downward trend in visitor shopping in Ciren due to hidden car parks and extortionate pricing.
2. Reduced issues with cars parking on streets rather than in car parks - this will negate the farsical proposals that have been put forward for Ciren parking.
I have on more than one occasion seen the current wardens (1x male with dark hair and 1x scottish lady) both show extreme courtesy and consideration as well as flexibility when dealing with people who had parked in a questionable area/position so I cannot criticise their attitude or approach - their frustration I do understand especially when having to check residents cars via mobile phones as they now have "virtual permits" (creating abuse by non residents - in Cecily Hill they have often spent 15min on 1 car due to poor signal!!!!
Interesting that the track record of David Fowles involving, water park / car parking and now waste diposal is a continued concern as to his lack of foresight/considerat
ion for the town, still as he has a shop in Poulton he will be happy with any business pushed his way!! time for a clear out in the cabinet methinks!! we need people who will put the trade in town first - more trade = more use of car parks (if better identifed/priced)=mo
re money for council - Simple!
If the council pull their fingers out and work with the Town Council to clearly identify the car parking facilities then apply common sense(as if) in pricing structures, there will be 2 positive effects: 1. The current dramatic downward trend in visitor shopping in Ciren due to hidden car parks and extortionate pricing. 2. Reduced issues with cars parking on streets rather than in car parks - this will negate the farsical proposals that have been put forward for Ciren parking. I have on more than one occasion seen the current wardens (1x male with dark hair and 1x scottish lady) both show extreme courtesy and consideration as well as flexibility when dealing with people who had parked in a questionable area/position so I cannot criticise their attitude or approach - their frustration I do understand especially when having to check residents cars via mobile phones as they now have "virtual permits" (creating abuse by non residents - in Cecily Hill they have often spent 15min on 1 car due to poor signal!!!! Interesting that the track record of David Fowles involving, water park / car parking and now waste diposal is a continued concern as to his lack of foresight/considerat ion for the town, still as he has a shop in Poulton he will be happy with any business pushed his way!! time for a clear out in the cabinet methinks!! we need people who will put the trade in town first - more trade = more use of car parks (if better identifed/priced)=mo re money for council - Simple! Iansky

2:22pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Dave - Cirencester says...

I have not gone into Cirencester since they put the overnight charges in.
They are losing money as people will not pay the charges for a short visit.
If their income came from local business rates which they would lose as the shops go under, their tune would change, instead it is Council Tax and a large cut out of parking. Nothing to do with the community.
I have not gone into Cirencester since they put the overnight charges in. They are losing money as people will not pay the charges for a short visit. If their income came from local business rates which they would lose as the shops go under, their tune would change, instead it is Council Tax and a large cut out of parking. Nothing to do with the community. Dave - Cirencester

5:33pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Iansky says...

Added
1. The current dramatic downward trend in visitor shopping in Ciren due to hidden car parks and extortionate pricing could be turned around through prudent application of fair pricing as suggested at a recent meeting by councillors - a charge of 50p for 2 hrs or £1.00 for 3 would put us on an more even footing and promote more use of car parks thus clearing cars of streets and in turn putting more money in council coffers from better utilised car parks - this has been voiced many times by visitors who now shop elsewhere due to our charging policies - the council is helping the demise of Ciren businesses. (Perhaps if we had more cabinet members who lived in town they may have a better understanding).
Added 1. The current dramatic downward trend in visitor shopping in Ciren due to hidden car parks and extortionate pricing could be turned around through prudent application of fair pricing as suggested at a recent meeting by councillors - a charge of 50p for 2 hrs or £1.00 for 3 would put us on an more even footing and promote more use of car parks thus clearing cars of streets and in turn putting more money in council coffers from better utilised car parks - this has been voiced many times by visitors who now shop elsewhere due to our charging policies - the council is helping the demise of Ciren businesses. (Perhaps if we had more cabinet members who lived in town they may have a better understanding). Iansky

10:28pm Tue 29 Jan 13

esse quam viderie says...

I believe that I am correct in saying that the only cabinet member whom lives in Cirencester is Councillor J Burgess. Not only does he support his colleagues on the matter of parking charges but he was noticeably absent from the Town Council public meeting last week.
I believe that I am correct in saying that the only cabinet member whom lives in Cirencester is Councillor J Burgess. Not only does he support his colleagues on the matter of parking charges but he was noticeably absent from the Town Council public meeting last week. esse quam viderie

1:24pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Iansky says...

esse quam viderie wrote:
I believe that I am correct in saying that the only cabinet member whom lives in Cirencester is Councillor J Burgess. Not only does he support his colleagues on the matter of parking charges but he was noticeably absent from the Town Council public meeting last week.
No surprise there then if he wants to maintain his position on the cabinet. Cronyism perhaps?
[quote][p][bold]esse quam viderie[/bold] wrote: I believe that I am correct in saying that the only cabinet member whom lives in Cirencester is Councillor J Burgess. Not only does he support his colleagues on the matter of parking charges but he was noticeably absent from the Town Council public meeting last week.[/p][/quote]No surprise there then if he wants to maintain his position on the cabinet. Cronyism perhaps? Iansky

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree