COUNCILS RAISE MILLIONS IN ON-STREET FINES AND PARKING INCOME

LAMBETH, CROYDON AND SOUTHWARK councils raised a combined total of £28.6 million in on-street parking fines – and a collective £47.9 million in parking income – for the 2011-12 financial year, figures issued by the RAC Foundation reveal.
 
Lambeth finished in the top ten earners for both on-street paring fines (£16.7 million) and in parking income (£25.1 million) despite a 43 per cent fall in parking income. 
 
The RAC Foundation released their figures after supporting Barnet residents in a High Court case where a judge ruled Barnet council had acted unlawfully when it hiked residents’ parking fees to “defray other road transport expenditure and reduce the need to raise income from other sources, such as… council tax.”
 
In a stinging comment the Foundation’s Philip Gomm said: “So councils are cash strapped? “Not when it comes to parking income it would seem.
 
“Between them the 359 authorities that run parking operations made an eye-watering £565 million between them in the financial year 2011-12, as our latest report shows. “Before all the councils start leaving comments, yes we realise this figure is before capital charges – that is building and replacing stuff associated with parking – are deducted
 
“But even after you allow for these the total surplus is still a massive £412 million. “In a way the point is not that a surplus is made – but why it is made.
 
“Few drivers will have a complaint with a coherent transport policy which manages traffic and congestion through the use of parking fees. “If there were no restrictions or charges then in many towns and cities there would be a free-for all on the roads which would be in no-one’s interests, drivers included.
 
“And if a ‘profit’, sorry surplus, is generated then this is allowed for in law as long as it is spent on a strict and limited number of things, all of which are essentially transport related.
 
“What is not allowed for in law are parking charges that are set to generate revenue for hard-up councils facing cuts in central government grants and restrictions on the level of council tax they can set. “We know it is against the law not just because it is there in black and white on the statue book but because a High Court a judge said so just last week.
 
“According to Mrs Justice Lang, Barnet council in north London acted unlawfully when it hiked residents’ parking fees to “defray other road transport expenditure and reduce the need to raise income from other sources, such as… council tax.”
 
“One nil to the residents of Barnet who brought the case, supported by the RAC Foundation.
 
“It is true that there are several councils which do not make money from parking, but they are in the minority. “That they made a loss might actually be a sign of a good parking policy where charges are kept low to actually encourage cars into a town or city centre to support the business of traders in the High Street.
 
“But as for the rest there will be the suspicion amongst drivers that they are increasingly coming to rely on parking surpluses as a way of protecting other services.
 
“This might be a laudable aim, but it is not a lawful aim. Why should councillors decide that the best way to break even is to arbitrarily tax one section of society?
 
“The RAC Foundation would encourage all councils to publish an annual parking report containing their traffic management strategy and detailing what they are charging and why. if a set of charges has risen dramatically, why have they gone up? “What is the traffic problem the council is trying to solve?
 
“The irony is that these huge profits come against a backdrop of a decline in traffic volume because of the recession. “Arguably parking charges should be generally coming down, not going up.
 
“And of course pigs might fly.”
 
(Tables below courtesy RAC Foundation. Remaining figures for Lewisham and Bromley awaited.)
 
Table 4 On-street penalty income

On-street penalty income

On-street penalties as % of on-street income

£ million
2011/12
2010/11
2009/10

Change 2011 on 2009

2011/12
2010/11
2009/10
1
Westminster
25.3
22.1
20.5
24%
32%
31%
29%
2
Camden
18.5
18.7
20.3
-9%
50%
51%
53%
3
Hammersmith & Fulham
18.2
11.0
8.5
114%
59%
39%
34%
4
Lambeth
16.7
16.8
34.0
-51%
67%
69%
82%
5
Islington
11.2
9.5
14.9
-25%
43%
39%
51%
6
Newham
10.8
7.7
7.8
39%
73%
70%
76%
7
Ealing
10.0
10.1
8.7
15%
55%
77%
72%
8
Brent
9.6*
7.2
11.4
-16%
60%
56%
81%
9
Kensington & Chelsea
9.4
10.2
12.2
-23%
23%
29%
34%
10
Haringey
8.0
7.2
7.2
11%
55%
58%
62%
11
Waltham Forest
7.7
6.1
6.3
22%
79%
70%
67%
12
Barnet
7.2
5.1
5.9
21%
55%
60%
62%
13
Wandsworth
7.1
6.0
6.1
16%
26%
24%
25%
14
Croydon
6.4
6.0
5.5
16%
63%
63%
60%
15
Hounslow
5.7
4.9
4.5
25%
57%
53%
54%
16
Manchester
5.6
3.6
3.8
45%
53%
47%
48%
17
Harrow
5.6
5.6
5.1
10%
79%
80%
78%
18
Hackney
5.5
9.3
5.3
3%
36%
57%
41%
19
Southwark
5.5
4.6
5.4
1%
93%
53%
61%
20
Tower Hamlets
5.4
5.2
5.1
7%
31%
31%
31%
ENGLAND
45%
45%
48%
 
 
(The Foundation says there is certainly evidence of a decline in the number of penalty charges as motorists become more aware of the rules and are more careful to park legally.)
 
 
Table 2 Parking income (on and off street) £ million 2011/12 2010/11 2009/10 Change 2011 on 2009
1 Westminster 80.0 84.3 83.4 -4%
2 Kensington & Chelsea 42.8 36.5 37.6 14%
3 Camden 39.3 39.2 41.0 -4%
4 Hammersmith & Fulham 31.1 28.3 24.9 25%
5 Wandsworth 27.0 25.2 24.2 12%
6 Islington 26.1 24.2 29.0 -10%
7 Lambeth 25.1 24.3 44.0 -43%
8 Brighton & Hove UA 23.6 23.1 21.6 9%
9 Ealing 20.0 14.5 14.0 42%
10 Birmingham 18.7 17.7 19.2 -2%
11 Tower Hamlets 17.5 16.8 16.5 6%
12 Newham 17.2 13.1 12.1 42%
13 Brent 16.9 13.7 14.8 14%
14 Hackney 15.3 16.5 13.2 16%
15 Haringey 14.8 13.0 12.0 24%
16 Cornwall UA 14.0 13.9 13.9 1%
17 Barnet 14.0 9.2 10.3 35%
18 Newcastle upon Tyne 13.9 12.5 13.5 3%
19 Manchester 13.7 12.5 11.1 24%
20 Leeds 13.0 11.7 12.0 8%
21 Hounslow 12.2 11.2 10.6 15%
22 Croydon 11.9 14.6 16.0 -25%
23 City of London 11.1 10.0 9.3 20%
24 Southwark 10.9 11.9 11.2 -3%
25 Bristol UA 10.8 9.9 9.7 11%
26 Enfield 10.8 10.9 13.0 -17%
27 Bath & North East Somerset UA 10.7 12.3 11.4 -6%
28 Guildford 10.7 10.1 9.4 13%
29 Waltham Forest 10.4 9.3 9.9 4%
30 Bromley 10.3 10.0 9.5 9%

 

Note: Local authorities are required to submit details of their finances to the Department of Communities and Local Government, following a detailed set of rules prepared by the Department each year. They are normally published in November.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.