Forum Topic

Residents parking permits rip-off

I'm amused to see that these are going up in price by around 20%. The council currently rakes in £562,255 on parking permits, according to the front page story on this site - presumably next year this will jump to around £700,000.So to all the poor saps and Nimbys that voted for the wretched CPZs, all I can say is "Told you so." Unless of course you think you will be getting a 20% better service from the empire builders of Hounslow's Parking DisService... LOL!

Bryan Betts ● 3360d25 Comments

Excellent idea - a sliding scale of two or three levels, depending on size of vehicle, would be preferable, if only to get more cars in.It won't happen, though, as I can see one individual who won't like it. Why not? Put together the mention of large 4x4s & wheelie bins above, and you'll know who I mean. ;-)

Steve Allen ● 3353d

I enjoyed this post so much I joined the forum... ;-)The labour lot in Hounslow Council have little to do with socialism. I realise you are trying to use it as an insult, but do look up the word.Real socialists would put the community first. This lot put themselves, and their sub-contracting round table mates, first. Not socialism.

Steve Allen ● 3353d

Well, I'm not sure about  cars displaying resident's permits parked in the car park (just outside the Ealing Road CPZ), but if you walk around Griffin Park are CPZ you will find many available places to park. To the extent that I can now always park within 50 yards from my house, while before CPZ I often had to park in a different street.

Alex Shpinkov ● 3354d

If it works well, how come there are now cars displaying resident's permits parked in our car park (just outside the Ealing Road CPZ) most evenings? What that says to me is that either the CPZ has reduced the available number of spaces to below the number required, or Parking DisServices has sold more permits than there are spaces - or quite probably both.

Bryan Betts ● 3354d

Well said

Robert Ayres ● 3356d

Putting the price of permits up is one thing.What really irks me is the claims of justification and the contradiction that it is not for profit.Many CPZs only exist as a result of very poor planning and developments which have ignored the objections on parking be existing residents time and time again, coupled with blinkered policies based on idealism rather than pragmatism.Serco make money out of CPZs. Serco and firms like them are not interested in anything with minimal margins of profit.They have been pressuring Ealing, Hounslow and Brent to hike up costs, introduce extra charges for households with second and third vehicles irrespective of the fact many are independent members of a families in the same house. Pure discrimination.Labour councils seem all too keen on hiking up the charges and embracing 'innovations' in charging cooked up by Serco and the like.  For them it is win win.It's very noticeable that since the BRS CPZ which I think works well. That there has been a huge increase in large 4WD cars.  One or two streets seem packed with these oversized vehicles taking up too much space.It's become the new status symbol and is really the most anti-social thing and not necessary in this sort of district in the same way that wheelie bins are not really practicable with these tiny front gardens.The official LBH published justification for the hike is rather uncannily like the same published by Ealing and Brent. With the same unfounded and crass anti car rhetoric.So where does all this money go in 'improving transport" If they are really serious about too many cars, then start by quadrupling charges long wheelbase 4WDs, Huge engined 4WDs. And offer a discount for small runabout cars and those driving residents over 75 and free visitor permits for the over 75s in CPZs without cars.Certainly not into the bus barrier at GWQ.  Or resurfacing the local streets. What happened to that?  Still the potholed streets remain unresurfaced.What about the fact that CPZ residents are now subsidising the huge amount of residents who have off street parking and no CPZ. Who can have as many cars as they like.As for a 20% hike. Where is the justification for that when inflation is almost negative?

Raymond Havelock ● 3357d

"Are you still in favour of your road becoming a CPZ?"I find this a rather bizarre question to ask when the preliminary consultation showed a slight majority were not in favour of a CPZ. I'm also surprised that objections were not raised at the time to the wording used, which clearly implies that the consultation was not aimed at people who voted no previously.

Ian Fillingham ● 3358d

Why on earth do you keep going on about Guy being awake or not as the case may be? Anyway, it puts me in mind of:The Kraken Wakes by Alfred Lord TennysonBelow the thunders of the upper deep,Far far beneath in the abysmal sea,His ancient, dreamless, uninvaded sleepThe Kraken sleepeth: faintest sunlights fleeAbout his shadowy sides: above him swellHuge sponges of millennial growth and height;And far away into the sickly light,From many a wondrous grot and secret cellUnnumbered and enormous polypiWinnow with giant arms the slumbering green.There hath he lain for ages and will lieBattening upon huge seaworms in his sleep,Until the latter fire shall heat the deep;Then once by men and angels to be seen,In roaring he shall rise and on the surface die.

Anne England ● 3358d

"would you like me to send you a copy?"No thanks, the numbers that brought about the CPZ are here:http://democraticservices.hounslow.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=576&MId=7227&Ver=4There may have been an earlier consultation but clearly people continued to agitate for a CPZ and some changed their minds

Guy Lambert ● 3358d

"they are in fact a pain in the proverbial for councillors and officers alike not least because some people are passionately in favour and some just as passionately against"So you end up with a community divided against itself?  Must be hell for an administration with such a proud track record of trying to empower residents by bringing them together in common purpose.

Phil Andrews ● 3358d

Check out Matt Harmers newsletter dated 22 March 2012 for the result of the CPZ consultation saves me having to post it. I was wrong it was 88 against 86 in Favour so the council having lost changed the goal posts to sneak it in street by street now tell me that's democratic

Robert Ayres ● 3358d

Wrong again  in the figures published  the vote was 82 against  80 in favourwould you like me to send you a copy ?

Robert Ayres ● 3358d

CPZ hugely improved parking around Griffin Park. So happy that I can now always find place to park even on match days.As for the pay increase... It's still worth it. And on the other hand - what else can one expect from Labour council? Labour have always been in business of collecting money rather than supporting earning money.

Alex Shpinkov ● 3358d

I am informed that there are extra costs because a bay must be suspended for the skip. I am a little sceptical of this because people tell me it doesn't actually happen(though I'm sure it's true in some circumstances, particularly say town centres).You're right that there is additional income from fines, though all income must by law be applied to transport matters.Trust me, CPZs are absolutely not a money raising exercise: they are in fact a pain in the proverbial for councillors and officers alike not least because some people are passionately in favour and some just as passionately against. When I lived in Chiswick I was told I was a moron (is there a pattern here?) and threatened with violence when I said I would vote against a CPZ in my road.

Guy Lambert ● 3358d

This is exactly why it is very important that new developments that have been specifically designed to have a good and accessible public transport system maintain it.  It is important and of benefit to those living in the development AND those living in the surrounding area that this is what happens.

Philippa Bond ● 3358d

Hi Guy - don't forget the 0.65% you talk of only impacts on people in CPZ roads, so for them the percentage is higher. I'm not so familiar with the parking numbers in the Brentford Station CPZ so can't comment on its reasonability, but the Osterley one is a classic example of the council letting residents be bloody minded to other local people.

Ian Speed ● 3358d

The CPZs may not be a revenue-raising exercise - I really don't know about that so I'll take your word. The Council must surely though make money out of the fines on people without permits who have parked during the operation times. I see that little car with its CCTV camera on top scoot up and down the roads on a regular basis and know at least one person who has fallen fowl of them (no names mentioned!)Also, I don't think the question was ever answered as to why it costs double to have a skip in a CPZ road as compared to a non-CPZ road. Surely there can be no good reason for this, particularly given the above.

Anne England ● 3358d

Moron here. Not sure I did say that but on checking the figures I find that - in the streets included in the original CPZ responses were in favour by 74 to 33 which sounds a bit overwhelming to me. In the whole area canvassed the majority was a bit slimmer at 101 to 71 so two roads that voted against were originally excluded (until one street  changed its mind and petitioned for CPZ).For the record, us socialists are obviously dead stupid as according to the LBH finance department:For 2014/15 the gross income received from the issuing of residential permits amounted to £0.56m and when compared to the 2014/15 Council Tax £82m requirement represents 0.65%.  This percentage will be significantly smaller if the permit receipt net income figure is used which takes into consideration the following expenses:. Officer time to conduct the consultation process. Capital expenses for road markings . Traffic order costs and signage. Costs of issuing permits. Cost of enforcement officers patrolling the zone.The idea that CPZs are a revenue-raising exercise is laughable

Guy Lambert ● 3358d

Could not agree more. I was recently told on this site by our local Councillor that I was moaning because there had been overwhelming support for the CPZ in my street .  Had this moron had the inclination or been awake long enough to check the figures he would have found that in the area canvassed as a whole  the majority was against a CPZ. So in order to impose the socialist dictat and make money they then decided change the goal posts and take the count on a road by road basis.  By doing this they drove people to park in roads not in the scheme and when the situation became Intolerable they canvassed these streets again until they got their way. What I think the people in Brentford have to understand is our socialist council really don't give a s--t about the residents. They will have their way whether you like it or not. Oh, by the way, don't complain or demonstrate toany of these so called socialists  or you could end up in court. Old Joe Stalin would be proud of Hounslow Council.

Robert Ayres ● 3359d

CPZs outside town centres are often either vindictive 'I'm all right Jack' acts by residents with off-street parking (viz the Osterley station and West Thames College ones) or self-harming lunacy like the one proposed for the St John's Road grid area in Isleworth. In the former, residents get to preen themselves looking out on empty spaces they themselves don't need (tell-tale sign is they're nearly all empty at night) while they smirk at the thought of hapless commuters from nearby stationless areas like Heston being unable to dare to park in their precious roads. In the latter, there is nearly no off-street parking so all residents need on-street availability. A CPZ sounds good in theory, but it's no good keeping the odd station commuter away during the day when many residents have left their spaces to drive to work- the pinch point will still be at night when the commuters have long gone and the residents gradually return home to find they have more difficulty parking in the evening because the traffic planners have festooned the area with yellow lines on corners and other unexpected places, and they are now paying effectively an increase in council tax to find it harder to park than before.

Ian Speed ● 3359d

The problem has been compounded by years of poor planning and policy.Housing with no parking, way too little parking, GSK with a fraction of the parking they had when at Beecham House, And the assumption that all can work at t'factory and cycle or walk.Plus the fact that this part of west london has lost out on major improvements for all transport when compared to East London North east London.I wonder how our Labour Councils are going to deal with Mayors green light for the congestion zone being moved out as far as Kew Bridge and effectively dividing the area into two as well as the inevitable 80% increase in traffic into Brentford South Ealing, Ealing , Osterley and as far as  Cranford.It was bad enough when the western extension was implemented out to Kensington.

Raymond Havelock ● 3359d

CPZ has not improved the parking situation in my experience. In the road that I live in we were told that it was being introduced because GSK employees would park here during the day. In fact during weekdays the road is relatively easy to park in but at nights it is a nightmare. If I come home after 8pm I can rarely find a place to park. If I have to pay for residents parking then I do expect to be able to park in my road. The trouble is that too many houses are being converted  into flats with multiple cars per building and the council are giving parking permits without taking the actual space available into account.

Nicki Cross ● 3360d

We have too many cars for the amount of space and need to keep updating and improving public transport so that it becomes a good option for more people.

Philippa Bond ● 3360d

I didn't want a CPZ, and voted against it- but I do want to be able to park my car. If the restrictions weren't there, I wouldn't be able to. Unfortunately, the council now has the residents over a barrel- and it needs the money. I very much doubt a change of regime would make any difference.

Mark Gormley ● 3360d

steady on there, at least now we can park our cars....I dont understand why it has gone up, but the area did need a CPZ, it was a total mess to park your car in Brentford....

Raki Smith ● 3360d