The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 Introduction

This document reports on the findings and conclusions of a research project conducted by Transport & Travel Research Ltd on behalf of the Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning Department of the Scottish Executive. The overall aim of this research was to investigate and review measures used to combat the abuse of parking bays reserved for disabled people, and to put forward best practice guidance, based on a review of the evidence through both desk based research and carrying out interviews with key service providers and users, on the most effective measures that can be used in off-street car parks in Scotland. The purpose of this research was to provide advice and assistance for those responsible for the provision of off-street parking in adhering to the guidelines set out in the Disability Discrimination Act 2005.

2 Study Aims

The research aimed to:

• Explore and review the existing evidence-base of what is known about the effectiveness of different intervention methods
• Conduct an evaluation of a range of existing intervention methods which are considered to be of practical interest within a Scottish context, including perceived attitudes towards their effectiveness and practical considerations/constraints
• Build on existing knowledge of the psychological factors influencing abuse of parking facilities reserved for disabled people
• Provide advice and assistance for those responsible for the provision of off-street parking in adhering to the guidelines set out in the Disability Discrimination Act 2005

3 Method

In order to meet the above aims and objectives, a range of research methodologies were applied including:

• A desk-top review of existing evidence on the effectiveness of different intervention methods
• Six case studies covering a range of interventions, contexts and locations (these included interviews with service providers and 'bay abusers')
• Two stakeholder workshops
• Four focus groups with people with and without disabilities

In addition to the intervention measures deployed at the case study sites, the use and effectiveness of other intervention measures were reviewed, including high-tech and innovative approaches to the enforcement of off-street parking. The full range of measures considered included:

• Possible measures which are available to service providers for enforcing off-street parking. Among these were: polite notice, stickering, patrolled car parks, electronic barrier, remote controlled mini-barrier system for individual parking bays, automatic electronic announcement for bay users and Automatic Number Plate Recognition ( ANPR).
• Measures which are used in Scotland for the enforcement of on-street parking but are not commonly used in off-street car parks e.g. vehicle removal, the use of traffic wardens.
• Suggested measures which are not currently possible or legal for the enforcement of off-street parking but are used as methods of intervention for other offences, e.g. points on driving licence, and wheel clamping.

4 Overview

The research has shown that the abuse of off-street parking facilities intended for use by disabled people can be attributed to a number of factors which can vary in different contexts. The research participants who had abused such facilities were divided into five groups according to the factors underlying the abuse. These groups have been defined as 'in-denial' abusers, 'reluctant' abusers, 'justified' abusers and 'persistent' abusers. The fifth group includes misusers and fraudulent users of the Blue Badge. Service providers can tackle the abuse of reserved parking facilities through the deployment of a range of measures, but the appropriateness and effectiveness of an intervention method is likely to depend on the context and the factors that influence abuse at the particular site.

5 Summary of Findings

The research has identified the following key themes and issues:

The factors influencing abuse and key considerations for intervention

The abuse of off-street parking facilities reserved for disabled people, whilst perceived as being fairly widespread, varies in terms of the context of the parking facilities provided, the design and capacity of the car park, and the demand for parking. The research has found abuse to be more evident in heavily used car parks in comparison with car parks that are rarely at capacity. There is also evidence to suggest that there is a greater propensity for people to abuse reserved parking facilities in supermarkets/retail parks, than in any other context because there is a perception amongst non-disabled people (bay abusers) that more parking bays are reserved for disabled people than there are actually seen to be used by disabled people.

The design of car parks has been shown to play an important role in abuse and the possibilities for enforcement. A comparison of NHS hospital sites has revealed that much inappropriate parking is due to small and badly designed car parks. Another aspect that has increased pressure on hospital car parks is the fact that some of them are non-charging, and therefore tend to be used by people with no connection to the hospital.

Attitudes to, and understanding of disability varies by the type of facility provided at the car park, and this greatly influences the use of parking bays. For example, there is more consideration among the public for the needs of disabled people at hospitals than in other contexts, as the expectation is that the demand by disabled people for the bays is higher.

The research has identified that abuse could also be attributed to:

• Social factors - there might be a lack of understanding of disability among members of the public who see other people using reserved bays who do not appear to have a disability. People might also be inclined to follow the behaviour of other drivers, seeing abuse as being acceptable if others are seen to do it and get away with it.
• Reduced mobility - some people who do not qualify for a Blue Badge, including those with some temporary disabilities and permanent medical conditions, nevertheless consider that they have a mobility problem, and so feel they are entitled to park in reserved bays.
• Journey purpose - some journeys have increased pressure to park somewhere, e.g. hospital trips, travelling with small children, and work-related journeys.
• Bay design - the width and position of reserved bays, in relation to the entrance to a facility could make them convenient or attractive to people who want to collect heavy shopping, get children safely in and out of the vehicle, quickly nip in and out of a facility, or want to feel safe and secure. Bays that are positioned close to facilities such as ATM machines might be the subject of increased abuse. Also, potential abusers might think it is acceptable to park in a bay where capacity appears to exceed demand.
• Signage and bay markings - poor signage and inconsistent bay markings could lead to people using the bays inadvertently.
• Cost of parking - free parking for disabled people has been shown to increase abuse.
• Environmental - inclement weather might increase the probability of reserved parking bays being used by non-disabled people.
• Lack of enforcement - the lack of visible intervention or clear signage to warn drivers not to park inappropriately, or of the consequences of abuse, could clearly have an impact on non-disabled people's decisions on whether or not to use a reserved bay. Furthermore, the research participants generally did not expect to be penalised for misusing disabled person's parking bays in off-street car parks, as they did for on-street, which might be an indication of their awareness of the legal situation.
• Psychological - behaviour (whether or not a person abuses reserved parking bays) could be greatly dependent on a person's conscience; for example, whether or not the possible impacts of bay abuse on a disabled person are considered before he or she uses the bay. Some participants in this study (bay abusers) stated that they would not use a reserved bay if they thought that there was a possibility that a disabled person might be affected in a negative way.

Types of abuser

• The sample of 33 participants who stated that they had abused parking facilities intended for use by disabled people, could be divided into four groups, according to their attitudes and the reasons underlying their use of such facilities.
• These groups have been categorised as those 'in denial' of their actions, 'reluctant' abusers, 'justified' abusers (including those who considered their use of parking bays for disabled people to be justifiable), and 'persistent' abusers.
• 'Persistent' abusers admitted to using disabled people's parking bays on a regular basis and therefore, pose a real threat to disabled people's access to services. Some participants in this group had also committed other traffic and parking offences, such as speeding, parking on double yellow lines, and not paying parking fines.
• A fifth group was highlighted by the case study site providers and other stakeholders as being misusers and fraudulent users of the Blue Badge. As the study focused primarily on off-street parking, it did not evaluate misuse of the Blue Badge, but it has been raised as an important issue for providers of off-street car parks to consider.

Need for enforcement and considerations for intervention

• Abuse of reserved parking facilities had prevented many research participants (disabled people) from accessing a service - they had missed medical appointments, and had abandoned trips altogether because they were not able to access a suitable parking space.
• There was a call for intervention for the enforcement of reserved parking facilities for disabled people by service users (disabled and non-disabled people) and organisations representing the interests of disabled people consulted during the study.

• There was a strong feeling that, for any intervention measure to be effective, it must have consequences.
• Whilst legislation relating to the Blue Badge Scheme refers primarily to on-street parking, the promotion of a Traffic Regulation Order ( TRO) to protect an off-street parking bay can restrict its use to Blue Badge holders.

Effectiveness of intervention measures and their appropriateness in different contexts

The evidence from this study is that there is no single method that would be appropriate and effective in all situations. The approach to enforcement should be relevant to the context and type of facility, design of the car park and the resources available to carry out monitoring and enforcement.

This research has evaluated the effectiveness and appropriateness of a range of possible intervention measures as follows:

Car park management

A patrolled car park is most effective when the site is integrated and where there is one single entry point to the reserved bays that are segregated from the rest of the car park. The opportunity for direct, face-to-face involvement with a parking attendant, together with signs adjacent to parking bays warning of the imposition of a fine, does seem to reduce abuse.

Barrier systems

In sites where there are limited resources available and regular monitoring by staff is not possible, barrier systems could offer the best solution. Alternatively, in smaller car parks, a provider might consider installing a remote controlled mini-barrier system in individual bays, but this is shown to be only practical for sites that have a 'closed' membership. Barrier systems were regarded as the clearest and fairest intervention measures in terms of their intended purpose. Furthermore, they can offer the only means of preventing all types of abuse and might be the most effective solution to preventing 'persistent' abuse.

Automatic Number Plate Recognition

Supermarket providers have realised that the use of Automatic Number Plate Recognition ( ANPR) camera technology works well in monitoring the use of segregated parking areas for registered disabled customers and in dealing with the problem on the spot, without the need to penalise customers. This is particularly important for the retail sector where the aim is to attract as many customers as possible. This relies on 'live' monitoring, otherwise the action caught on camera would need to be followed up with a warning, or penalty. With ANPR there is no requirement for staff to regularly patrol the car park or confront potentially aggressive service users, which precludes concerns relating to health and safety.

Imposition of fines

The research has shown that the imposition of fines could be effective at reducing inappropriate parking, but that this might depend on whether the fine is enforced by a parking attendant or a traffic warden. The comparison of municipal parking in Edinburgh and Inverness has also shown that compliance in paying fixed penalty fines is lower in Edinburgh, where parking has been decriminalised, than it is in Inverness, where parking is still dealt with by the city's traffic wardens. Fines can be imposed on customers found to be parked inappropriately, given that the motorist enters into a contract with the car park provider as soon as he or she starts to use the facility. Much reliance is placed on the compliance of the motorist, in terms of both payment of any fine imposed, and any change in relation to parking behaviour in the future.

To make these fines legally enforceable the provider needs to apply for a Traffic Regulation Order ( TRO). TROs have been found to be an effective method for reducing inappropriate parking in some cities (e.g. Inverness and Stirling), but it has emerged that the application, enforcement and parameters of a TRO (including costs, maintenance, potential changes to the value of the land etc) need further clarification among service providers.

'Charging for all'

One of the main factors influencing abuse related to the fact that free parking is provided for disabled people. The introduction of a 'charging for all policy' for parking at Ninewells hospital has resulted in a significant reduction in the occurrence of abuse at these sites. However, consideration should be given to offering concessions to disabled users if a disabled person needs to visit the facility for medical needs.

Advisory measures

Advisory measures such as automated electronic announcements and bay design, although essential in preventing 'accidental' abuse, were shown to have little impact on preventing other types of abuse when used on their own.

6 Recommendations

In summary, the conclusions of the research point to the need for service providers of off-street car parks to consider the following key points:

1. The importance of intervention for the enforcement of bays reserved for disabled people should abuse occur or at least be a possibility. If providers do not monitor whether the service is accessible to disabled customers by ensuring that reserved spaces are not used by non-disabled customers, then it is possible for a disabled person to make a claim against the service provider under Part III of the Discrimination Disability Act ( DDA) 2005.
2. There is no single intervention method that would be appropriate and effective in all situations. Service providers are advised to undertake regular monitoring of the car park, and consult users on their parking requirements to determine the factors influencing abuse, and to consider issues surrounding the design, capacity and demand levels of the car park, in order to select intervention measures that will be most practical and effective.
3. Service providers should consider the practicalities involved with different enforcement measures. For instance, parking providers may need to find significant financial resources for some enforcement measures, and other policies may entail putting staff potentially at risk when confronting members of the public. There are also certain regulations to consider, e.g. attaching stickers to cars might infringe the rights of the vehicle owner.
4. The use and misuse of Blue Badges has been identified as a major issue for providers of off-street car parks to consider, as has raising awareness among service users on the correct use of the Blue Badge. One approach might be for this to be done using signs next to parking bays.
5. Monitoring misuse of the Blue Badge has been raised as an important issue for providers of off-street car parks to consider. The use of automatic number plate recognition ( ANPR) has been suggested as a potential method for doing this. It has also been suggested that the creation of a database of offenders that could be used by a number of enforcement agencies, in order to identify and target persistent offenders, might be beneficial. (The establishment of a national database of Blue Badge Holders was a key recommendation of the 2002 review of the scheme by the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee ( DPTAC), and one that was accepted by UK Ministers. This would be a prerequisite to establishing a record of abusers).
6. Charging for facilities/services - in principle, access to services was considered to be more important to research participants with a disability than free parking. The general perception was that disabled people would be willing to pay for parking if it meant they were guaranteed to have access to a reserved bay. However, consideration should be given to offering concessions in particular circumstances, e.g. if a disabled person needs to visit the facility for medical needs.
7. 'Designing out abuse' and reducing the need to travel by private car - there are benefits of 'designing out' abuse through thoughtful car park design, as opposed to penalising or confronting abusers. Additionally, implementing solutions that reduce car dependency and the need for people to access services by car would reduce pressure on parking, e.g. community transport, dedicated shuttle buses and other public transport solutions, and initiatives such as Green Travel Plans. It was considered important to encourage staff (especially at hospitals) to make "greener" travel choices, to relieve pressure on demand for parking facilities at hospital sites generally. Other design considerations might include placing reserved parking bays close to the car park attendant's kiosk or the customer services desk and the repositioning of facilities such as ATM machines.

8. 'Dropping off' bays - reserved bays situated outside a hospital entrance, for dropping off or picking up a passenger, might be a possible solution for hospitals; it was considered that such a move might potentially tackle much abuse and prevent people from missing medical appointments.
9. Traffic Regulation Orders - in order to make fines legally enforceable in off-street car parks, service providers need to apply to use a Traffic Regulation Order ( TRO). There are issues that service providers should consider before applying for a TRO, such as the need to ensure signs and bay markings conform to the Traffic Sign Regulations and the prescriptive nature of the application process, from drafting a TRO, to its eventual 'seal'.
10. 'Naming and shaming' - the 'embarrassment factor' associated with being shown to have parked in a bay reserved for a disabled person can be a powerful deterrent (except for persistent offenders). However, highlighting offenders' actions might sometimes have the effect of making some disabled people feel self-conscious. Any policy or equipment implemented to enforce parking bays should not in any way make it more difficult or less comfortable for disabled people to use them.
11. Need for education - the research highlighted a general perception that there is, among some people, a lack of respect for disabled people and of the impacts that parking abuse can have on a disabled person. Service providers should be aware of this, and should seek to play a role in educating their customers in the needs of disabled people.
12. Consultation with service users is important, to determine user needs and aspirations. Information on any scheme introduced should be clear and time should be taken to develop the most appropriate strategy.
13. Circumstances in which abuse might be tolerated - there are people with reduced mobility who do not fall within the eligibility criteria of the Blue Badge scheme although these badges are often effectively used as a proxy for entitlement to off-street reserved parking. There might be a case for people who do not have a Blue Badge to use parking facilities that are reserved for disabled people, such as for non-disabled patients who drive to hospital for treatment and clearly need to park somewhere (e.g. out-patients including heavily pregnant women), and in some car parks that become anti-social environments at night time, so that more vulnerable users might feel safer parking close to their destination. However, acceptance of these circumstances can only realistically be enforced where there is a car park attendant or other member of staff present who is able to make a considered judgment on the merits of an individual case.

« Previous | Contents | Next »