« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER TEN: RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents recommendations on how service providers can tackle the abuse of off-street parking intended for use by disabled people, based on the evidence obtained during the study. The conclusions of this study point to the need for service providers to consider the following:
1) Importance of enforcement and awareness-raising
Overall, the conclusions of this study point to the need for providers of off-street car parks to enforce spaces 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 the 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.
Evidence from previous research, from the consultations with service users undertaken in this study and from case study evidence, indicate that, in spite of any educational or awareness-raising activities that take place, actual enforcement is key to the prevention of abuse. At the same time, however, it is important for service providers to raise awareness, among all facility users, of any enforcement measures that are in place. This was a recurrent theme of the interviews with service users and providers, and was recognised as being an important issue.
2) Selection of intervention measures
A range of options exists for dealing with the abuse of parking facilities for disabled people. The evidence from this study is that there is no single method that would be appropriate and effective in all situations. Service providers are advised to:
- Assess and monitor the problem and causes of abuse at individual sites - undertake regular monitoring of the car park to check that parked vehicles are authorised to use the facilities, and consult users on their parking requirements.
- Consider issues surrounding the design and capacity of, and demand for, the car park, in order to select intervention measures that will be most practical and feasible to deploy for that particular site.
It should be noted that there are limitations with implementing any intervention measure, and as such, providers need to ensure that they deploy measures which are best suited to the specific requirements of the site. An assessment of contextual issues, considerations for intervention, practicalities of different intervention measures and their effectiveness is included in chapters seven and eight of this report as a guide for service providers.
3) Evaluate the type of abuse
The research has identified a number of factors that can be linked to the abuse of parking facilities at any given facility ( see chapter three). Service providers should be aware of the causes of abuse at the site and adopt solutions as appropriate. For example, the abuse of parking facilities could be eliminated by re-positioning facilities such as ATM machines, or implementing security measures to enhance customers' feeling of safety when using the car park at certain times of the day.
4) Consideration of practicalities involved
Service providers should consider the practicalities involved with different enforcement measures; for instance, it should be borne in mind that parking providers would need to find 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. The practical considerations and constraints of all the possible intervention measures have been evaluated in this study and highlighted in chapter eight of this report.
5) Clarification of the Blue Badge Scheme
The use and misuse of the Blue Badge Scheme has been identified as a major issue for providers of off-street car parks to consider. Therefore, raising awareness among service users on the correct use of the Blue Badge is another issue for consideration. One approach might be for this to be done using signs next to parking bays. This could also have a positive impact on reducing abuse that is motivated by perceptions of the misuse of the Blue Badge. One of the factors found to influence the research participants to abuse bays, was that they had seen other drivers misuse the Blue Badge Scheme.
6) Monitoring misuse of the Blue Badge Scheme
Misuse of the Blue Badge Scheme 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 would assist in identifying and targeting persistent offenders. (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 Ministers; this would be a prerequisite to establishing a record of abusers).
7) Charging for facilities/services
In principle, access to parking facilities was considered to be more important to disabled people in this research than free parking. The general feeling was that parking providers should have no qualms about charging disabled people for off-street parking, since the primary aim of parking concessions is to provide convenience, not to ease the cost of mobility. Others regarded the introduction of charging for reserved parking bays as a potentially contentious issue, as disabled people are statistically more likely to be on a low income than non-disabled people. Nonetheless, 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 to disabled users if a disabled person needs to visit the facility for medical reasons.
8) "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. Design considerations might include placing disabled people's bays close to the car park attendant's kiosk or the customer services desk, and the repositioning of facilities such as ATM machines.
9) Reducing the need to travel by private car
Service providers reported, from experience, that making more parking spaces available generally attracts more car drivers. It was suggested that implementing solutions that reduce car dependency and the need for people to access services by car would reduce pressure on parking. For example, hospitals serving rural catchment areas should consider alternatives, e.g. community transport, dedicated shuttle buses and other public transport solutions and initiatives, including 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.
10) "Dropping off" bays
Further to the previous recommendation, 'Dropping off' bays (reserved spaces situated outside a hospital entrance for dropping off or picking up a passenger) were a particular solution suggested for hospitals, considered to potentially tackle much abuse and thus prevent disabled people from missing appointments.
11) Traffic Regulation Orders
In order to make fines legally enforceable in off-street car parks, service providers need to apply to the appropriate Local Authority for a Traffic Regulation Order ( TRO). The making of a TRO is a statutory process which begins with a public consultation period. Following this, the proposed TRO will be advertised in the local press for 21 days, during which time formal objections can be raised. Service providers should be made aware of the time the application is expected to take if there are any objections (reported to take up to nine months). 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'. Service providers should refer to chapters seven and eight of this report for guidance on the use of TROs, and on where/how these have been shown to work.
12) "Naming and shaming"
Previous research has shown that 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 could sometimes have the effect of making some disabled people feel self-conscious. By the same token, any policy/equipment implemented to enforce parking bays should not in any way make it more difficult or less comfortable for disabled people to use them.
13) Need for education
The research highlighted a general perception that there is, among some members of the community, a lack of respect for disabled people and of the impacts that parking abuse can have on a disabled person. It was thought that this was a result of a lack of awareness of disability and of the different types of conditions that contribute to disability. Furthermore, a key finding of the research has been that some abusers (described as 'persistent' abusers in this report) do not believe that their actions have negative consequences for disabled people. Service providers should be aware of this, and should seek to play a role in educating their customers on the needs of disabled people.
14) Importance of consultation
The importance of user consultation to determine user needs and aspirations has been identified, including consultation with organisations representing the interests of disabled people, and other interested parties. Information on any scheme introduced should be clear, and time should be taken to develop the most appropriate strategy.
15) Circumstances in which abuse might be tolerated?
The study has drawn attention to the eligibility criteria for the Blue Badge Scheme. There are people with reduced mobility who do not fall within these eligibility criteria, which are effectively used as a proxy for entitlement to off-street reserved parking. 4 There might be a case for people who do not have a Blue Badge to use parking facilities that are reserved for disabled people. Furthermore, there are certain circumstances in which abuse of reserved parking facilities might be tolerated, such as for 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 »