Question 13626 — road safety

Summary

Mr. Patrick Vignal questions the Minister of the Interior on the implementation of the post-parking package (FPS) and its organizational and economic consequences which currently weigh on shared mobility operators. Previously, rental companies had the option, in the event of a parking fine, to name the tenant responsible. From now on, they must first pay the FPS payment and then turn against the tenant in order to recover the amount. This situation poses several major difficulties for shared mobility operators but also for rental customers. On the one hand, current legislation does not allow these operators to transfer, in the context of their activity, the responsibility for paying the FPS to the actual driver of the vehicle. On the other hand, and in the event that the customer wishes challenge the validity of the FPS, the law does not allow it because the challenge can only be made by the holder of the registration certificate (in this case the shared mobility operator). This attack on the right to contest the FPS reveals a breach of the principle of constitutional value of the right to appeal. This is why he asks what recourse is available to shared mobility operators and their customers can deal with this type of situation. He also asks whether a modification of the MAPTAM law is currently being considered in order to reestablish a fairer mechanism for designating the responsible tenant.

Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

No documents linked.

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.