Question 13630 — road safety

Summary

Ms. Emmanuelle Ménard draws the attention of the Minister of the Economy and Finance to the implementation of the parking reform and the difficulties in recovering post-parking packages from their customers by vehicle rental companies and other players in the peer-to-peer sharing sector. Indeed, the law for the modernization of territorial public action and the affirmation of metropolises (known as the MAPTAM law), entered into force on January 1, 2018, by establishing the decriminalization and decentralization of paid parking, modified the possibility for these rental companies to designate the tenant responsible for the vehicle when committing the offense. Today, they must pay the post-parking fee (FPS) before turning against the tenant in an attempt to recover the amount paid. This This situation has damaging consequences for these shared mobility operators. Indeed, current legislation does not allow these operators to transfer, in the context of their activity, responsibility for payment of the FPS to the holder of the vehicle rental contract. In the present situation, any clause introducing, into the general conditions of rental contracts, the automatic passing on of the FPS charge on the customer would be qualified as an unfair clause under consumer law. This situation therefore has considerable financial consequences and goes so far as to call into question the economic sustainability of shared mobility companies. The FSP amounts are sometimes much higher than the average daily profit from short-term rental of a vehicle. On the scale of an independent company and franchised, it involves around a hundred FPS per month, for amounts between 1,000 and 3,000 euros. Furthermore, in the event that the customer wishes to challenge the validity of the FPS, the law does not allow him to do so because the challenge can only be made by the holder of the registration certificate, in this case the rental company. This attack on the right to contest the FPS reveals a breach of the constitutional principle of right to appeal. It is important to emphasize that shared mobility players provide a response adapted to the mobility needs of users and represent an alternative to vehicle ownership. They also contribute significantly to the renewal of the vehicle fleet with rental fleets made up of recent vehicles. She would like to know what steps he has taken, if any, to find a solution to this situation which is particularly damaging to the activity and development of shared mobility operators.

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.