 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Are they worst people in the world, or not?
Ok, they've got a job to do, I know. Some people are real pricks and
certainly deserve a ticket (or being clamped) for where they're parked,
that's for sure. But, what about the 'Little Hitler' wardens? Are they Scum
or what? And I mean Scum too.
Yes, yes, I got a ticket - first one ever in 20 years of driving. It
wouldn't be so bad if I was on double yellows, or parked/blocked somewhere I
shouldn't have, BUT, take a look at the attached, that car isn't mine, but
that's *exactly* how I parked on the 24th August. It's a TWO CAR BAY. The
reason I got a ticket? My rear wheels were over the back line just like that
car. I took that picture this morning, but wait, it's Sunday, I doubt if he
got a ticket...
You know, I'm raging with anger about it, really. That image is being
printed out and sent with a letter to the local council. I'll first get them
to admit that it's a two car bay, and then I'll argue why the bay isn't big
enough for two cars*, and if they say it is, (which they can't), I'll ask
them to cancel the freakin' fine of £60 (£30 if paid within 14 days). And if
they insist I pay it, I'll pay it, but it will cost THEM 5 times as much,
and then I'll have MY satisfaction! >:o(
This is why the world is angry.
~Steve~
*Two years ago, I watched some council workers out of that very window
measuring that very bay and all of the bays in that road - but then nothing
happened, no change whatsoever. Why did they do that?
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'parking.jpg' (115 KB)
Preview of image 'parking.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
For clarification.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'back_line.jpg' (65 KB)
Preview of image 'back_line.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Woah there... do *not* annoy Steve! o_O
My dad gets annoyed about his neighbors. They insist on parking a large
van exactly on the corner of the road where my dad's driveway is. This
in spite of the fact that their own drive is empty, and there are not
one but 2 empty laybys within 18 feet on the van.
My dad tells me that when he wins the lottery, he's going to be a
****-of Big Foot. And he's going to drive it down the road and
accidentally mutilate that van. Sure, he'll probably have to pay for a
new van. But at least it'll be mutilated then.
Hmm, come to think of it... don't upset my dad! ._.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Orchid XP v3" <voi### [at] dev null> wrote in message
news:46db18e4$1@news.povray.org...
> Woah there... do *not* annoy Steve! o_O
No, you've got that wrong, plenty of things, plenty of people can annoy
me, but just do it fairly, that's all I ask. I'm a hands-up guy for
something I've done wrong, no problem, but two rear wheels over a line?! I
didn't even know it was against the law to do that (and I've done that
particular parking in that same spot LOADS of times - no ticket). So a smart
car would be ok, but a long car like mine (Rover 820) and the one in the
image is not? Let's get real here, prejudice against long cars is not
illegal?
Bar Stewards.
> My dad gets annoyed about his neighbors. They insist on parking a large
> van exactly on the corner of the road where my dad's driveway is. This in
> spite of the fact that their own drive is empty, and there are not one but
> 2 empty laybys within 18 feet on the van.
>
> My dad tells me that when he wins the lottery, he's going to be a ****-of
> Big Foot. And he's going to drive it down the road and accidentally
> mutilate that van.
No, not accidently, on purpose - and I don't blame him. I hope he's asked
nicely in the past though before he crushes that van...
Sure, he'll probably have to pay for a
> new van. But at least it'll be mutilated then.
>
> Hmm, come to think of it... don't upset my dad! ._.
I now know where he's coming from. You should learn from him. I didn't
have a real Dad to learn from. (Well, I did, but a late Victorian
Grandfather that I called 'Dad'). My Grandad was my father in spirit. F*ck,
I miss him though - really. He was a great guy, he taught me to be the way
he was in a new world that he didn't know. I wish I knew him now at my age,
but, he's gone.
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. wrote:
> Are they worst people in the world, or not?
>
> Ok, they've got a job to do, I know. Some people are real pricks and
> certainly deserve a ticket (or being clamped) for where they're parked,
> that's for sure. But, what about the 'Little Hitler' wardens? Are they Scum
> or what? And I mean Scum too.
>
> Yes, yes, I got a ticket - first one ever in 20 years of driving. It
> wouldn't be so bad if I was on double yellows, or parked/blocked somewhere I
> shouldn't have, BUT, take a look at the attached, that car isn't mine, but
> that's *exactly* how I parked on the 24th August. It's a TWO CAR BAY. The
> reason I got a ticket? My rear wheels were over the back line just like that
> car. I took that picture this morning, but wait, it's Sunday, I doubt if he
> got a ticket...
>
> You know, I'm raging with anger about it, really. That image is being
> printed out and sent with a letter to the local council. I'll first get them
> to admit that it's a two car bay, and then I'll argue why the bay isn't big
> enough for two cars*, and if they say it is, (which they can't), I'll ask
> them to cancel the freakin' fine of £60 (£30 if paid within 14 days). And if
> they insist I pay it, I'll pay it, but it will cost THEM 5 times as much,
> and then I'll have MY satisfaction! >:o(
>
> This is why the world is angry.
>
> ~Steve~
>
> *Two years ago, I watched some council workers out of that very window
> measuring that very bay and all of the bays in that road - but then nothing
> happened, no change whatsoever. Why did they do that?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Dunno Steve, I'm thinking you'll loose this one. I mean suppose the
foreward car was some big mother Esplanade or something else huge, a
motor home or something, such that it is taking most of the space. Are
you going to insist that because it is a 'two-car' space you can park
your minicoup or whatever, and block the guy's drive, just because maybe
you can get your front nose over the line and into some fraction of the
space? Or what if 4 motor bikes were there? Seems like you could park
whatever you want as long as you don't violate the end markings, but if
you can't fit your car in, however reasonable its size, then you just can't?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 21:12:30 +0100, Orchid XP v3 wrote:
> My dad tells me that when he wins the lottery, he's going to be a
> ****-of Big Foot. And he's going to drive it down the road and
> accidentally mutilate that van. Sure, he'll probably have to pay for a
> new van. But at least it'll be mutilated then.
There are days where I wish I was driving a real beater (something worth
< $200) on the road, just so I could ram people who are being stupid
idiots.
The roll cage and reinforced bumpers *might* just be a giveaway though...
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote in message
news:46db376a$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>> Are they worst people in the world, or not?
> Dunno Steve, I'm thinking you'll loose this one. I mean suppose the
> foreward car was some big mother Esplanade or something else huge, a motor
> home or something, such that it is taking most of the space. Are you
> going to insist that because it is a 'two-car' space you can park your
> minicoup or whatever, and block the guy's drive, just because maybe you
> can get your front nose over the line and into some fraction of the space?
> Or what if 4 motor bikes were there? Seems like you could park whatever
> you want as long as you don't violate the end markings, but if you can't
> fit your car in, however reasonable its size, then you just can't?
Oh, I know I'll lose, I'm prepared to pay. As for parking there if there
was a bigger vehicle parked there, and say, there was only half a space, I
just wouldn't park there, knowing full well that I'd probably get a ticket
with half a car stuck out the back end. But, what's that distance in the
picture? A foot? 18 inches? It's just petty, that's all. My main point is if
it's going to be a two car bay, then make sure that it's big enough for two
cars in the first place, otherwise, what's the point?
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> There are days where I wish I was driving a real beater (something worth
> < $200) on the road, just so I could ram people who are being stupid
> idiots.
Oh when I left university I didn't have much money and I got my car for £50
from someone who was going to scrap it. There was a big dent in the driver
side door and a few other smaller dents. You would not believe how many
people got out of the way when there was a "fight" for position on the road
(like 2 lanes going down into 1) - it really was cool.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Oh, I know I'll lose, I'm prepared to pay. As for parking there if there
> was a bigger vehicle parked there, and say, there was only half a space, I
> just wouldn't park there, knowing full well that I'd probably get a ticket
> with half a car stuck out the back end. But, what's that distance in the
> picture? A foot? 18 inches? It's just petty, that's all. My main point is
> if it's going to be a two car bay, then make sure that it's big enough for
> two cars in the first place, otherwise, what's the point?
Both cars in the photo look pretty large cars. Two smaller cars (or even
one big and one small) would fit easily in there.
BTW, why is it illegal there to park outside the marked bays? There doesn't
seem to be any yellow lines, or does it say on the sign "parking only in
marked bays"? Around where I used to live people always parked how you did
and nobody got a ticket.
If it was me, I would write in the letter for a clarification of exactly
what the white line means. Does your entire tyre foot-print have to be
inside the inner border of the line, or is it allowed to be on the line. Or
does it mean your entire car must be inside the line, overhangs and all, and
which side of the line counts... etc. If they don't have a detailed policy
on this then how can they prosecute people in a fair way, it's probably
against some European human rights thingy that they have to treat everyone
fairly.. blah blah blah.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 09:16:28 +0200, scott wrote:
> Oh when I left university I didn't have much money and I got my car for
> £50 from someone who was going to scrap it. There was a big dent in the
> driver side door and a few other smaller dents. You would not believe
> how many people got out of the way when there was a "fight" for position
> on the road (like 2 lanes going down into 1) - it really was cool.
I can imagine. There was a staffer where I went to university who worked
deals like that on cars, I imagine he also didn't have to fight hard to
get position on the road. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"scott" <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote in message news:46dbb643@news.povray.org...
> Both cars in the photo look pretty large cars.
They are. Mine's a Rover 820, which is also large.
Two smaller cars (or even
> one big and one small) would fit easily in there.
That's also my point - it's kind of like a descrimination against big
(or long, like mine) cars.
>
> BTW, why is it illegal there to park outside the marked bays? There
> doesn't seem to be any yellow lines, or does it say on the sign "parking
> only in marked bays"?
I have no idea why it's illegal. All I know is that since the police
don't control parking regs any more, there's been a drive to get as many
people booked with an offence as much as possible. Seriously, you should see
the parking attendants in action around here, they all walk fast looking for
the next one.
Around where I used to live people always parked how you did
> and nobody got a ticket.
Scott, I could sit at that window all day and take a zillion pictures
of people parking 'illegally' just like I did and that person did, and then
send all those pictures (without the number plates obscured) to the council.
That would upset the apple cart! >:o)
>
> If it was me, I would write in the letter for a clarification of exactly
> what the white line means. Does your entire tyre foot-print have to be
> inside the inner border of the line, or is it allowed to be on the line.
> Or does it mean your entire car must be inside the line, overhangs and
> all, and which side of the line counts... etc. If they don't have a
> detailed policy on this then how can they prosecute people in a fair way,
> it's probably against some European human rights thingy that they have to
> treat everyone fairly.. blah blah blah.
It's a new directive over here now. As I said, the police don't control
parking any more, the council employs people to do it. It's a self financing
thing too, so money has to be incoming. I just found this in one of our
council's PDF files:
"20. What if I think the Penalty Charge Notice (ticket) was issued
unfairly?
You write to us saying why you think it was unfair. We will consider your
arguments and give you our response. If we believe the ticket was issued for
valid reasons but you are unhappy with the decision you have the right to
appeal to an independent adjudication body (National Parking Adjudication
Service). We will tell you whom to contact if you want to do this."
It's obvious this is what's going to happen, so I think I'll follow
through with this if they say I still have to pay. It's the principal. I
wasn't blocking anyone, and my car wasn't at an angle or anything else - my
wheels were outside of the back line, that's all.
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I have no idea why it's illegal. All I know is that since the police
> don't control parking regs any more, there's been a drive to get as many
> people booked with an offence as much as possible.
I would check that an offence has actually been committed though. Without
any other lines or signs, the white parking lines do not mean anything
legally. Ask them to tell you exactly which law you were breaking, AFAIK
there is no law that says "you must not park outside marked parking spaces".
Usually where I've seen marked spaces, the rest of the road has double
reds/yellows or at least a sign that says similar.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"scott" <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote in message
news:46dbd735$1@news.povray.org...
>> I have no idea why it's illegal. All I know is that since the police
>> don't control parking regs any more, there's been a drive to get as many
>> people booked with an offence as much as possible.
>
> I would check that an offence has actually been committed though. Without
> any other lines or signs, the white parking lines do not mean anything
> legally. Ask them to tell you exactly which law you were breaking, AFAIK
> there is no law that says "you must not park outside marked parking
> spaces".
> Usually where I've seen marked spaces, the rest of the road has double
> reds/yellows or at least a sign that says similar.
Yes, I'm going to ask them this because really, at the end of the day,
there is no offence. See the attached. Why are those two cars allowed to
park across the road like that? That blue car can't have received any
tickets because it's been parking there everyday for the last two years. The
car in the other image where I was parked also got a ticket, (you can just
see it on the windscreen) and at first glance I would say that it's her
fault that she didn't move a bit further on, but then I don't know what the
circumstances were when she first parked there - there may well have been a
bigger vehicle in front of her instead of the car now.
The official signs that are there are only 2 hour waiting signs, there's
nothing that says you must park within the lines.
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'park3.jpg' (66 KB)
Download 'park2.jpg' (36 KB)
Preview of image 'park3.jpg'
Preview of image 'park2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Yes, I'm going to ask them this because really, at the end of the
> day, there is no offence. See the attached. Why are those two cars allowed
> to park across the road like that? That blue car can't have received any
> tickets because it's been parking there everyday for the last two years.
> The car in the other image where I was parked also got a ticket, (you can
> just see it on the windscreen) and at first glance I would say that it's
> her fault that she didn't move a bit further on, but then I don't know
> what the circumstances were when she first parked there - there may well
> have been a bigger vehicle in front of her instead of the car now.
>
> The official signs that are there are only 2 hour waiting signs,
> there's nothing that says you must park within the lines.
From those photos I can't see anything that indicates any of the cars are
parked illegally or dangerously. Look at the red car across the street, it
is parked in practically the same position as the red car in the foreground
(position of rear wheel relative to the sunken kerb). Why should one get a
ticket and not the other?
If you'd parked on the single yellow line, then fair enough, but you
weren't, by a long way.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. wrote:
> "Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote in message
> news:46db376a$1@news.povray.org...
>
>>St. wrote:
>>
>>> Are they worst people in the world, or not?
>
>
>>Dunno Steve, I'm thinking you'll loose this one. I mean suppose the
>>foreward car was some big mother Esplanade or something else huge, a motor
>>home or something, such that it is taking most of the space. Are you
>>going to insist that because it is a 'two-car' space you can park your
>>minicoup or whatever, and block the guy's drive, just because maybe you
>>can get your front nose over the line and into some fraction of the space?
>>Or what if 4 motor bikes were there? Seems like you could park whatever
>>you want as long as you don't violate the end markings, but if you can't
>>fit your car in, however reasonable its size, then you just can't?
>
>
> Oh, I know I'll lose, I'm prepared to pay. As for parking there if there
> was a bigger vehicle parked there, and say, there was only half a space, I
> just wouldn't park there, knowing full well that I'd probably get a ticket
> with half a car stuck out the back end. But, what's that distance in the
> picture? A foot? 18 inches? It's just petty, that's all. My main point is if
> it's going to be a two car bay, then make sure that it's big enough for two
> cars in the first place, otherwise, what's the point?
>
> ~Steve~
>
>
Ahh. Okay, I see what you mean on the 'pettiness' point, that you are
not really doing harm, and the marking is a guideline. You might even
get a break there. I mean if expanding the zone is common practice. On
the other hand maybe the owner of the driveway complained. My brother
lives in a very toney, leafy, old money section of Toronto with quiet,
wide streets. When I went to visit him once it became apparent that
parking was the undeclared war in the neighbourhood. Before even saying
hello to me my sister-in-law asks me where I parked! In NY there is an
actual measurement, 15 inches 2 feet? something like that, that applies
to driveways. I know one fellow who actually took a picture of a
situation when he got ticketed but the parking bureau just told him that
he could of moved the car before taking the pic! Obviously not, they
were packed in like sardines, if he could have he would have in the
first place.
I'm having problems on the 'two car' idea though. I mean what is the
alternative? Somehow try and mark the space for one 'full size' car and
limit it to that? Then what do you do if you have something bigger? At
least they are giving as much space as they can. Seems to me they are
just saying here are the limits, use it however, just don't violate the
lines. There are parking *meters* in NY here, usually at the back of a
block, that are setup such that there is no way the space will
accommodate a full size model car. And beware the driver who parks with
his rear bumper a fraction into the pedestrian crosswalk. But hey, the
city needs the money, and everyone wants parking, and so if you have a
small enough car? I mean think of it this way, maybe the sanctimonious
little sh*t in his little car, who gets the little space, would
otherwise be taking the full size space you need. Lame, but the best I
can do for you.
What I hate? Here the cops are all over yellow cabs for blocking
traffic. Meanwhile cab drivers suffer from kidney stones, driving 11
hours a shift with no where to piss. There are taxi relief stands,
quite a lot of them actually, but you would never know it. Everyone
just parks in them as if they are free parking, and the signs are never
enforced by these traffic bums.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote in message
news:46dc2187@news.povray.org...
> Ahh. Okay, I see what you mean on the 'pettiness' point, that you are not
> really doing harm, and the marking is a guideline. You might even get a
> break there.
I doubt it Jim. You don't know our local (money-strapped, bollox)
councils. But, I'll try to see if I can get off it. Let's see what
happens... Two images and a printed letter is heading their way tomorrow...
> I mean if expanding the zone is common practice.
No, it's not at all common practice, (not around here anyway, maybe
London or other cities). Once painted, it's there until you start dying of
old age. There have been cases where if double yellow lines (bad, don't park
there), have frayed at the edges or the ends of the lines, then any penalty
notices won't be entertained by the courts if said person takes a picture
veryfying this.
On
> the other hand maybe the owner of the driveway complained.
No, no, I work there (some days, to meet customers). I get on well with
the landlord. Even if he complained, (and doesn't know my car by now), the
council wouldn't act on his say-so unless there really was a blockage of his
driveway, they would come and ask me a few questions first I think...
My brother
> lives in a very toney, leafy, old money section of Toronto with quiet,
> wide streets. When I went to visit him once it became apparent that
> parking was the undeclared war in the neighbourhood. Before even saying
> hello to me my sister-in-law asks me where I parked!
Damn, that's bad...
In NY there is an
> actual measurement, 15 inches 2 feet? something like that, that applies to
> driveways. I know one fellow who actually took a picture of a situation
> when he got ticketed but the parking bureau just told him that he could of
> moved the car before taking the pic! Obviously not, they were packed in
> like sardines, if he could have he would have in the first place.
Yeah, as numbers, we're just meant to take everything everyone throws
at us. "Ooh, bad parking, that's a £60 fine thanks." "Just pay it, or you'll
go to jail in the end if you don't, and your life will be messed up
bigtime."
wtf. Bringiton.
>
> I'm having problems on the 'two car' idea though. I mean what is the
> alternative? Somehow try and mark the space for one 'full size' car and
> limit it to that?
The bay directly opposite is a 'one car' bay, but you could fit two
'smart' cars in there, I reckon, but definately not two 'normal' cars.
Then what do you do if you have something bigger? At
> least they are giving as much space as they can. Seems to me they are
> just saying here are the limits, use it however, just don't violate the
> lines.
And I've never seen this example written in stone yet. AFAIK, the local
laws haven't been published to say that you can't park with your wheels
outside of the line...
It might be published somewhere, but it hasn't been put through my
letterbox.
There are parking *meters* in NY here, usually at the back of a
> block, that are setup such that there is no way the space will accommodate
> a full size model car. And beware the driver who parks with his rear
> bumper a fraction into the pedestrian crosswalk. But hey, the city needs
> the money, and everyone wants parking, and so if you have a small enough
> car? I mean think of it this way, maybe the sanctimonious little sh*t in
> his little car, who gets the little space, would otherwise be taking the
> full size space you need. Lame, but the best I can do for you.
Thanks Jim, I know you mean to help. Yes, if a smaller car took two
spaces in a two car bay, then shouldn't it also get a ticket?
>
> What I hate? Here the cops are all over yellow cabs for blocking traffic.
> Meanwhile cab drivers suffer from kidney stones, driving 11 hours a shift
> with no where to piss. There are taxi relief stands, quite a lot of them
> actually, but you would never know it. Everyone just parks in them as if
> they are free parking, and the signs are never enforced by these traffic
> bums.
Damn, Jim, that's bad. I thought I had hassles... It's hard work to
take a wizz? Man, I'd wizz in the back and blame the fares... (?)
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. wrote:
> Damn, Jim, that's bad. I thought I had hassles... It's hard work to
> take a wizz? Man, I'd wizz in the back and blame the fares... (?)
>
Well there is what the younger guys smirkingly refer to as 'the bathroom
in the taxi'
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. wrote:
> Are they worst people in the world, or not?
>
> Ok, they've got a job to do, I know. Some people are real pricks and
> certainly deserve a ticket (or being clamped) for where they're parked,
> that's for sure. But, what about the 'Little Hitler' wardens? Are they Scum
> or what? And I mean Scum too.
>
> Yes, yes, I got a ticket - first one ever in 20 years of driving. It
> wouldn't be so bad if I was on double yellows, or parked/blocked somewhere I
> shouldn't have, BUT, take a look at the attached, that car isn't mine, but
> that's *exactly* how I parked on the 24th August. It's a TWO CAR BAY. The
> reason I got a ticket? My rear wheels were over the back line just like that
> car. I took that picture this morning, but wait, it's Sunday, I doubt if he
> got a ticket...
>
> You know, I'm raging with anger about it, really. That image is being
> printed out and sent with a letter to the local council. I'll first get them
> to admit that it's a two car bay, and then I'll argue why the bay isn't big
> enough for two cars*, and if they say it is, (which they can't), I'll ask
> them to cancel the freakin' fine of £60 (£30 if paid within 14 days). And if
> they insist I pay it, I'll pay it, but it will cost THEM 5 times as much,
> and then I'll have MY satisfaction! >:o(
>
> This is why the world is angry.
>
> ~Steve~
>
> *Two years ago, I watched some council workers out of that very window
> measuring that very bay and all of the bays in that road - but then nothing
> happened, no change whatsoever. Why did they do that?
>
>
>
Many years ago I got a ticket for parking on the wrong side of the road
- against traffic.
It was a residential road with very little traffic, but bumper-bumper
parking. I saw a spot and parked it - there was no easy place to turn
around that I saw.
20 minutes I come back to find a ticket - but there was no fine marked
so I just ignored it.
30 days later I got a 'double fine' ticket in the mail for failure to
pay. I argued that one and sent a copy showing no fine marked.
They were actually very polite and sent a letter stating that even tho
no fine was marked I had still broken the law and owed the fine - but
they removed the penalty for not paying on time.
I think most of the time officers need to meet quotas or the
municipality actually budgets the fines into their fiscal system.
I know MANY places that lower the speed limit by 10 mph for no reason at
all just to place a speed trap.
Therefore you get screwed.
Oh well... tis life.
Sock it to em Steve!
Tom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tom Austin" <taustin> wrote in message news:46dd5439$1@news.povray.org...
> Many years ago I got a ticket for parking on the wrong side of the road -
> against traffic.
> It was a residential road with very little traffic, but bumper-bumper
> parking. I saw a spot and parked it - there was no easy place to turn
> around that I saw.
>
> 20 minutes I come back to find a ticket - but there was no fine marked so
> I just ignored it.
You get a box on the ticket where the warden can check it if there's a
fine to pay or not 'in their opinion'? Man, I wish we had that. Ours are
just 'pay first, or else'.
>
> 30 days later I got a 'double fine' ticket in the mail for failure to pay.
> I argued that one and sent a copy showing no fine marked.
>
> They were actually very polite and sent a letter stating that even tho no
> fine was marked I had still broken the law and owed the fine - but they
> removed the penalty for not paying on time.
Ok, fair enough I suppose... but were you aware that it was illegal to
park backwards where you are? I *think* it would be illegal here in the UK
if it was a one-way street. I.E., the actual offence would be 'driving down
a one-way street the wrong way and then parking incorrectly'. I would never
do this, but if I did, I think that's the terms they would use... Or some
code that no-one has ever heard of...
>
> I think most of the time officers need to meet quotas or the municipality
> actually budgets the fines into their fiscal system.
Well, I learnt that our new system is now 'self financing' which to
me means 'get as many as you can in a day/week and everything will be all
right Jack, you'll keep your job'.
>
> I know MANY places that lower the speed limit by 10 mph for no reason at
> all just to place a speed trap.
>
> Therefore you get screwed.
>
> Oh well... tis life.
Yeah, it's life, but it ain't right.
>
> Sock it to em Steve!
:o) Thanks Tom! Well, I sent one good glossy print of that other (gold) car
and asked why it's illegal when there is actually no danger to pedestrians
or other road users, or not blocking that particular drive-way. (BTW, If
you've been wondering, I work there, that's our office (hence the window
shot) for this area. I could have parked freely in the space that you see in
the foreground, (behind the walls), but two cars were taking up *my*
official spaces, and I was only going to be there a couple of minutes on
that day, so I parked where I did, and that wouldn't be the first time I did
that).
I've held the second image (the one with the red car, and the red car
opposite that Scott kindly beamed in on) back. I'm hoping for some mistake
on their part with this, because that's all I've got.
Bye-bye £30? I'll let you know what happens.
~Steve~
> Tom
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. wrote:
> "Tom Austin" <taustin> wrote in message news:46dd5439$1@news.povray.org...
>
>
>
> You get a box on the ticket where the warden can check it if there's a
> fine to pay or not 'in their opinion'? Man, I wish we had that. Ours are
> just 'pay first, or else'.
>
No, they just check the fine amount - none was checked on my ticket.
I think it is a standard fine for a particular infraction.
They try to make it generic enough to catch everything.
>
> Ok, fair enough I suppose... but were you aware that it was illegal to
> park backwards where you are? I *think* it would be illegal here in the UK
> if it was a one-way street. I.E., the actual offence would be 'driving down
> a one-way street the wrong way and then parking incorrectly'. I would never
> do this, but if I did, I think that's the terms they would use... Or some
> code that no-one has ever heard of...
>
I can understand the law on busy streets, but a low use residential
2-way street.... the cop must have had to make a quota or something....
Ok Ok, it is generally against the law to park facing the wrong way -
especially in cities as large as Washington DC.
>> I think most of the time officers need to meet quotas or the municipality
>> actually budgets the fines into their fiscal system.
>
> Well, I learnt that our new system is now 'self financing' which to
> me means 'get as many as you can in a day/week and everything will be all
> right Jack, you'll keep your job'.
>
That is the way it should NOT be... too much incentive for giving a ticket.
>
>> I know MANY places that lower the speed limit by 10 mph for no reason at
>> all just to place a speed trap.
>>
>> Therefore you get screwed.
>>
>> Oh well... tis life.
>
> Yeah, it's life, but it ain't right.
>
No, tickets should not be a source of revenue. The ticket and fine
should be a punishment and deterrent from breaking the law. When it
becomes revenue generating and depended upon, then tickets start to be
given that are not really justified.
But again, tis life, but it ain't right.
>
>> Sock it to em Steve!
>
> :o) Thanks Tom! Well, I sent one good glossy print of that other (gold) car
> and asked why it's illegal when there is actually no danger to pedestrians
> or other road users, or not blocking that particular drive-way. (BTW, If
> you've been wondering, I work there, that's our office (hence the window
> shot) for this area. I could have parked freely in the space that you see in
> the foreground, (behind the walls), but two cars were taking up *my*
> official spaces, and I was only going to be there a couple of minutes on
> that day, so I parked where I did, and that wouldn't be the first time I did
> that).
>
> I've held the second image (the one with the red car, and the red car
> opposite that Scott kindly beamed in on) back. I'm hoping for some mistake
> on their part with this, because that's all I've got.
>
> Bye-bye £30? I'll let you know what happens.
>
>
Most people don't worry too much about the fine, they just pay and move
on with life. I love it when someone who was going 80mph in a 60 zone
gets a ticket and goes to court and gets off, but the poor woman who
doesn't go to court gets a bugger of a fine.
again, tis life....
Best of luck - maybe they will hear your voice :-)
Tom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:11:23 +0100, St. <dot### [at] dotcom> did spake,
saying:
>
> "scott" <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote in message
> news:46dbb643@news.povray.org...
>
>> BTW, why is it illegal there to park outside the marked bays? There
>> doesn't seem to be any yellow lines, or does it say on the sign "parking
>> only in marked bays"?
>
> I have no idea why it's illegal. All I know is that since the
> police don't control parking regs any more, there's been a drive to get
> as many
> people booked with an offence as much as possible. Seriously, you should
> see the parking attendants in action around here, they all walk fast
> looking for the next one.
Am I too late for the party? Looking at the photos you've posted I can see
a Parking sign on the opposite side of the street and what could be the
back of one on the other side. As for the blue car on the corner, it's
inadvisable to park there, but not illegal; I also note the post without a
sign, if there's no sign a case could be made by the owner for not knowing
it was bay parking only on that side of the bay.
>> If it was me, I would write in the letter for a clarification of exactly
>> what the white line means. Does your entire tyre foot-print have to be
>> inside the inner border of the line, or is it allowed to be on the line.
>> Or does it mean your entire car must be inside the line, overhangs and
>> all, and which side of the line counts... etc. If they don't have a
>> detailed policy on this then how can they prosecute people in a fair
>> way,
>> it's probably against some European human rights thingy that they have
>> to
>> treat everyone fairly.. blah blah blah.
That's a case in point; strictly speaking the vehicle has to be within the
lines - that's the whole vehicle. Most authorities go with the tire thing
though. Of course then you have to define 'within' as the lines themselves
have width ;-)
> It's a new directive over here now. As I said, the police don't
> control
> parking any more, the council employs people to do it. It's a self
> financing
> thing too, so money has to be incoming. I just found this in one of our
> council's PDF files:
Ah yes decriminalise it and make it a civil matter. In theory a good idea,
instead of being a tag-on of the whole police budget it gains its own
accounts; it also frees up a police officer with a wide range of powers
who could be handling something else and replaces them with a parking
enforcer with limited ones. Likewise as the local authority tend to be the
ones who set the parking restrictions it makes sense they enforce them,
keeps them in the same basket. Oh and of course it's self-financing.
Okay any council that proposes self-financing parking enforcement needs
clubbing to death, burying, and a new (and hopefully smarter) council
elected. The whole aim of parking enforcement is as a preventative
punishment, the whole requirement of self-financing is that *it keeps
happening*. Any successfull parking enforcement scheme that relies on
fining brings in no money. Then what do you do fire the enforcers,until
the situation gets bad again then bring them back?
Do that and any smart enforcer will soon realise that they should limit
the number of tickets they hand out, keep the problem ticking over while
keeping it a level below that it started with to show they are at least
doing something. Try to nip that in the bud and set performance figures
and you'll get them issuing fines over petty infringments that get
overturned later by anyone fighting them.
Sounds like you've got the latter on your hands.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote in message
news:op.tyfw5rskc3xi7v@news.povray.org...
> Sounds like you've got the latter on your hands.
Yep, all of what you said was bang on Phil. Anyway, I haven't had time
until now to say that I got my answer on Friday - no go. <sniff, bye bye
£30>
I thought some of the comments in the letter were interesting:
"As a rule and for consistency purposes within our Section, we will not
issue a Penalty Charge Notice to a vehicle unless one wheel is outside the
bay."
Erm, now let me get this straight, one wheel outside the bay??! How is
that possible in a car?
And this:
"Further to your correspondence I would like to point out that waiting
bays are marked out between drop kerbs, therefore, the length of the bays
are not measured on the number of vehicles that can park within the bays."
Hmm, they might as well have just painted a bay that's easily big enough
for just one car alone, much easier, costs less in paint if they did that
with all bays too. But wait. They wouldn't get the fine then would they?
Damn jobsworths.
~Steve~
>
> --
> Phil Cook
>
> --
> I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
> http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:54:42 +0100, St. <dot### [at] dotcom> did spake,
saying:
>
> "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote in message
> news:op.tyfw5rskc3xi7v@news.povray.org...
>
>
>> Sounds like you've got the latter on your hands.
>
> Yep, all of what you said was bang on Phil.
Of course it was me saying it, besides it's about roads :-P
> Anyway, I haven't had time
> until now to say that I got my answer on Friday - no go. <sniff, bye bye
> £30>
Dumb thing is if it were still a police matter I bet it would never have
been ticketed in the first place, they'd have realised the difference in
an infraction causing a problem and one that doesn't and simply not wanted
the hassle of all the paperwork.
> I thought some of the comments in the letter were interesting:
>
> "As a rule and for consistency purposes within our Section, we will
> not issue a Penalty Charge Notice to a vehicle unless one wheel is
> outside the bay."
>
> Erm, now let me get this straight, one wheel outside the bay??! How
> is that possible in a car?
On the side sure - slight angle with one wheel on the line, one outside.
Damn easy on some of the narrower bays.
> And this:
>
> "Further to your correspondence I would like to point out that
> waiting bays are marked out between drop kerbs, therefore, the length of
> the bays
> are not measured on the number of vehicles that can park within the
> bays."
Yup and they have to allow some wiggle room on the drop kerbs so they just
go from point-to-point, it's up to the driver to determine if they can fit.
> Hmm, they might as well have just painted a bay that's easily big
> enough for just one car alone, much easier, costs less in paint if they
> did that
> with all bays too. But wait. They wouldn't get the fine then would they?
To be fair they would then get people complaining that there's space
between the drop-kerbs for two small cars, but they've haven't painted the
bay large enough.
> Damn jobsworths.
Easy - next time get there early when no-one's there and park directly in
the middle of the bay; won't win your neighbour's friendship, but you
can't be touched by the enforcers. Might start a block war, with everyone
revving their engines waiting to be the one to dominate the space; might
get the council to remove the bays in the first place.
Actually I'm kind of curious as to why they're their in the first place?
Was there some problem with people parking in front of driveways or
whatever?
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote in message
news:op.tyfztib2c3xi7v@news.povray.org...
> And lo on Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:54:42 +0100, St. <dot### [at] dotcom> did spake,
> saying:
>
>>
>> "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote in message
>> news:op.tyfw5rskc3xi7v@news.povray.org...
>>
>>
>>> Sounds like you've got the latter on your hands.
>>
>> Yep, all of what you said was bang on Phil.
>
> Of course it was me saying it, besides it's about roads :-P
Heh, yeah, I knew that. :)
>
>> Anyway, I haven't had time
>> until now to say that I got my answer on Friday - no go. <sniff, bye bye
>> £30>
>
> Dumb thing is if it were still a police matter I bet it would never have
> been ticketed in the first place, they'd have realised the difference in
> an infraction causing a problem and one that doesn't and simply not wanted
> the hassle of all the paperwork.
That's so true. Kinda makes me want them back now, at least if you did
get a ticket, you'd know that they would probably be right in their
decision.
>
>> I thought some of the comments in the letter were interesting:
>>
>> "As a rule and for consistency purposes within our Section, we will
>> not issue a Penalty Charge Notice to a vehicle unless one wheel is
>> outside the bay."
>>
>> Erm, now let me get this straight, one wheel outside the bay??! How
>> is that possible in a car?
>
> On the side sure - slight angle with one wheel on the line, one outside.
> Damn easy on some of the narrower bays.
Yeah, hadn't thought of that, but it reminds me that when I was in a
nearby town on Saturday, I looked at some of the bays there and they were
wide! Seriously, probably a foot wider than ours - there was loads of room.
>
>> And this:
>>
>> "Further to your correspondence I would like to point out that
>> waiting bays are marked out between drop kerbs, therefore, the length of
>> the bays
>> are not measured on the number of vehicles that can park within the
>> bays."
>
> Yup and they have to allow some wiggle room on the drop kerbs so they just
> go from point-to-point, it's up to the driver to determine if they can
> fit.
"Oh, damn, my back wheels are just going to be outside the line, I
better move on and find somewhere else to make that important appointment.
Hmm, where shall I go, there doesn't seem to be anywhere, they're all full."
Twenty minutes later: "Ah, there's a spot! I'll get in that one." Checks
time: "Missed the appointment!"
It doesn't make sense.
>
>> Hmm, they might as well have just painted a bay that's easily big
>> enough for just one car alone, much easier, costs less in paint if they
>> did that
>> with all bays too. But wait. They wouldn't get the fine then would they?
>
> To be fair they would then get people complaining that there's space
> between the drop-kerbs for two small cars, but they've haven't painted the
> bay large enough.
Well, yeah, true.
>
>> Damn jobsworths.
>
> Easy - next time get there early when no-one's there and park directly in
> the middle of the bay; won't win your neighbour's friendship, but you
> can't be touched by the enforcers. Might start a block war, with everyone
> revving their engines waiting to be the one to dominate the space; might
> get the council to remove the bays in the first place.
LOL! :) Well, you know, I'd already thought of that, but if it is
empty, I'll probably park as far forward as I can, because to be honest, I
would feel uncomfortable knowing someone will probably get a ticket behind
me. Hmm, I might put a sign in the car that I can stick on the back
windscreen warning people not to park behind me if they've got a big or long
car. I bet the council have made a stack from that bay, and it would be nice
to save a pensioner some money.
.
>
> Actually I'm kind of curious as to why they're their in the first place?
> Was there some problem with people parking in front of driveways or
> whatever?
Yes, I think it was about five years ago that they put the bays there.
It's a one way street, so everyone was parking on the left hand side for
ease of parking I guess. There's certainly more bays on the left than on the
right, as you can see from the images. Certainly as you walk up the left
side, you can see all the little notices nailed to the trees warning people
not to block the driveways.
Soon, I'll take another photo of a road situation which you would simply
hate Phil. It would be your worst nightmare if you had to drive to work
through it everyday. :o)
~Steve~
>
> --
> Phil Cook
>
> --
> I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
> http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Mon, 10 Sep 2007 16:05:47 +0100, St. <dot### [at] dotcom> did spake,
saying:
>
> "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote in message
> news:op.tyfztib2c3xi7v@news.povray.org...
>> And lo on Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:54:42 +0100, St. <dot### [at] dotcom> did spake,
>> saying:
>>
>>>
>>> "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote in message
>>> news:op.tyfw5rskc3xi7v@news.povray.org...
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sounds like you've got the latter on your hands.
>>>
>>> Yep, all of what you said was bang on Phil.
>>
>> Of course it was me saying it, besides it's about roads :-P
>
> Heh, yeah, I knew that. :)
I am the road man coo coo ca choo
>>> Anyway, I haven't had time
>>> until now to say that I got my answer on Friday - no go. <sniff, bye
>>> bye
>>> £30>
>>
>> Dumb thing is if it were still a police matter I bet it would never have
>> been ticketed in the first place, they'd have realised the difference in
>> an infraction causing a problem and one that doesn't and simply not
>> wanted
>> the hassle of all the paperwork.
>
> That's so true. Kinda makes me want them back now, at least if you
> did get a ticket, you'd know that they would probably be right in their
> decision.
Exactly and bonus you've got a police officer patrolling the street.
>>> I thought some of the comments in the letter were interesting:
>>>
>>> "As a rule and for consistency purposes within our Section, we will
>>> not issue a Penalty Charge Notice to a vehicle unless one wheel is
>>> outside the bay."
>>>
>>> Erm, now let me get this straight, one wheel outside the bay??!
>>> How
>>> is that possible in a car?
>>
>> On the side sure - slight angle with one wheel on the line, one outside.
>> Damn easy on some of the narrower bays.
>
> Yeah, hadn't thought of that, but it reminds me that when I was
> in a nearby town on Saturday, I looked at some of the bays there and
> they were
> wide! Seriously, probably a foot wider than ours - there was loads of
> room.
1.8m to 2.7m at the discretion of the local authority (damn how sad to
know that) disabled bays have to be 2.7m minimum 3.6m maximum, unless the
road width can't support the traffic at that width (In which case you can
go back down to 1.8m); angled bays are 2 to 2.5m. Now go get your
tape-measure :-)
>>> And this:
>>>
>>> "Further to your correspondence I would like to point out that
>>> waiting bays are marked out between drop kerbs, therefore, the length
>>> of
>>> the bays
>>> are not measured on the number of vehicles that can park within the
>>> bays."
>>
>> Yup and they have to allow some wiggle room on the drop kerbs so they
>> just
>> go from point-to-point, it's up to the driver to determine if they can
>> fit.
>
> "Oh, damn, my back wheels are just going to be outside the line, I
> better move on and find somewhere else to make that important
> appointment.
> Hmm, where shall I go, there doesn't seem to be anywhere, they're all
> full."
> Twenty minutes later: "Ah, there's a spot! I'll get in that one." Checks
> time: "Missed the appointment!"
>
> It doesn't make sense.
Only from a revenue-collecting standpoint, from a traffic-control one it
makes no sense unless you're actually blocking something; there's the
dichotomy.
>>> Damn jobsworths.
>>
>> Easy - next time get there early when no-one's there and park directly
>> in
>> the middle of the bay; won't win your neighbour's friendship, but you
>> can't be touched by the enforcers. Might start a block war, with
>> everyone
>> revving their engines waiting to be the one to dominate the space; might
>> get the council to remove the bays in the first place.
>
> LOL! :) Well, you know, I'd already thought of that, but if it is
> empty, I'll probably park as far forward as I can, because to be honest,
> I would feel uncomfortable knowing someone will probably get a ticket
> behind me.
To be honest me too, damn this moral conscience I'd be ruling the world by
now otherwise.
> Hmm, I might put a sign in the car that I can stick on the back
> windscreen warning people not to park behind me if they've got a big or
> long
> car. I bet the council have made a stack from that bay, and it would be
> nice
> to save a pensioner some money.
That would be a nice gesture.
>> Actually I'm kind of curious as to why they're their in the first place?
>> Was there some problem with people parking in front of driveways or
>> whatever?
>
> Yes, I think it was about five years ago that they put the bays
> there.
> It's a one way street, so everyone was parking on the left hand side for
> ease of parking I guess. There's certainly more bays on the left than on
> the right, as you can see from the images. Certainly as you walk up the
> left
> side, you can see all the little notices nailed to the trees warning
> people not to block the driveways.
Single yellows straight along might have been better.
> Soon, I'll take another photo of a road situation which you would
> simply hate Phil. It would be your worst nightmare if you had to drive
> to work
> through it everyday. :o)
I can't wait...um. Heh you should have overheard the police at our
carnival when the doctor's car and the ambulance had to drive against the
procession over our one and only bridge or face a nine-mile diversion (at
the least) "Well they'll just have to get out of the bloody way"
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
