Engine running, An offence?

[recycled]

A group of parking attendants in Manchester have been given additional powers to issue fixed penalty notices for misdemeanours other than parking.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3366265.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6742225.stm
Over the next six months, 12 attendants will ticket people for handing out fliers, littering and leaving their engines running once they have parked.
They have been given permission under the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005. The scheme's success will be assessed at the end of the pilot period.
BBC news. RANT OVER GRRRRRRRRRR


We have instructed our company drivers to leave engines running if they have to wait for goods or staff in the winter in order to keep the heater on and keep themselves warm as we were having too many sick compo claims.
i guess we will not be heading to manchester then, or is this another case of discretion not used, like the car park clampers who ticket you in seconds. Imagine you did not switch off your engine in time sir .£60 please

 

[MBManInKen]

I am dead against this. Outsourcing policing to anyone else but the police is not just wrong, it is asking for trouble.

 

[Swiss Toni]

I *think* the offence mentioned here is for leaving the engine running whilst the vehicle is parked (and not attended) - it is also an offence to leave the vehicle unattended without the parking brake set.

 

[BonzoDog]

I can only think of all the coaches parked with their drivers on Park Lane, engines running for hours on warm days spewing endless gunge onto the streets.
Now why would one need a realtively highly paid and specialist crime copto nab such people? As I said in another post recently it begs the 'Have you guys got nothing better to do, like catch real criminals.'

 

[MBManInKen]

Now why would one need a realtively highly paid and specialist crime copto nab such people? As I said in another post recently it begs the 'Have you guys got nothing better to do, like catch real criminals.'

Well, you raise valid points, of course, but on the balance of things I would say that I prefer other tasks (such as administrative ones) to be outsourced in order to get more cops out and about. Not all coppers are high-crime investigators after all.

"Policing" of offenses in my view is incompatible with "making profits" by writing out as many tickets as possible. I am also against outsourcing parking ticketing to private companies - I would say that the example of parking wardens has proven over the last few years how bad such an approach is. You end up with over-zealous ticketing by a largely low-skilled workforce whose motives for entering the profession can be quite dodgy as I remember from the recent documentary on traffic wardens reported elsewhere on this site.

There are a lot of problems that have resulted from outsourcing what used to be a police task to non-police entities. I would think that until those issues have been solved, it is unwise to further add to the problems by giving these problematic entities even more tasks over which to screw up.

For the record, the only ticket I have had in many years was for parking on a bus stop, which was given to me by the police and which I paid immediately - as I was clearly at fault - so, it's not some feeling of spite that is informing my posts .

 

[Dieselman]

I can only think of all the coaches parked with their drivers on Park Lane, engines running for hours on warm days spewing endless gunge onto the streets.

Do they?
Normally commercial vehicles have separate diesel heaters to heat the interior, no need for the engine to be running.

 

[pammy]

Do they?
Normally commercial vehicles have separate diesel heaters to heat the interior, no need for the engine to be running.

I think they do it for the aircon not the heating

 

[Dieselman]

I think they do it for the aircon not the heating

The clue was in the post wasn't it...Doh..

 

[pammy]

The clue was in the post wasn't it...Doh..

lol - a Homer moment

 

[grober]

A doctor writes

We have instructed our company drivers to leave engines running if they have to wait for goods or staff in the winter in order to keep the heater on and keep themselves warm as we were having too many sick compo claims.
It sounds as if your employees are in fact suffering from that rare complaint WORK-SHY-ITIS Seriously- how long before they start suing you for "inhalation of exhaust fumes"

 

[Dieselman]

We have instructed our company drivers to leave engines running if they have to wait for goods or staff in the winter in order to keep the heater on and keep themselves warm as we were having too many sick compo claims.
It sounds as if your employees are in fact suffering from that rare complaint WORK-SHY-ITIS Seriously- how long before they start suing you for "inhalation of exhaust fumes"

But the problem is that sometimes the drivers are waiting hours to be unloaded so can get cold.
Although surely they should be using the auxilary heater.

 

[robert.saunders]

Let's not confuse ourselves with offences and civil contraventions.

Leaving the vehicle running whilst engine is on (unattended) as Swiss rightly pointed out is an offence.

These Attendants will not issue any form of Penalty for offences; civil contravention? Yes.

The issue here is that Manchester has decided to trial their Parking Attendants to undertake the enforcement of the raft of new powers given to ALL local councils under the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005. Some local councils are enforcing these options via employed staff; others are contracting out enforcement to willing agencies.

Whether you agree with it or not is another issue.

Equally, to clarify a point - I have no idea why it's reported that Attendants will be able to deal with vehicles where the engine is running. This is already a contravention for buses/coaches where prohibited, I imagine this could be a "new" contravention made under the Traffic Management Act 2004, but this would be speculation at present as the guidance under this Act from DfT isn't even issued yet (and I should know)!

Rob

 

[mark.t]

don't go near manchester city centre... this once great city is being buggered up by the council yet again .... and who sits on the council ...... well people like your dad ....... the older coffin dodgers are buggering up for the rest of us and our children .. god help us all ...... if this was in Paris there would be a riot .... leave your engine running ....enlarge your carbon footprint ..don't recycle...... fly every week....put your heating on and leave your windows open ..... put tins in the brown wheely bin and put grass in the green one, PC blarh, speak your mind don't mind your speak, smoke you worked hard you deserve it ........ they are systematically physiologically bullying the citizens of this country and its time we took this crap they keep dealing out and told em where to shove it

 

[glojo]

Question
Is this bye-law being introduced as a tree hugging act, or is it more to do with half a dozen buses parked in a busy street with their engines running and spewing out obnoxious diesel fumes for hours on end?

Regards
John

 

[Dryce]

Glasgow has had some sort of rule on this with fixed penalty notices for a couple of years and it's been extended by wasting money on signs and advertising apparently.

I sometimes think that when councils do this sort of thing that somebody should drag a few of them out by the ear and point out how much fuel is wasted idling at unsynchronised traffic lights.

 

[crockers]

A few point / questions

1. If a company takes a contract for the outsourcing of a service and can make money out of it - why was it outsourced? Surely this profit could have been kept in house?

2. Carbon footprints - hmmm...how comes studies have proven that carbon levels rise and fall 50 years BEHIND climate conditions - surely it cant be a bandwagon that is generating political kudeos and 1000s of jobs?

3. Do I just get cynical cos I'm getting old in the tooth?

:bannana:

 

[R2e]

A few point / questions

1. If a company takes a contract for the outsourcing of a service and can make money out of it - why was it outsourced? Surely this profit could have been kept in house?

There is a case for the outsourcing company to be more efficient as that is its prime business and if, for example, you have a team of 3 cleaners to clean your office, you have to cater for holidays, sickness, etc, employment costs and so on. In theory, and I emphasize, in theory, the outsourcing cleaners have a bigger and more flexible staff so can handle this sort of thing without problems and at a cheaper cost. You save the hassle, they make the profit, everyone wins .

Of course this is a fairytale. Inevitably quality suffers to increase profits, the cheaper it is the worse service you're going to get. And when an IT organisation outsources the bulk of its IT, the world has indeed gone mad.

2. Carbon footprints - hmmm...how comes studies have proven that carbon levels rise and fall 50 years BEHIND climate conditions - surely it cant be a bandwagon that is generating political kudeos and 1000s of jobs?

Among many other totally valid questions about the great global warming swindle that the politicians are not answering. How come CO2 is not the biggest greenhouse gas by far, how come algae in the ocean produces the bulk of the world's CO2, how come the temperature rise and fall is cyclical, how come I'm not convinced that it has much, if anything, to do with man's puny efforts?

3. Do I just get cynical cos I'm getting old in the tooth?

:bannana:

You and me both Crockers!

 

[MBManInKen]

Of course this is a fairytale. Inevitably quality suffers to increase profits, the cheaper it is the worse service you're going to get.

Agreed. In addition to cost cutting to increase profits (resulting in worse service), one of the most overlooked side effects of these privatisation is that they tend to reduce CapEx spending and long term investment, leading to deteriorating infrastructure. By the time that problem becomes really bad, the taxpayer has to step in at hugely inflated cost. Excellent examples are energy networks and rail infrastructure. They end up costing the taxpayer a lot more than what would have been the case without privatisation.

 

[senior]

Glasgow has had some sort of rule on this with fixed penalty notices for a couple of years and it's been extended by wasting money on signs and advertising apparently.

I sometimes think that when councils do this sort of thing that somebody should drag a few of them out by the ear and point out how much fuel is wasted idling at unsynchronised traffic lights.

Agreed, while driving through Austin,Texas all the traffic lights were synchronised and it took me about 5 minutes to travel the distance it would have taken me 20 mins. in Glasgow.
PS Texas also has the same rule for idling engines

 

[recycled]

here i think the lights are doctored to make you frustrated as the hamster pointed out.
When i used to get up at five in the morning to go to work about 4yrs ago,i was the only car for miles around. Anytime i get to a junction the lights will always be red on all sides, except the side that has no car coming from it. While waiting, as soon as a car starts approaching from the green side, that turns red too and then mine turns green. So everyone has to wait for at least some time at the lights .
Has anyone ever had this experience?