Knitted jumper given bus lane fine

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Stratman

MB Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 15, 2003
Messages
5,804
Location
Sunbury
Car
W203 C200 CDI '04Estate
Bus lane camera mistakes woman's sweater for number plate

A couple were sent a fine for driving in a bus lane when a camera mistook a word on a woman's clothing for their number plate.
Dave and Paula Knight, from Surrey, received the fine for driving in a bus lane in Bath despite not being in the city at the time.
A camera had registered the word 'knitter' on a pedestrian's clothing as Mr Knight's number plate KN19 TER.
"We thought one of our friends was stitching us up," said Mrs Knight.
Bath and North East Somerset Council (BANES) confirmed the fine had been cancelled.

More...
 
I watched this piece on the BBC news earlier and you couldn't make this up:doh:
It shows the photos haven't been checked before sending out the fixed penalty notice.
The guy and his wife took it well to be fair.
 
PRC_205499285.jpg

SOFTWARE needs a "little work"
 
I think the airbags have gone off...
 
While there's an amusing angle to this story, most seem to have missed this bit:
Mrs Knight said when she contacted the council, they initially told her the fine would need to be paid but when the staff member looked at the image she "burst out laughing".
This goes to the heart of the problem that "officialdom" takes the view that automated enforcement devices are infallible, and it's up to the accused to prove their innocence rather than the enforcement agency being under an obligation to prove that the accusation is founded on fact.
 
Talk about being 'stitched up' . imagine you wanted to have s 'laff' , or simply wanted to pi$$ someone off . If you were of a mind to (and had nothing better to do) you could bodge up a number plate of one of their vehicles and ride around in bus lanes all day on a bicycle in a big city near you ....hours of endless fun ! :eek:
 
Talk about being 'stitched up' . imagine you wanted to have s 'laff' , or simply wanted to pi$$ someone off . If you were of a mind to (and had nothing better to do) you could bodge up a number plate of one of their vehicles and ride around in bus lanes all day on a bicycle in a big city near you ....hours of endless fun ! :eek:
ISTR that there was a case involving a particularly litigious and obstinate private parking company where a mischievous individual tied a number plate to a shopping trolley which they then pushed through camera monitored entry and exit zones, leaving a suitable time lapse between the "entry" and "exit" so as to receive a "parking penalty charge".

The parking company were so certain they had a right to enforce that after refusing the initial appeal, they initiated court proceedings. It was only when they were provided a contemporaneous (and witnessed) video recording of the shopping trolley being pushed through their cameras that they finally folded.
 
ISTR that there was a case involving a particularly litigious and obstinate private parking company where a mischievous individual tied a number plate to a shopping trolley which they then pushed through camera monitored entry and exit zones, leaving a suitable time lapse between the "entry" and "exit" so as to receive a "parking penalty charge".

Variation on a theme.

 
While there's an amusing angle to this story, most seem to have missed this bit:

This goes to the heart of the problem that "officialdom" takes the view that automated enforcement devices are infallible, and it's up to the accused to prove their innocence rather than the enforcement agency being under an obligation to prove that the accusation is founded on fact.
The thing is though they will be correct nearly all the time, the automation will record accurately against the human version of events.
 
The thing is though they will be correct nearly all the time
True enough, but the "nearly" is an important caveat that shouldn't get lost.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom