New parking laws

[verytalldave]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7318669.stm


So how do you prove you were not parked illegally if they post you a parking ticket?

And how do they prove you were?

Seems a very dodgy state of affairs if you ask me.

 

[recycled]

merge with the other stealth tax

 

[st4]

Just double check the parking rules and regs any where before you park, i.e. double yellows and any signs that are visible. If you get a ticket then appeal on the basis the no parking rule wasn't clearly visible.

 

[recycled]

how would you double check it?
by driving past it, or stopping to read it.
Either way you will be in trouble.
reading while driving, or parking on yellow to read signs

 

[MBManInKen]

See my post in the other thread.

 

[recycled]

just do what the government want. move off the roads and leave it for the rich people or the people that can get away with it or afford it.
certain emergency cars and their mates or certain talivan types

 

[st4]

how would you double check it?
by driving past it, or stopping to read it.
Either way you will be in trouble.
reading while driving, or parking on yellow to read signs

Visible camera's will be an obvious starting place, I hope "they" won't be that pedantic to fine you for undue care and attention is you read a sign whilst moving.

I fear three things, the expense this new system will cost, the fact they will be vandalised and this will cost more state money to put right, and that this may lead to a "surveillence" culture. Points 1 and 2 are most relevent to this thread.

 

[recycled]

if they can fine someone for moving into the bus lane for a few seconds to let an emergency vehicle by, they can fine you for parking to read the sign or for driving without care and attention.
I suspect the signs may be like loan small prints anyway from the seat of a moving car.
They will always say you an appeal e.t.c which will almost certainly fail.

 

[MBManInKen]

I suspect the signs may be like loan small prints anyway from the seat of a moving car.

That would not meet the required standard. Note that while in the past you could have appealed against such a ticket on the grounds that the signage or similar didn't meet the required standard, under the new Act the adjudicator can go further and instruct councils etc to address these problems - which wasn't the case before.

They will always say you an appeal e.t.c which will almost certainly fail.

Facts, please, not mere urban myths!

In London for example, of the 28,121 appeals against parking tickets allowed in 2005/06, 12,075 succeeded, or about 42%.

 

[st4]

if they can fine someone for moving into the bus lane for a few seconds to let an emergency vehicle by, they can fine you for parking to read the sign or for driving without care and attention.
I suspect the signs may be like loan small prints anyway from the seat of a moving car.
They will always say you an appeal e.t.c which will almost certainly fail.

If "they" do that then its a sad day. I can see these camera's being targets for vandalism. It hasn't been that well thought through. How would the system respond to a dirty regi plate? Too much automation is not a good thing. A human touch with the power of discretion is much better.

 

[recycled]

That would not meet the required standard. Note that while in the past you could have appealed against such a ticket on the grounds that the signage or similar didn't meet the required standard, under the new Act the adjudicator can go further and instruct councils etc to address these problems - which wasn't the case before.



Facts, please, not mere urban myths!

In London for example, of the 28,121 appeals against parking tickets allowed in 2005/06, 12,075 succeeded, or about 42%.

sorry a myth then.
i mean if you are driving across a sign it will look smaller from the car than when standing up to read one.
I am not saying they will deliberately print them smaller.
Things from a vehicle look smaller anyway in motion

 

[MBManInKen]

If "they" do that then its a sad day. I can see these camera's being targets for vandalism. It hasn't been that well thought through. How would the system respond to a dirty regi plate? Too much automation is not a good thing. A human touch with the power of discretion is much better.

I think you're confused: there is no "new" system. It's using the existing CCTV infrastructure and allowing for that to be expanded. The issue of vandalisation of cameras is nothing new and so far has not been of a level to threaten their deployment.

But I do agree on the human touch: I would prefer to have more coppers out and about to police the roads, rather than just automated system. Nevertheless, when we talk specifically about parking, that is a civil matter, not a criminal one, so for that particular issue the policy presence is largely irrelevant.

 

[recycled]

Simple .boycott all areas where there is no parking available and if the businesses start to crash and all move to poland and romania we know who to blame.
if you cannot do that, leave he car at home or grin and pay.
Luckily all my stuff needed are always out of town.

 

[st4]

I stand corrected. A more human touch to parking offensenses wouldn't go amiss, area's of Helensburgh have people parking on junctions, etc so they can go to the community hall, a parking attendent would be most welcome...

I think that If CCTV systems were to be used for monitoring parking vandalism of them would increase? Maybe I am wrong?

A logistical view, in cases of parallell i.e. street parking, will a CCTV camera pick up every regi plate, as blind spots and other cars may obscure them, obviously a human eye can go upto the car and inspect it.

 

[st4]

Simple .boycott all areas where there is no parking available and if the businesses start to crash and all move to poland and romania we know who to blame.
if you cannot do that, leave he car at home or grin and pay.
Luckily all my stuff needed are always out of town.

Apparenty the government wants to tax supermarkets as they offer free parking. A constructive solution is to accept that parking is limited, and built more dedicated multi storey cark parks to ease the strain on the street parking, which IMO cannot handle the demands of 21st century traffic.

We come back again to another key issue, there are too many of us.

 

[verytalldave]

14 replies so far - yet nobody has addressed my 2 original questions.

 

[recycled]

As with all motoring laws, they do not have to prove anything.
You have to do the proving.
If you can not, you are stuffed.
So take a camera or install CCTV in your car that can video everyhere you parked and do not erase the tape for at least 6months

 

[verytalldave]

As with all motoring laws, they do not have to prove anything.
You have to do the proving.
If you can not, you are stuffed.
So take a camera or install CCTV in your car that can video everyhere you parked and do not erase the tap fpr at least 6months

My point entirely. Its totally unworkable and you cant PROVE anything. You are at their mercy.

 

[MBManInKen]

As with all motoring laws, they do not have to prove anything.

That is not true actually. Unless they can provide evidence of the offence, they can not issue a ticket. Just the word of the parking officer and your registration are not enough.

One of the things that MPs made clear when this went through the House was that parking enforcement must be properly evidence based and consistent across the country. This new act is an attempt to create the legal framework for that.

But as with everything, we will have to wait and see if the new legal instrument is up to the job. Time will tell.

 

[robert.saunders]

The phrase that is used often is "balance of probabilities" - the authority has to make a very good case indeed to succeed at adjudication - if the authority cannot prove, based on the balance of probabilities that the contravention has occurred (therefore the evidence has to be exceptional) the appellant will 'win' at adjudication.

Hence why there is distinctly no take-up (at the moment) of CCTV enforcement outside of London