Result: Great Argument To Escape Parking Fines

[JimTheGent]

Just over a week ago I got a parking ticket. The car park fees ceased at 6:30pm and I arrived there at 8:30pm. The car park was full except for disabled bays (of which there were many and mostly empty). There is no other car park close by, so I figured using the Disabled Bay would be ok because the car park tariffs stopped hours before. WRONG!

When I came out I had a ticket. I asked the Traffic Warden why and he informed me it was for parking in a disabled bay. I queried about the charges stopping at 6:30pm and he told me the penalties for parking in a disabled bay operated 24 hours a day. He even pointed it out to I would have left it at this and paid the penalty notice but the warden then decided to be a smart arse by saying "..besides, people are disabled 24 hours a day and you should be more considerate..."

He was of course correct, but in my opinion he is not paid to pass judgement - only to issue tickets.

So, I hopped on to the Internet a did a spot of research into the Roads Traffic Act and it led me to the Bill of Rights Act 1689 (search the _http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk website). This Act states all penalties and levies have to be passed by a Court and not a civic authority. Back to the Roads Traffic Act to check if it makes specific mention of the Bill of Rights Act 1689 (hence excluding its use) and it does not. So I sent in a letter to the local council accusing them of trying to extort money by stealth using powers which they have no authority to use and challenging them to take me to court in order for a judge to pass judgement and apply the penalty. I also challenged the legality of charging £30 if the fine was paid within 14 days and £60 if it was not, quoting discrimination against people who have limited funds and blackmail etc. My final argument was the fact the fees stopped at 6:30pm implies the regulations governing parking also stopped at 6:30pm and there were no clear notices on the Disabled Bays stating otherwise.

I got a TWO page reply this morning. It warbles on about how the regulations are in force 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and notices being issued after 6:30 if the vehicle is in violation. It then goes on to say the charge is not discriminatory because the fee is £60 but reduces to £30 if paid promptly because of lower administration costs. Finally it goes on to say there is no conflict between the Bill of Rights Act 1689 and the Councils Decriminilised Parking Scheme because no "fines" are imposed and the scheme does not utilise criminal law, motorists are not convicted of an offence. Then it goes on about how a person can appeal etc.

The real clincher is the final sentence which I will quote:

" In this instance I have arranged for this Notice to be waived as there has been a clerical error within our system, which would make the charge unenforceable, and in view of this the Penalty Charge Notice has been cancelled."

RESULT! Clearly they are aware the Bill of Rights Act 1689 is not mentioned in the Road Traffics Act 199X and has not been repealed. This means no Council will risk going to Court when presented with this argument because if they lost it would mean all parking levies, speeding fines and penalty notices (even on the spot fines) were illegal unless they are issued by a Court. They don't mention what type of clerical error in their system could cause the penalty notice to be invalid.

I figure you can use this argument to appeal pretty much any parking ticket which is on Government or Council property (i.e. not a private car park).

Also, the very word PENALTY implies it is a fine of some sort, therefore by default falls under the Bill of Rights Act 1689.

I hope this helps someone to escape being battered by the stealth motoring taxes dressed up as Penalty Notices. I can post a copy of the letters if anyone wants them.

There is also another interesting thread which discusses this same topic (wish I had seen it last week LOL) Your parking ticket may be unlawful

[BotB]

Telegraph - 18 September 2005

Labour assault on constitution

Ministers are said to be so alarmed by the latest twist in the row over the legality of automatic penalties - the billions of pounds raised each year by parking fines, penalties for late tax returns and so forth - that they are considering emergency legislation.
This extraordinary story began with a ruling by Lord Justice Laws in the "Metric Martyrs" case that certain Acts of Parliament, such as the Bill of Rights Act 1689, are "constitutional statutes" which cannot be overridden by subsequent legislation, unless this is made "expressly clear". It was on this point that the judge decided that the Metric Martyrs, including the late Steve Thoburn, should be found guilty.
But a central provision of the Bill of Rights is that no one can be fined except by the judgment of a court. For more than a year therefore, Neil Herron, the Metric Martyrs campaign director, has been questioning the legality of the automatic parking fines imposed by the 142 councils that operate "decriminalised" parking schemes under the 1991 Road Traffic Act, since motorists penalised under these schemes have no recourse to a court. Their only appeal is to the National Parking Adjudication Service, which is run on behalf of and financed by the councils involved, and which is anyway on record denying that it is a court of law.
Sunderland city council -which originally seized Mr Thoburn's scales - had so many motorists using the "Bill of Rights defence" to justify non-payment of these automatic penalties that it sought legal advice. Eleanor Sharpston QC said that, since it was the intention of the 1991 Act that the Bill of Rights should be set aside, the penalties are legal.
Here, however, Miss Sharpston is impaled on a hook, because it was she who represented Sunderland in the metric case, which she only won because of Laws's ruling; and Laws was unequivocal in saying that the Bill of Rights can only be overridden where Parliament makes this "expressly clear".
The 1991 Act does nothing of the kind. The only way Miss Sharpston can defend her latest opinion is by rejecting the very ruling that won her the case. If she is right, the Metric Martyrs' case should be quashed.
So many people are using the "Bill of Rights defence" to justify non-payment of automatic penalties - HM Customs has backed down more than once over refusal to pay surcharges for late VAT returns - that, according to Birmingham city council last week, Government lawyers are considering emergency legislation to override the Bill of Rights.
But, as Mr Herron points out, the Bill of Rights itself only enshrines the Declaration of Rights, which was a solemn contract between Sovereign and People, and which Parliament has no power to undo. When those Sunderland officials seized Mr Thoburn's scales in 2000, they can little have guessed what a constitutional can of worms they were about to open.

[dw190]

Originally Posted by JimTheGent

They don't mention what type of clerical error in their system could cause the penalty notice to be invalid.

Write a letter demanding to know the reason under the Freedom of Information Act

[Bookworm]

Originally Posted by JimTheGent

Just over a week ago I got a parking ticket. The car park fees ceased at 6:30pm and I arrived there at 8:30pm. The car park was full except for disabled bays (of which there were many and mostly empty). There is no other car park close by, so I figured using the Disabled Bay would be ok because the car park tariffs stopped hours before. WRONG!

When I came out I had a ticket. I asked the Traffic Warden why and he informed me it was for parking in a disabled bay. I queried about the charges stopping at 6:30pm and he told me the penalties for parking in a disabled bay operated 24 hours a day. He even pointed it out to I would have left it at this and paid the penalty notice but the warden then decided to be a smart arse by saying "..besides, people are disabled 24 hours a day and you should be more considerate..."

He was of course correct, but in my opinion he is not paid to pass judgement - only to issue tickets.

Well, I don't get paid for being here, so I'll pass judgment.

I'm glad for you you got your money back.
But if I were in your place, I would donate the money to a registered charity of my choice.
Because, frankly, I am disgusted that since they were no other space, you felt it was OK to park in a disabled space. You can wrap it up any way you like, that was morally despicable. You may have got your money back on a technicality, but I find it hard to believe you can then come here and boast about it, considering the reason for getting the ticket in the 1st place.

.

[JimTheGent]

For your information I already donated the money I would have paid to charity - I did it within five minutes of receiving the letter. You are entitled to your opinion but I should not have to explain myself to you or anyone else. It was a person with the same attitude as you who prompted the action I took in the first place. Get a life and stop criticising other people. It's bad for your health.

[GSMGuy]

Well, I wasn't - but I am gonna add my 2p... My Aunt suffers from Cerebral Palsy, and has extreme difficulty walking. We take her shopping to Tesco's once a week, and yes, we do have a blue badge for her - What really pees me off is inconsiderate people who park in disabled bays, with no badge, or in taxis and vans ffs... Just to save a 30 second walk. I think if you park in a disabled bay without a badge, you should be wheelclamped and towed away with a £250 charge to get your car back - you may think twice next time.

Rant over...

Mike

[caro]

Sorry but I am with the don't park in disabled camp. While I am very scrooge like and will do anything to get out of paying for anything, I would never park in a disabled space without my elderly disabled mother and her blue badge. It is hard enough getting around with a disability without thoughtless drivers parking in reserved places.

Fair play to you for getting your money back though. You obviously did your homework, but spare a thought for those with a genuine need for the space next time - especially if there is nowhere else to park nearby. Pretty please.

[JimTheGent]

I am with you all in full agreement about not parking in the disabled bays. I never claimed to be right but my point is this was at 8:30pm when the car park had closed and the only available empty spaces were 20 of the disabled bays of which there are 25. I am technically classed as disabled myself and I could probably get a blue badge too, but I have never bothered claiming one because I can walk perfectly well. However, once again I am compelled to point out this thread is NOT a discussion about the merits of parking in disabled bays or on double yellow lines. This thread IS about using the law to escape parking levies - regardless of why they goet applied. Please try to stay on topic. If you want to have a debate about whether you SHOULD park in a certain place and why/why not, I will be more than happy to contribute in any thread you start. But for this thread please stay on topic to avoid it becoming a slanging match rather than a useful informative thread about parking fines. Thanks

[jonni2bad]

Let's stick to the topic, as suggested above - there's plenty of space left for new threads about the rights and wrongs, and if anyone feels strongly about it they can freely make their own....

GSMGuy (Mike) - even the use of @ or # in the middle of your words will not be deemed acceptable if it looks like you are using profanities. Please moderate the language so that we don't have to!

[Eduin]

Originally Posted by Bookworm

Well, I don't get paid for being here, so I'll pass judgment.

I'm glad for you you got your money back.
But if I were in your place, I would donate the money to a registered charity of my choice.
Because, frankly, I am disgusted that since they were no other space, you felt it was OK to park in a disabled space. You can wrap it up any way you like, that was morally despicable. You may have got your money back on a technicality, but I find it hard to believe you can then come here and boast about it, considering the reason for getting the ticket in the 1st place.

.

Well if disability badges and hence the entitlement to use the spaces was actually enforced I for one would willingly not use such spaces.

The problem is that the majority of users of these spaces appear to be able bodied individuals who have "someone else's badge". The badges do not specify a vehicle registration and do not appear to specify an individual, hence the widespread abuse.

Walking around Glasgow city centre is always interesting to see the wide array of brand new sports cars and such using the streetside parking all day while they are at work as in Glasgow a disability badge allows you to use metred parking bays for free.

Last place I worked a guy used to park his Subaru Impreza STI right outside using a badge bought in The Barras.

Regards,
Eduin

[MondeoST24]

Agreed, I know a couple of people with badges who have absolutely nothing wrong with them.

[jonni2bad]

Once again this thread is going off topic. If you wish to pass comment on parking in disabled bays, please start your own thread.

The OP has already indicated the point;

Originally Posted by JimTheGent

....He was of course correct, but in my opinion he is not paid to pass judgement - only to issue tickets....

but this thread is actually advising on a wider issue of Councils not having the right to impose a penalty. As such, it is not intended to justify parking in the 'wrong' space, but to help other site users.

Further posts here that do not keep on topic will be removed.

[dave]

My partner once got fined for parking in a disabled bay.

The road was clear and there were plenty of other spaces.

The thing was, the only marking that showed the space as being disabled was painted in the road.....and covered in snow.

When she came back the snow under the car had melted and there was a sticker on the car.

Not really very fair. They should be clearly marked at the very least.

..anyway, I got her money back.

If she'd parked in one knowingly (and I don't think she would ever do that), then I probably wouldn't have gotten her money back.

[Jacksy1980]

Its like parent and child parking in supermarkets, when im with my dad we always use it, im 25 but still his child! lol just thought id raise a luagh because looked like things were getting heated.

[taff999]

hi great thread here,

can anyone direct me to a template for contesting a parking PENALTY charge , this is just a straight forward case and as im led to believe penalties are irrecoverable in english law i feel i may get it struck off?

thanks in advance.

[jonni2bad]

There is no template for that, I'm afraid.

Perhaps JimTheGent can point you in the right direction...?

[clairus99]

Edited by moderator.

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC !

[clairus99]

Originally Posted by taff999

hi great thread here,

can anyone direct me to a template for contesting a parking PENALTY charge , this is just a straight forward case and as im led to believe penalties are irrecoverable in english law i feel i may get it struck off?

thanks in advance.

Taff, I used to work in Parking Representations for a short time, if I can be of any assistance, please PM me. That goes for anyone else.

[clairus99]

Edited by moderator.

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC !

[JimTheGent]

Originally Posted by taff999

hi great thread here,

can anyone direct me to a template for contesting a parking PENALTY charge , this is just a straight forward case and as im led to believe penalties are irrecoverable in english law i feel i may get it struck off?

thanks in advance.

Check your PM - I have sent a copy of the letter I used so hopefully it will be a good starting point.