Parking rules 'could spell chaos'

[Conniff]

It looks like Broon and his friends have found a way to pay for their inflation busting payrise.

New parking rules coming into force in England on 31 March will cause "some chaos" for drivers and see the number of fines soar, the AA has warned.

BBC NEWS | UK | Parking rules 'could spell chaos'

Probably the parts that will affect us the most is:

For the first time, councils outside London will be able to issue fines by post using CCTV evidence.

They will also be able to issue a penalty even when a motorist has driven away before a ticket can be physically placed on their car.

I sometimes wonder if this appalling government has a bonus scheme for ideas to con the public out of it's hard earned.

[Andyr]

Hang on a second.

BANES have been issuing PCN's for bus lane offences for about 18 months now. My understanding of that article is that only London local authorities can. Can someone please correct me?

regards,

andy

[green_and_mean]

I fail to see why issuing a PCN after a driver has driven away is a bad thing, if you have parked in contravention speeding off down the street should not be rewarded with getting off scott free. The same goes for cctv enforcement if you park on a bus stop for example what difference should it make if the PA is walking down the street or filming you on CCTV. CCTV is actually of benefit to the driver as it films the whole incident on video so the PA cannot lie.

[electron99]

Originally Posted by green_and_mean

I fail to see why issuing a PCN after a driver has driven away is a bad thing, if you have parked in contravention speeding off down the street should not be rewarded with getting off scott free.

So what is to stop a parking attendant, down on his quota for the day, jotting down your car number as you drive past him when you have not parked at all?
Several months later your word against his, and we all know which is going to be believed by money hungry councils.

[Bookworm]

My thoughts precisely when I saw it on the news earlier.

[Zamzara]

Originally Posted by electron99

So what is to stop a parking attendant, down on his quota for the day, jotting down your car number as you drive past him when you have not parked at all?
Several months later your word against his, and we all know which is going to be believed by money hungry councils.

I suppose time will tell what evidence is required by adjudicators. Personally I would be happier if an assurance were given NOW that CCTV evidence proving a contravention will be required in every case.

[adamna]

green_and_mean, where do you live? Maybe on another planet, but definitely not in fabulous London surrounded by Big Brother cameras of various kinds, bus lanes and ridiculous parking controls on the boundary of Congestion Charging! Of course the police CCTV cameras are never working if you are the victim of a crime.

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by electron99

So what is to stop a parking attendant, down on his quota for the day, jotting down your car number as you drive past him when you have not parked at all?
Several months later your word against his, and we all know which is going to be believed by money hungry councils.

What is to stop him doing it now, it has always been his word against yours when it comes to whether PCN was served.

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by adamna

green_and_mean, where do you live? Maybe on another planet, but definitely not in fabulous London surrounded by Big Brother cameras of various kinds, bus lanes and ridiculous parking controls on the boundary of Congestion Charging! Of course the police CCTV cameras are never working if you are the victim of a crime.

I do actually live and work in London and have to tollerate the problems caused by traffic as much as the next person. CCTV enforcement once more widespread will lead to much greater compliance of parking regulations. Most drivers do not realise at present that cctv parking enforcement takes place and will still happily park on yellow lines, bus stops and school zig zags etc taking the risk because they do not see a PA in the street and think they will return to the vehicle and leave before one arrives. Most sensible drivers will not now risk going in a Bus lane because of cameras despite not knowing if they are manned or not at the time it is an effective deterent.

[electron99]

Originally Posted by green_and_mean

What is to stop him doing it now, it has always been his word against yours when it comes to whether PCN was served.

At the moment photographs he/she takes have to include the PCN on the car windscreen.In future there will be no requirement to even place it on the car, let alone photograph it in situ.

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by electron99

At the moment photographs he/she takes have to include the PCN on the car windscreen.In future there will be no requirement to even place it on the car, let alone photograph it in situ.

I must have missed that piece of legislation please can you enlighten me where to find it?

[electron99]

Originally Posted by green_and_mean

I must have missed that piece of legislation please can you enlighten me where to find it?

No legislation, just standard practice for many authorities.The photos will also include the tax disc, and blue badge if any.This is to counter any claims that the PCN was not placed on the vehicle, which of course will now become academic.

[Bookworm]

Originally Posted by electron99

This is to counter any claims that the PCN was not placed on the vehicle, which of course will now become academic.

Or that the infraction had not happened in the first place.

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by electron99

No legislation, just standard practice for many authorities.The photos will also include the tax disc, and blue badge if any.This is to counter any claims that the PCN was not placed on the vehicle, which of course will now become academic.

So maybe you could show a few cases where the lack of a photo showing PCN was served have lead to an appeal being upheld?
Adjudicators cannot rule that a photo IS required because there is no such legislation. Councils use photos to add weight to their case that is the only reason they are used.

[Rob S]

I parked on a residents parking bay in Camden in 1999. The sign stating it was a residents bay was missing so I knew I was safe to park there. On my return a PCN was attached. I challenged it and Camden rejected my representations as the PA's notes stated the sign was present and they had "no reason to disbelieve the attendent". In short, the PA had blatently lied about the presence of the relevent sign.

I appealed to PATAS and inspected the site a few weeks later and discovered a brand new sign in situ. I contacted the Highways department and they advised me of the date the sign was erected (it was after the aleged contravention), so that formed the basis of my appeal. Camden withdrew from the appeal and cancelled the PCN prior to getting to PATAS.

The bottom line is that while there are incentives for PA's to issue more PCN's there will always be those that will be dishonest and issue PCN's in circumstances where they should not be issued.

[adamna]

Lucky for you there was a box you could tick on the appeal form! Well done for making the effort to get the evidence, pretty conclusive, your case demonstrates that we are not dealing with a system that operates fairly, or in our interests. I find it offensive that we have to put that kind of effort in.

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by adamna

Lucky for you there was a box you could tick on the appeal form! Well done for making the effort to get the evidence, pretty conclusive, your case demonstrates that we are not dealing with a system that operates fairly, or in our interests. I find it offensive that we have to put that kind of effort in.

How unfair can a system be you appeal to the adjudicator and the Council cancels the PCN outrageous!!

Have you ever been to a 'real' trial you seem to be under the impression that you can just sit in the box repeating 'I'm innocent' and the judge will throw the case out. Unless you can argue your case and prove otherwise usually you will be found guilty.