Is my parking ticket valid??

[warby111]

I received a parking ticket on 04/08/07 for parking outside my own house at 08.21 when i should have moved the car by 8am.

 

The reason for my post is the reg number is wrong on the ticket, so i want to ask does this ticket still stand or will it be cancelled?

 

Do i write in to appeal against it or just leave it as there is no way of tracing e with the wrong reg? I am not sure if the local traffic wardens take pics when issuing tickets.

 

Cheers

[Rob S]

See this thread, the circumstances are identical to yours:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-wardens/103377-pcn-wrong-reg-number.html?highlight=wrong+reg+number

 

And this one:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-wardens/73898-incorrect-reg-number-pcn.html?highlight=wrong+reg+number

 

And finally:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-wardens/55174-incorrect-registration-ticket-valid.html?highlight=wrong+reg+number

[warby111]

See this thread, the circumstances are identical to yours:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-wardens/103377-pcn-wrong-reg-number.html?highlight=wrong+reg+number

 

And this one:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-wardens/73898-incorrect-reg-number-pcn.html?highlight=wrong+reg+number

 

And finally:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-wardens/55174-incorrect-registration-ticket-valid.html?highlight=wrong+reg+number

 

Cheers Rob, sorry i posted a similar thread. Need to make my searches more thorough before posting lol

[Rob S]

No worries, I wasn't having a dig at you for posting your (legitimate) question, it was easier to do the search and post the links to allow you to browse them at your leisure.

[green_and_mean]

There is no need to appeal the PCN will be processed on the VRM on the PCN which luckily for you (as you were parked in contravention) is not your vehicle. I suspect once the ticket gets to notice of owner stage it will be cancelled as the details will not tie up with those for the vehicle at DVLA. If you appeal you are getting involved in a PCN which technically has not been issued to your vehicle.

[Rob S]

There is no need to appeal the PCN will be processed on the VRM on the PCN which luckily for you (as you were parked in contravention) is not your vehicle.

 

I would be interested how you can state quite categorically that the OP's vehicle was in contravention without you having been there to witness it or seen the PCN to see if it was complient.

[warby111]

No worries, I wasn't having a dig at you for posting your (legitimate) question, it was easier to do the search and post the links to allow you to browse them at your leisure.

 

Cheers Rob, did not take it as a dig i know how difficult it is on times to finmd what you are looking for in a forum.

 

Love this place, so much advise to be had lol.

[green_and_mean]

I would be interested how you can state quite categorically that the OP's vehicle was in contravention without you having been there to witness it or seen the PCN to see if it was complient.

 

I received a parking ticket on 04/08/07 for parking outside my own house at 08.21 when i should have moved the car by 8am.

 

The OP has said he was parked in contravention which is why he was querying the wrong VRM as a way of appeal. I have not said the PCN was complient quite the opposite in fact. So try and find something more useful to do than just have a dig at other forum members.

[Guest perky88]

Have to agree with green_and_mean, certain users of this forum in particular seem to take the slightest thing to dig at other members... apology in order to green_and_mean I think Rob !

[Rob S]

The OP has said he was parked in contravention which is why he was querying the wrong VRM as a way of appeal. I have not said the PCN was complient quite the opposite in fact. So try and find something more useful to do than just have a dig at other forum members.

 

Pot, kettle, black. Most of your posts have been of little help to forum members Green, so you are in no position to criticise me for commenting on you.

[Rob S]

Have to agree with green_and_mean, certain users of this forum in particular seem to take the slightest thing to dig at other members... apology in order to green_and_mean I think Rob !

 

If you look at Green and Means posts Perky, you will see the majority have been of no help to other members and are often critical. So, no apology due. I stand by what I said. He could easily have posted what he did without the comment relating to the alleged contravention, but he chose to put the comment in (typical of his general attitude towards members who post in the parking section unfortunately).

[green_and_mean]

A forum to discuss the legalities or unlawfulness of parking tickets or charges

 

There would be little point discussing anything if everyone agreed 100% with each other would there? I give help where help is due but do not see the point of helping people escape being fined for something they knew full well was wrong when they did it. There is a big difference from getting a PCN due to missleading signage to posts such as 'I left my car on a Bus stop while I went shopping because I was in a hurry and got a PCN is there any way I can get out of it' .

I think selfish and dangerous parking is wrong and feel those that do it with no consideration for others should be punished if thats a crime then lock me up but I think if you look in the highway code the law is on my side.

This forum surely is for giving advice to those that have tried to act within the law and been caught out by the Council or Parking co. acting wrongly rather than trying to aid those that drive and park with no consideration for others escape the consequences.

If not the next logical step would be to open a forum for drunk drivers or speeding ticket advice. I can just see it now ' I was doing 120 mph past the local school and got done for speeding but the copper didn't have his hat on can I get off!!?'

[patdavies]

Whilst we all having differing views, which is a normal and healthy human condition, rhew major difference with grean_and_mean is that he wishes to introduce a moral element into parking law.

 

IOW, as far as he is concerned, if you park unlawfully (not illegally - that would be a criminal matter) then however wrong the council or private parking company may be in their enforcement process, you should pay.

 

Others take the view that if motorists continue to be hemmed in by ever more restrictive laws - especially those aimed at revenue gathering - then it is right and proper that both sides of the battle should have to abide by the letter of the law. If a Council are arrogant enough to consider themselves above the law to the extent that they continually attempt to enforce worn out or improper signage, or use paperwork that does not comply with the law that grants them the right to enforce then they should forfeit that enforcement right and the revenue that attaches to it.

 

As for private parking companies and clampers, there should be a special place in Hell reserved for them.

 

What I would ask green_and_mean is this. If you are driving down a motorway and notice that your speed has strayed up to 75mph, do you voluntarily post of your £60 and licence for 3 points to be added - or do you wait to be caught? If you want to enforce law on the basis of morality instead of fact, then your should of course, take the former course of action and volunteer to your guilt.

 

As to the comments about a forum to 'get off' speeding tickets, go and look at Pepipoo. Your example of 120 mph is just a nonsense example that attempts to apply emotional blackmail. In the circumstance you describe, if the school was occupied or start/end of day, then the Police would not be concerned with speeding - it would be a matter of dangerous driving. If the school was closed for holidays or it was the middle of the night then the presence of the school is irrelevant and is a simple device to attach emotion to a legal argument

[Guest perky88]

to green_and_mean ..

What patdavies is trying to say is .. its ok for shopkeepers/hotel owners to pay to purchase/rent land and want it for their own customers, its ok for the shopkeepers/landowners to pay for the upkeep of the land, pay rates and even insure it for liability etc.

Then its OK for someone else who is not using the services of the shop/hotel to just park their car on the land because they cant be bothered to pay 30p at the local pay&display.

 

Then when the landowner gets fed up with this and doesnt have the spare £1000+ to install a barrier system or other device (as we all know small business owners are loaded and have lots of spare cash ... yeah right), doesnt want to clamp vehicles as its bad for business and just a generally nasty thing to do .. they put up clear notices stating its private land and as a deterrent puts a charge of £60 or whatever to stop people who are not customers parking there.

 

Pat and certain other users think its OK for someone to see the sign and completely ignore it, then when a ticket is issued (as it said it would be on the sign) .. they come out with all types of bu#####t to avoid paying it.

 

How many posts have pat & co replied to when all the OP has stated is "I got a ticket for parking on a private carpark .. how can I get out of it" .. and their repsonse is "Ignore it .. " (or similar) .. Lots and Lots is the answer.

 

How many times have pat & co replied with "well did you see the sign", "did you overstay", "were you a customer", "well it was a fair ticket then" .. NEVER I think is the answer

 

Just sums it up really ... they are not interested in the legality .. just ways of wriggling out of it.

 

its obvious that pat and the majority of others donot own businesses and have no real idea of the real frustration and annoyance of landowners who just want their land for their customers ..

 

This forum is called "A forum to discuss the legalities or unlawfulness of parking tickets or charges"

 

Most of the posts seem to go away from the whole ethos of the title above ..

 

At the end of the day .. if a driver does not park on private land to which they should not be .. then they would not get a ticket ... not rocket science !!!! but thats another argument.

[Zamzara]

At the end of the day .. if a driver does not park on private land to which they should not be .. then they would not get a ticket ... not rocket science !!!! but thats another argument.

 

This thread isn't even about private land, and in the ones that are the driver often has an invitation to park there but is being scammed.

[Guest interesting]

I suspect thats why perky88 has stated "but thats another argument" Zamzara

[green_and_mean]

Its not just about morals its about intention a vast majority of PCNs are issued to those who had no intention of parking within the law but took a risk...for those I have no sympathy. To me its no difference from dropping litter, speeding, smoking in public buildings its all anti social and against the law. Parking was decriminalised not to trivialise parking or lessen the offence but to improve enforcement as the Police no longer had the resources to meet the growing problem. It is still wrong both legally and morally to park in breach of the law whether its civil or criminal.

I guess I'm just an honest person if I have done wrong I'll admit it and face the consequences.

Councils are not the enemy they are democratically elected by us to make our towns a safer and more pleasant place to live. Similar arguments are used for speed cameras being used to raise cash but if you don't speed you don't have to pay.

[patdavies]

I guess I'm just an honest person if I have done wrong I'll admit it and face the consequences.

 

So if you park unlawfully, you send the council the money for the fine, whether or not you get a PCN? Or do you just pay up without question when you get a PCN, IOW when you're caught?

 

I appreciate that if you never get a PCN ,the this is a purely hypothetical question, but is this honesty that you are claiming total or conditional?

 

 

Councils are not the enemy they are democratically elected by us to make our towns a safer and more pleasant place to live. Similar arguments are used for speed cameras being used to raise cash but if you don't speed you don't have to pay.

 

Councillors are elected; council officers are not. there is a huge amount of control from central government as they control the majority of the council's money and legislate the Council's statutory duties - against which elected local councillors are powerless.

 

The argument that if you don't speed then you don't pay has been proven fallacious time and time again.

[Guest perky88]

pat, I think its obvious what green_and_mean is trying to say ...

 

Most people at sometime have exceeded the speed limit or parked on a double yellow for a couple of mins just to nip into the postoffice or similar .. most of the time you get away with it.

Sometimes you are caught out and get a ticket .. and when you're caught .. its a fair cop .. you took a chance and this time got caught.

 

Then to try and get out of it by using sites like this for any possible loophole/incorrect wording on the ticket/ the box not ticked correctly is just wrong ...

 

Now I am sometimes wrong .. but if thats not what green_and_mean was trying to say then I apologise .. if it is, then I hope my additional explination has assisted you.

[Zamzara]

Then to try and get out of it by using sites like this for any possible loophole/incorrect wording on the ticket/ the box not ticked correctly is just wrong ...

 

But surely by the same logic, if they take a chance with the incorrect wording in defiance of the law, then they are taking a chance and should accept it when they get caught?

[Guest perky88]

If a person drinks 15vodkas, drives down a road, kills a young family - gets arrested, admits it to the policeman in car, takes breathalyser over the limit - obvious hes done it .. goes to court and they say the arrest was not done correctly as he had not been given his rights (or similar) and the case is thrown out as anything that happened after the arrest was unlawful.

This is a technicality and cases get thrown out of court on a daily basis, even though the defendant did it ... but a box not ticked on a piece of paper or something spelt wrong making all the difference .. is this right ...

 

I know a parking ticket vs the above are worlds apart ... but if you knowingly take the chance and get caught then morally (not legally) is it right to try and use loopholes to avoid a 'fair cop' ticket ???

 

Peoples opinion differ in relation to their moral standing, and so is their thinking about trying to wriggle out of things ... mine is "I think its wrong" - yours seems to be "its ok" ... Thankfully for society as a whole most people accept if they have been fairly caught .. I am not talking about [causing problems] people, hiding signs etc.. as I have always agreed this is wrong .. but a 'fair cop' if you take the chance and get caught ...

[Zamzara]

Well now you're moving the goalposts... you're trying to base the penalty on the harm done and the moral wrong committed, which I agree is a much better system.

 

So in the case of a family killed by a dangerous driver, clearly the harm done and moral wrong are large.

 

In the case of a yellow line placed in a safe parking place purely to raise revenue, the harm done is zero, hence why it causes so much outrage. I know of nobody who objects to the targeting of drink drivers for enforcement.

[patdavies]

If a person drinks 15vodkas, drives down a road, kills a young family - gets arrested, admits it to the policeman in car, takes breathalyser over the limit - obvious hes done it .. goes to court and they say the arrest was not done correctly as he had not been given his rights (or similar) and the case is thrown out as anything that happened after the arrest was unlawful.

This is a technicality and cases get thrown out of court on a daily basis, even though the defendant did it ... but a box not ticked on a piece of paper or something spelt wrong making all the difference .. is this right ...

 

Morally, no. Legally, yes. Unfortunately perhaps, the court system relies on law and not morals or emotion. In your example above we pay the Police to act professionally on our behalf in such matters and this includes acting within the law in all their procedures. The fault for your exemplar drink driver escaping 'justice' is the fault of the enforcers of the law. Otherwise, why have these procedures, if they are capable of being ignored with impunity?

 

Let me turn this round slightly. Why does the law require the Police to obtain a search warrant from a magistrate to perform a search (and for the pedants, I know there are other grounds for a lawful search). If the Police just searched as and when they liked, with no chance of the 'evidence' being rejected by the court as resulting from an illegal search, why bother with obtaining a warrant?

 

Is there not a moral (as well as legal) imperative that those who would seek to uphold or enforce the law should themselves act within the law.

 

I know a parking ticket vs the above are worlds apart ... but if you knowingly take the chance and get caught then morally (not legally) is it right to try and use loopholes to avoid a 'fair cop' ticket ???

Surely it can only be a 'fair cop' ticket if it is lawfully executed? Otherwise, it's just a piece of paper. Would you expect someone to pay a Council parking penalty merely because the Council wrote them a letter saying that they want them to? When there are procedures to be followed in law for such an occasion?