Introducing parking charges in evenings & Sundays

[Litotes 63]

Restrictions are put in place here for sound engineering or safety reasons.

 

That's a lie in itself - the parking permit schemes are restrictions which weren't wanted by the residents, they aren't for engineering reasons, and they certainly haven't created any safer roads, in fact quite the opposite.

[onewheeldave 22]

You have some rather ridiculous ideas and a considerable lack of understanding of how and why restrictions are put in place.

 

Restrictions are put in place here for sound engineering or safety reasons. No restrictions are ever put in place to trap motorists and any insinuation to the contrary is a blatant lie.

 

My "mate" KB, the Parking Services Manager, has no influence whatsoever on where restrictions are put in place. His service just enforce.

 

There are simple appeals processes in place for anyone who feels they have received an unjustified penalty.

Greenwebs link-

 

http://www.appealnow.com/scams/

 

about the 74 parking ticket scams makes interesting reading- are you going to address it in any way? Or should we all assume that it's completely valid?

[Penistone999 10]

Restrictions are put in place here for sound engineering or safety reasons. No restrictions are ever put in place to trap motorists and any insinuation to the contrary is a blatant lie.

 

 

 

So the council dont see parking fines as a way to raise revenue ?

 

Do the council budget for a rough amount of income from parking fines when setting their annual budget ?

[Planner1 438]

Greenwebs link-

 

http://www.appealnow.com/scams/

 

about the 74 parking ticket scams makes interesting reading- are you going to address it in any way? Or should we all assume that it's completely valid?

That website is there to promote a business which charges a fee to appeal parking penalties. (Which anyone can do for free by the way )

 

So, would it be in the site owners interest to create the impression there are all these "scams" going on, or is he a good honest campaigner for the rights of the motorist. You decide.

 

---------- Post added 30-06-2013 at 00:06 ----------

 

So the council dont see parking fines as a way to raise revenue ?

 

Do the council budget for a rough amount of income from parking fines when setting their annual budget ?

All Council services have to plan their budgets carefully. Parking Services costs the Council millions to provide, so they need to forecast income as well as possible, because the department's budget is fixed and any shortfalls have to be made up elsewhere in the service, which could ultimately impact on jobs. So of course the income from penalties is factored into the departments budget planning.

 

You can't forecast the income from penalties exactly, but, if you do the same amount of enforcement this year as last year and nothing else changes, it's a fair assumption you will get something similar again.

[onewheeldave 22]

That website is there to promote a business which charges a fee to appeal parking penalties. (Which anyone can do for free by the way )

 

So, would it be in the site owners interest to create the impression there are all these "scams" going on, or is he a good honest campaigner for the rights of the motorist. You decide.

 

I will (decide). I was just wondering if you wanted to dispute any of the listed scams.

 

Pointing out that the site is there to promote a business certainly doesn't invalidate any of the listed scams.

 

I think you'll find a lot of websites that are genuine and contain plenty of facts and good advice, also are profit making businesses. Indeed, by your reasoning above, you're basically invalidating your own advice, as you also have a vested interest in persuading people to see parking issues your way.

 

I also noticed that the site offers a page of free advice for those who wish to appeal their fines by themselves-

 

http://www.appealnow.com/Barrie-Segal/

 

and that advice seems pretty good.

 

Additionally, I've seen several such parking scams by councils covered in news reports, both on the net, and, by 'watchdog' style tv programs, so I know that at least some of them are occuring.

 

So, rather than evading the question, would you like to actually try to discredit any of the scams listed on the page?-

 

http://www.appealnow.com/scams/

[Penistone999 10]

All Council services have to plan their budgets carefully. Parking Services costs the Council millions to provide, so they need to forecast income as well as possible, because the department's budget is fixed and any shortfalls have to be made up elsewhere in the service, which could ultimately impact on jobs. So of course the income from penalties is factored into the departments budget planning.

 

You can't forecast the income from penalties exactly, but, if you do the same amount of enforcement this year as last year and nothing else changes, it's a fair assumption you will get something similar again.

 

So obviously the greater number of tickets the council can issue the more it benefits the council , which clearly proves the council have an agenda where parking is concerned and they see motorists as a cash cow to be vmilked and squeezed as often as possible and for as much as possible.

[onewheeldave 22]

So obviously the greater number of tickets the council can issue the more it benefits the council , which clearly proves the council have an agenda where parking is concerned and they see motorists as a cash cow to be vmilked and squeezed as often as possible and for as much as possible.

 

To be fair- not really.

 

Obviously, the more tickets issued, the more money the council gets, but that in itself doesn't prove that they do intentionally try to increase the number of tickets issued.

 

The same applies to any business- they could unfairly put up prices to get more money, but, whether they do or not is up to them and depends on their integrity.

 

I'm not suggesting the council do have integrity, just pointing out that the fact that they could rip of motorists does not constitute proof that they actually do.

[Planner1 438]

So obviously the greater number of tickets the council can issue the more it benefits the council , which clearly proves the council have an agenda where parking is concerned and they see motorists as a cash cow to be vmilked and squeezed as often as possible and for as much as possible.

 

Your argument ignores the blindingly obvious fact that the Council's ability to issue tickets is limited by the motorists ability to stay within the rules.

 

The Council's agenda is to see that motorists observe the rules and that is necessary, because as has been well demonstrated elsewhere, when there is no threat of enforcement, drivers feel free to completely ignore the rules and anarchy ensues.

[metalman 21]

Strange, I don't remember seeing any news reports about outbreaks of anarchy recently.

[Litotes 63]

Your argument ignores the blindingly obvious fact that the Council's ability to issue tickets is limited by the motorists ability to stay within the rules.

 

You ignore the fact that the council doesn't stay within the rules... e.g. HIlsborough Tram gates, Wicker Bus gates

 

So, let me see, illegally placed signage, insufficient signage = lots of fines = lots of income

 

It is only when challenged by the courts that they do anything (slowly) about the fraud they have been perpretating.

 

"In criminal law, fraud is intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual"

 

 

Sounds like fraud to me...

 

This has occurred in many places - e.g. Broomhill, they were giving tickets out when the white lines were not as sepcified by the relevant regulations.

 

As far as I know, theye did not refund everyone they had illegally charged - instead you had to apply for the money of which they had defrauded you.

[Penistone999 10]

Your argument ignores the blindingly obvious fact that the Council's ability to issue tickets is limited by the motorists ability to stay within the rules.

 

 

And of course ,as has already been pointed out ,the council never operate outside the rules do they ? Re the Hillsbro bus gate scam , the council only refunded motorists for the money they obtained through shady practices when motorists appealed . The council knew they were in the wrong ,but didnt automatically refund the fines as they should have done, they instead kept the money hoping no one would find out they had been conned.

 

Maybe the council should look closer to home before they talk about motorist`s ability to stay withing the rules.

[Planner1 438]

You ignore the fact that the council doesn't stay within the rules... e.g. HIlsborough Tram gates, Wicker Bus gates

 

So, let me see, illegally placed signage, insufficient signage = lots of fines = lots of income

 

It is only when challenged by the courts that they do anything (slowly) about the fraud they have been perpretating.

 

"In criminal law, fraud is intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual"

 

 

Sounds like fraud to me...

 

This has occurred in many places - e.g. Broomhill, they were giving tickets out when the white lines were not as sepcified by the relevant regulations.

 

As far as I know, theye did not refund everyone they had illegally charged - instead you had to apply for the money of which they had defrauded you.

Displaying your usual ignorance I see.

 

"The courts" are not involved in traffic penalties. It's the Traffic Penalties Tribunal which hears appeals.

 

If there was some "fraud" on the scale you insinuate, don't you think someone would already have challenged it?

 

Bus lane enforcement is notoriously difficult. Most authorities who do it have had issues caused by Adjudicators interpreting the government guidance on signage in a way that could not be anticipated. Hillsborough is such an example. The Council could not reasonably anticipate that the adjudicator would require an additional road marking which is not specifically associated with the signs used and would therefore find wanting a signs / lines layout which has been legally authorised by the Government.

 

The example you cite whe SCC'S asked people to apply for refunds was when the then Lib-Dem administration decided they would refund motorists who

had been penalised because they thought it was the right thing to do, they were under no legal obligation to do so.