Beware ! Traffic Police and civil parking matters

[Rovinghawk]

Red 4 said:

vonhosen said:

As I said, I'm sure that the Police will be checking that the vehicle is being legally driven on the road. The bailiffs may step in after that.
I don't believe the Police will just be stopping the vehicle for the bailiff.

There have (apparently) been 3 operations in the Metropolitan Police area since September 2013 where police have worked in conjunction with local councils and their enforcement officers/ bailiffs and stopped vehicles due to outstanding parking "fines".

If you believe bailiffs have nothing better to do than blindly follow police officers around on the off-chance that the vehicles they stop may have outstanding fines registered against them I suggest you are deluded - I know you're not btw, you're just doing a (poor) job of acting daft.

Here's a tip - sometimes the police act incorrectly (for many reasons). Poor judgement from force hierarchy is not uncommon. If you continue to defend the police no matter what actions they take or policies they pursue you may be institutionalised/ brainwashed.

As a former police officer who has been around the block more than a few times, I'm happy to say I'm not. I just say it as it is (I always have). The Met appear to have got this one spectacularly wrong in my opinion. Like I said - it's a slippery slope.

Red 4 & I disagree on many things but I'm solidly behind him on this one.

The setup stinks and any attempt at justification just looks like a desperate PR attempt, complete with disingenuous statements.

[jshell]

Eclassy said:

Snowboy said:

It seems quite sensible to me.

Chances are the people who have parking tickets are quite likely to be a bit dodgy in other ways.

wowzers!

Is this your first introduction to Snowboy? This post is normal for the biggest suporter/apologist of police/state powers to interfere in your life. 'you haven't committed a crime - yet!'

[Snowboy]

jshell said:

Is this your first introduction to Snowboy? This post is normal for the biggest suporter/apologist of police/state powers to interfere in your life. 'you haven't committed a crime - yet!'

It's just a pragmatic approach.
I'm not an apologist - I just think they have nothing to apologise for in most cases.

Anpr already covers road tax, which is money owed to the govt. I don't see much of a difference extending it to TFL tickets.
It's sensible sharing of geverment data and resources.

As for the other comment.
Do you think there isn't a correlation between criminals and unpaid parking tickets?

If you think this is the state intefereing in your life then you really need to gain some perspective. Perhaps read the international news.

Edited by Snowboy on Wednesday 9th April 09:20

[Rovinghawk]

Snowboy said:

I just think they have nothing to apologise for in most cases.

I think this is the main point he's making, tbh.

[9mm]

Snowboy said:

jshell said:

Is this your first introduction to Snowboy? This post is normal for the biggest suporter/apologist of police/state powers to interfere in your life. 'you haven't committed a crime - yet!'

It's just a pragmatic approach.
I'm not an apologist - I just think they have nothing to apologise for in most cases.

Anpr already covers road tax, which is money owed to the govt. I don't see much of a difference extending it to TFL tickets.
It's sensible sharing of geverment data and resources.

As for the other comment.
Do you think there isn't a correlation between criminals and unpaid parking tickets?

If you think this is the state intefereing in your life then you really need to gain some perspective. Perhaps read the international news.

Edited by Snowboy on Wednesday 9th April 09:20

Here we go again.

Please let us know what correlation exists between criminals and unpaid parking tickets.

Can you try and reply a bit quicker (we're still waiting) than your assertion about child ksi stats in supermarket car parks prior to the introduction of p and c spaces?

[jshell]

Snowboy said:

It's just a pragmatic approach.

It's not a pragmatic approach. It's a total acceptance of any level of existing or future levels of the powers of officialdom to interfe in ordinary folks lives. Many of the actions you've shown support for are beyond acceptable to ordinary people. Ordinary people who should be free from state interference until they actually commit a 'crime'. You seem like a nice chap, but unfortunately naive in the extreme.

As for International news, thanks, but I've spent the last 11 years in Africa, the US and Scandinavia.

[Snowboy]

jshell said:

Snowboy said:

It's just a pragmatic approach.

It's not a pragmatic approach. It's a total acceptance of any level of existing or future levels of the powers of officialdom to interfe in ordinary folks lives. Many of the actions you've shown support for are beyond acceptable to ordinary people. Ordinary people who should be free from state interference until they actually commit a 'crime'. You seem like a nice chap, but unfortunately naive in the extreme.

As for International news, thanks, but I've spent the last 11 years in Africa, the US and Scandinavia.

Um.
Parking illegally is a crime.
Not paying your parking tickets is a crime.

Now, I'm sure some people will argue about the exact definition of 'crime', but it's just going to be mostly semantics.

[jshell]

Snowboy said:

jshell said:

Snowboy said:

It's just a pragmatic approach.

It's not a pragmatic approach. It's a total acceptance of any level of existing or future levels of the powers of officialdom to interfe in ordinary folks lives. Many of the actions you've shown support for are beyond acceptable to ordinary people. Ordinary people who should be free from state interference until they actually commit a 'crime'. You seem like a nice chap, but unfortunately naive in the extreme.

As for International news, thanks, but I've spent the last 11 years in Africa, the US and Scandinavia.

Um.
Parking illegally is a crime.
Not paying your parking tickets is a crime.

Now, I'm sure some people will argue about the exact definition of 'crime', but it's just going to be mostly semantics.

[Rovinghawk]

Snowboy said:

Parking illegally is a crime.
Not paying your parking tickets is a crime.

"It's a civil matter, sir"

[smegmore]

vonhosen said:

A vehicle with any marker raises my interest.
As I said (may times) I don't believe they'd have been stopping only vehicles of interest to the bailiffs & many of those stopped won't have been of interest to the bailiffs.

Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 9th April 07:00

Well that's alright then.

[smegmore]

Snowboy said:

It seems quite sensible to me.

Chances are the people who have parking tickets are quite likely to be a bit dodgy in other ways.
By sharing data and resources the two government organisations are both working more efficiently.

I don't have a problem with it.

If it was 'parking eye' or 'NCP' it would be a different story.

[Zod]

Red 4 said:

vonhosen said:

They work together on many initiatives, just like they do with many other agencies. I don't so any thing wrong with TFL picking up pieces on the fringe of Police work.

Maybe, but if TFL are providing funding for police officers and in return police officers are helping TFL to recover debts for unpaid parking tickets that smacks of favouritism to me.

Like I said, police are not debt collectors and should not be involved in any kind of civil enforcement/ recovery.

What next ? Helping private companies with their debt collection because they sponsor a few police vehicles ?

Without fear or FAVOUR, malice or ill will ?

I am very much with Red 4 on this. The Police should not have any involvement in civil debt collection beyond protection of a bailiff where there is a clear threat.

[Snowboy]

smegmore said:

Snowboy said:

It seems quite sensible to me.

Chances are the people who have parking tickets are quite likely to be a bit dodgy in other ways.
By sharing data and resources the two government organisations are both working more efficiently.

I don't have a problem with it.

If it was 'parking eye' or 'NCP' it would be a different story.

I've edited the post to 'unpaid parking tickets'.
It's what I intended to say originally.

[Eclassy]

Some other CRIMES:

1. Eating an apple/smoking when driving
2. Crossing a road when the red man is lit
3. Putting good recyclable household cardboard into the non-recyclable household waste bin.

It has been proven that people who do the above are 5 times more likely to be involved in other criminal activity.

[10 Pence Short]

Zod said:

am very much with Red 4 on this. The Police should not have any involvement in civil debt collection beyond protection of a bailiff where there is a clear threat.

A friend of mine, who is a bit eccentric and about 5'5" tall, was served with High Court documents by a couple of very burly blokes a few years ago on behalf of a very wealthy haulage magnet, known for his distinctive trucks and spotters club. For some unknown reason, a local bobby was asked by these burly blokes to accompany them when serving said document.

Later, the officer appeared at the High Court as a witness for the haulage magnet in a committal hearing against my friend.

Fast forward 3 years and my friend stood accused of assaulting someone outside a pub.

Same officer as before was tasked with collecting the CCTV from the hotel across the road. He told the CPS it was unavailable as the system had been removed some time before.

I found out that was not true, and also managed to collect the CCTV which was supposedly impossible to have existed (which helped absolve my friend of blame).

For this and other discrepancies the case was eventually stayed as an abuse of process.


My point is this; even if the officer needed to be there, helping those documents to be served (debatable), by doing so without some threat or need being obvious, he undermined his ability to be seen as impartial. It made it look more suspicious when his investigations of my friend were described as "incompetent" by the Crown Court judge.

In my view, unless there is a clear need in order to prevent a breach of the peace or other crimes, the Police should not involve themselves in private matters.

[Snowboy]

Zod said:

The Police should not have any involvement in civil debt collection beyond protection of a bailiff where there is a clear threat.

I agree with the sentiment of this.
But TFL parking tickets are government issued.
TFL is a government agency.

I'm not sure I'd call this a civil problem.
TFL maintain the anpr cameras in London, I think it's fair enough these cameras are used for TFL fines.

I'm not sure how the balif came to be at the stop.
I can only assume it was a static 'event' where cars were pulled in if they had any sort of flag against them from or just randomly.
If that the case it makes sense to have a baliff on hand too.

[Devil2575]

smegmore said:

vonhosen said:

SV8Predator said:

vonhosen said:

I don't believe the Police will just be stopping the vehicle for the bailiff.

Aw.. Bless!

Practicalities of the situation.

And there we have it in a nutshell, the reason why public (particularly motoring) distrust of the police is increasing

With all due respect this has fk all to do with why public distrust of the Police is increasing. Recent and historic high profile cases have done much to damage the Police's image. As far as I am aware stuff like this doesn't even register, perhaps because it wouldn't happen to most people. The old "It got sent to my old address" routine. In other words you failed to inform the DVLA of a change of address and it bit you on the arse.

[Devil2575]

Snowboy said:

I'm not sure how the balif came to be at the stop.
I can only assume it was a static 'event' where cars were pulled in if they had any sort of flag against them from or just randomly.
If that the case it makes sense to have a baliff on hand too.

I agree, it makes perfect sense.

[Zod]

Snowboy said:

I agree with the sentiment of this.
But TFL parking tickets are government issued.
TFL is a government agency.

I'm not sure I'd call this a civil problem.
TFL maintain the anpr cameras in London, I think it's fair enough these cameras are used for TFL fines.

I'm not sure how the balif came to be at the stop.
I can only assume it was a static 'event' where cars were pulled in if they had any sort of flag against them from or just randomly.
If that the case it makes sense to have a baliff on hand too.

Of course it's a civil matter. There is no question whatsoever about this. TfL fines are not a criminal matter and therefore have nothing to do with the Police.

[Devil2575]

Zod said:

Snowboy said:

I agree with the sentiment of this.
But TFL parking tickets are government issued.
TFL is a government agency.

I'm not sure I'd call this a civil problem.
TFL maintain the anpr cameras in London, I think it's fair enough these cameras are used for TFL fines.

I'm not sure how the balif came to be at the stop.
I can only assume it was a static 'event' where cars were pulled in if they had any sort of flag against them from or just randomly.
If that the case it makes sense to have a baliff on hand too.

Of course it's a civil matter. There is no question whatsoever about this. TfL fines are not a criminal matter and therefore have nothing to do with the Police.

So what?

Who cares?

Other than perhaps people who have parking tickets and are trying to get away with it by not informing the DVLA of a change of address?

I've had plenty of parking tickets in my time and i've paid all of them without any problems at all. I also prioritised changing my address with the DVLA when I moved house. I have very little sympathy for people who can't seem to manage this and even less when they complain that the authorities caught up with them during a Police stop.

Good. Don't park like a dhead in future and if you do man up and pay up.