Parking ticket advice

[51mon]

Hi guys,

Just after a quick bit of advice. Went out to the chippy today at dinner and when I came back to my car a traffic warden was writing out a ticket, but hadn't actually put it on my car yet.

I'm not trying to dispute the fact that I was getting the ticket because I was parked illegally (albeit only for about 5 mins), but I was just wandering whether or not I'll get away with it because he hadn't actually put it on my car by the time I got in and moved it?

At what point is the ticket 'issued', is it when he enters it into his machine, or when he puts it on the car?

Like I say, not being arsey about it, if I have to pay it, it's my own fault for parking there, but would be well chuffed if I had got back just in time!!!

Cheers

Si.

[blackvanman]

Depends if you have decriminalised parking (parking attendants) rather than police traffic wardens.

In the decriminalised world, the ticket must either be affixed to the vehicle or handed to the driver. If it is not, it is not valid, unless the parking attendant was prevented from serving the ticket, e.g. through physical intimidation. Driving away does not constitute prevention of service.

Profile says Manchester which I think has decriminalised parking so you did the right thing and got away with it.

Doesn't mean they won't lie and say they attached the ticket to your car though... (but in London they now take photos of the ticket on the car which stops them lying!)

[51mon]

Ah, might look promising then, was definatly a private parking warden i.e. the ones that hunt in pairs on mopeds!!

Luckily I had two mates with me at the time so may be able to protest if they try to lie their way round it!!

Cheers for the advice blacvanman!!

[mr_annie_vxr]

I think you will find that if there is a need to show its been placed on the vehicle they will photograph it. So find out if thats the local policy and if it is then they will only be able to claim they handed it to you. As you have a witness you may well be okay. May be worth checking up locally. Forewared is forearmed.

[51mon]

Nice one mr annie, think i'll call their bluff, if i get anything through the post they certainly didn't hand me a ticket, and there was nowt on my car, so i reckon i should just deny it and take it on the chin if anything comes of it!

Cheers

Si

[Dwight VanDriver]

Retract that Simon if the incident occurred in London. They are allowed by law to still proceed if prevented for any reason from putting ticket on car/hand to driver and are also authorised to go ahead on camera evidence.

dvd

[blackvanman]

Dwight VanDriver said:

Retract that Simon if the incident occurred in London. They are allowed by law to still proceed if prevented for any reason from putting ticket on car/hand to driver and are also authorised to go ahead on camera evidence.

dvd

They can proceed if prevented from serving the PCN but driving away does not constitute prevention of service.

For example, see this adjudicator decision: www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.u . CCTV tickets are a separate matter and do not relate to driving away from PAs.

Also - Simon, no need to deny any knowledge etc., if they try and proceed. I had a driveaway cancelled in Westminster and I just told the truth - that I was double parked outside my house but the PA didn't even come close to getting the ticket on the vehicle or handing it to me.

ben

[Dwight VanDriver]

Thanks for that Bro.... duly noted.

Reading it though it does not strike me as being very assertive??????

dvd

[blackvanman]

Dwight VanDriver said:

Thanks for that Bro.... duly noted.

Reading it though it does not strike me as being very assertive??????

dvd

I love the way he drops in the word vexatiously at the end. As you probably know, that's not-so-coded-speak for 'if you don't stop persecuting motorists who have quite legitimately driven off from PAs, I will start awarding them costs against you.'

(costs and expenses may only be awarded by the Adjudicator in very rare circumstances if the Adjudicator determines that you or Transport for London has acted ‘frivolously’, ‘vexatiously’ or ‘wholly unreasonably’ in bringing or contesting the appeal)

[Dwight VanDriver]

Looks like the judiciary in London are coming onto motorists side:

www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0

yet again eh.

dvd

[freedman]

Dwight VanDriver said:

Looks like the judiciary in London are coming onto motorists side:

www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0

yet again eh.

dvd

So TFL are stuffed if they try that again?

Can you believe they took aparking ticket to the high court?? someone should be drawing the dole for that decision and waste of taxpayers money

[streaky]

freedman said:

Dwight VanDriver said:

Looks like the judiciary in London are coming onto motorists side:

www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0

yet again eh.

dvd

So TFL are stuffed if they try that again?

Can you believe they took aparking ticket to the high court?? someone should be drawing the dole for that decision and waste of taxpayers money

Ratepayers, not taxpayers. But the principle is the same - Streaky