Parking ticket with wrong VRM on it
Discussion
Whilst loading yesterday (parked on a wide pavement) I went out to my van to find A guy typing into his machine frantically. I told him, I'd been inside the shop to get my goods & he told me that he'd already got my details in his machine. Fair cop I thought.
As A loading bay had become available, I offered to move the van & he said "I've already booked you, you might as well stay there"
I carried on loading, he carried on typing, about ten minutes later he finished, put the ticket on the front of the van & took a photo of the front of the van.
The shop asked to have a look at the ticket, as they wanted the ticket man's number (they think he's picking on them)
To mine & thier suprise, my ticket had their van's regisration mark on it. I asked if there van was out there & it wasn't. It was 50 miles away, plus it's A VW not A Ford as stated on the ticket.
The guy must have thier plate on "quick dial"
I've got 14 days to pay £30 or 28 days to pay £60, after that they will contact the registered keeper (the shop owner) to ask for £90.
What would you do next ?
As A loading bay had become available, I offered to move the van & he said "I've already booked you, you might as well stay there"
I carried on loading, he carried on typing, about ten minutes later he finished, put the ticket on the front of the van & took a photo of the front of the van.
The shop asked to have a look at the ticket, as they wanted the ticket man's number (they think he's picking on them)
To mine & thier suprise, my ticket had their van's regisration mark on it. I asked if there van was out there & it wasn't. It was 50 miles away, plus it's A VW not A Ford as stated on the ticket.
The guy must have thier plate on "quick dial"
I've got 14 days to pay £30 or 28 days to pay £60, after that they will contact the registered keeper (the shop owner) to ask for £90.
What would you do next ?
Tell the ticket issuing authority that you want to go to court and that without being found guilty in a court any 'fine or forfeiture' is illegal under the 'Bill of Rights'.
Then, if they take you to court, the information laid is incorrect and invalid. If they go for the shop owner, they again have the wrong vehicle detyails.
Waste as much of their time as you possibly can.
Then, if they take you to court, the information laid is incorrect and invalid. If they go for the shop owner, they again have the wrong vehicle detyails.
Waste as much of their time as you possibly can.
Throw it in the bin. You haven't been served with a ticket. Although the shop will have to fight their side, proving their van was not parked there, and not served with the original ticket.
Edited to add: I like Cooperman's idea more! Waste days and days of the ticket company's time in court!
>> Edited by Raify on Friday 10th March 11:30
Edited to add: I like Cooperman's idea more! Waste days and days of the ticket company's time in court!
>> Edited by Raify on Friday 10th March 11:30
One thing that annoyed me, was the fact that the guy can turn round & say the van was parked there for ten minutes (time between when he started the ticket & when he took the photo)
But I had the opportunity to move the van after 30 seconds & he told me not to.
I would have thought that if it was badly parked, it should be moved at the earliest chance.
But I had the opportunity to move the van after 30 seconds & he told me not to.
I would have thought that if it was badly parked, it should be moved at the earliest chance.
RUSSELLM said:
One thing that annoyed me, was the fact that the guy can turn round & say the van was parked there for ten minutes (time between when he started the ticket & when he took the photo)
But I had the opportunity to move the van after 30 seconds & he told me not to.
I would have thought that if it was badly parked, it should be moved at the earliest chance.
That's EXACTLY the problem I have with Traffic wardens. They're no longer there to ensure that the roads are clear, but to generate money. This is demonstrated by your offer to move the van off the pavement and into a loading space, and his refusal. If his purpose was to keep the roads clear and traffic moving, he would have accepted.
AND, £20 says that he started writing the ticket whilst hiding behind a wall somewhere. I've seen the b
ards doing this.Raify said:
That's EXACTLY the problem I have with Traffic wardens. They're no longer there to ensure that the roads are clear, but to generate money.
'Round here, they'll double-park their tow truck to get at a parked car in rush hour, thus causing gridlock far worse than if they'd left the errant car where it was. All in the name of traffic flow!
It seems to be beside the point that the road narrows further up causing a natural blockage anyway and has no parking restricitons there, so I don't see the point in having timed parking restrictions on the wide part in the first place
combemarshal said:
Am I right in saying that they have to physically put the ticket on the vehicle, if you left before they had chance then it tough luck!
When no one else will employ you become a traffic warden!!
They have to physically serve it (on you or the car AFAIK) unless: 1. You're in London.
2. The ticket is being issued by Bib.
They stuck the ticket on HIS van so that vehicle has been served, the VRM wont count for alot as they will be able to vary the details should they wish in court.
Ultimately his van has been served a ticket.
There is photographic evidence of the ticket on that van.
The VRM is wrong on the ticket but i feel that this will be a court challenge but they will eventually come to you for the money.
Edited to add:
If the shop feel this warden is harassing them then they could use the wrong VRM as evidence of that but ultimately should they have parked there??
Edited again to add!:
To be honest the bulk of the cost in defending will be te shops as they will have to prove the details are incorrect to their vehicle and it will be down to the shop to point out that the VRM is wrong in the photo.
Then either the Council will go after you for the ticket to mitigate some of the losses or they will bin it.
Then you have the choice of paying up or contesting it, if you contest the ticket then you will have to basically say i did not recieve the ticket personally or on the vehcile but bear in mind they will have photographic evidence to confirm this.
You could try and defend the fact that the VRM is wrong on the ticket but when they ask "were you parked illegally" and "did you recieve the ticket on your vehicle" then you will end up paying.
>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Friday 10th March 13:55
Ultimately his van has been served a ticket.
There is photographic evidence of the ticket on that van.
The VRM is wrong on the ticket but i feel that this will be a court challenge but they will eventually come to you for the money.
Edited to add:
If the shop feel this warden is harassing them then they could use the wrong VRM as evidence of that but ultimately should they have parked there??
Edited again to add!:
To be honest the bulk of the cost in defending will be te shops as they will have to prove the details are incorrect to their vehicle and it will be down to the shop to point out that the VRM is wrong in the photo.
Then either the Council will go after you for the ticket to mitigate some of the losses or they will bin it.
Then you have the choice of paying up or contesting it, if you contest the ticket then you will have to basically say i did not recieve the ticket personally or on the vehcile but bear in mind they will have photographic evidence to confirm this.
You could try and defend the fact that the VRM is wrong on the ticket but when they ask "were you parked illegally" and "did you recieve the ticket on your vehicle" then you will end up paying.
>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Friday 10th March 13:55
^Slider^ said:
If the shop feel this warden is harassing them then they could use the wrong VRM as evidence of that but ultimately should they have parked there??
]
They wasn't.... I was
But no, I shouldn't have parked there & I hold my hands up. From what I'm reading on here, if I'd moved whan I had chance, he never had the sticker ready, I could have moved, he couldn't take his photo & I would have got off with it.
I don't know whether to write & contest it now, or let them write to him in 28 days, realise their mistake & come after me (my plate on the photo)
I was going to contest it, on the fact that I was loading & had chance to move when I saw the guy.
What i meant was they could use the fact the wrong VRM meant that he had already typed the ticket prior to seeing the vehicle!
Im not sure how you can contest the ticket in all honesty but im sure someone may well know for sure, probably DVD will know.
All i can say is if they are permitted to vary the VRM as all other factors are correct and the offence complete i doubt a clerical technicality will prevent successful prosecution!
Im not sure how you can contest the ticket in all honesty but im sure someone may well know for sure, probably DVD will know.
All i can say is if they are permitted to vary the VRM as all other factors are correct and the offence complete i doubt a clerical technicality will prevent successful prosecution!
If the guy has served a ticket with the VRM of a van that was 50 miles away, it seems to me that something is definitely amiss. Although it is probably going to do little to help you out, highlighting this fact in court, and to this guys superiors may make the point that he is victimising this shop, and it's suppliers. I think you should go for them on a point of principle. If there is a strong feeling locally about this (Does it constitute some sort of harrassment?) then maybe involving the local press would be a good idea as well.
What is the offence on the ticket Russell and I presume W Midlands and not London?
London on a pavement is a no no under a specific Act.
If it is other than a Waiting restriction infringement, i.e. parking on a pavement or something similar sounds most likely,you can try the wrong VRM avenue but as stated above the photo will stuff you.
Bear in mind that if you have an appeal get it in early to stop the increase in penalty and put it on hold until sorted.
Cooperman, for inf, by the sound of this it is LA enforcement and as such Mags Court not involved but any penalty not paid recovereable as a debt by County Court.
dvd
London on a pavement is a no no under a specific Act.
If it is other than a Waiting restriction infringement, i.e. parking on a pavement or something similar sounds most likely,you can try the wrong VRM avenue but as stated above the photo will stuff you.
Bear in mind that if you have an appeal get it in early to stop the increase in penalty and put it on hold until sorted.
Cooperman, for inf, by the sound of this it is LA enforcement and as such Mags Court not involved but any penalty not paid recovereable as a debt by County Court.
dvd
Rob if I could answer that I would be a rich man.
Maybe I am a pessimist but this has been doing the rounds for some time but has not effected matters. I did read sometime ago that it had been tried on a parking appeal but since then nothing. If it had been successful then would it not have been shouted from the housetops??? Bit like the Pace argument with a S172 request???
dvd
Maybe I am a pessimist but this has been doing the rounds for some time but has not effected matters. I did read sometime ago that it had been tried on a parking appeal but since then nothing. If it had been successful then would it not have been shouted from the housetops??? Bit like the Pace argument with a S172 request???
dvd
It's odd that it's sat on the statute books staring the legal profession in the face. Perhaps the majority of cases get dropped quietly as soon as the BoR gets quoted. It wouldn't really be in HMG's interests to publicise successful defences using it.
I didn't used to take an interest in such matters but since Bliars attempts to change the basic presumption of innocence I like to be aware of my rights. My understanding is that it's consstitutional legislation and unless it's specifically nullified in the following legislation then it's still in force.
"Well the Bill Of Rights of 1689 says you can't do that". 
I do try and stay within the law, but it's becoming increasingly difficult these days.
I didn't used to take an interest in such matters but since Bliars attempts to change the basic presumption of innocence I like to be aware of my rights. My understanding is that it's consstitutional legislation and unless it's specifically nullified in the following legislation then it's still in force.
"Well the Bill Of Rights of 1689 says you can't do that". I do try and stay within the law, but it's becoming increasingly difficult these days.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff