The parking spy
Discussion
A parking enforcement device that sends messages to alert traffic wardens that a driver should be given a ticket was put on show yesterday as plans were announced for a professional qualification for parking attendants.
The ParkingEye looks little more than an ordinary pay and display machine at first sight. But one day it will instil as much fear into motorists as speed cameras.
Even Andrew McKerney, the managing director of the manufacturers, said the machine was "evil" - before correcting himself and describing it as merely "very efficient".
The on-street version of the six-foot tall device spots a car as it parks and sends a text message to a traffic warden within seconds if the motorist either doesn't pay or overstays.
"Traffic wardens won't roam any more," Mr McKerney said with evident glee, "They will respond."
The version of the machine designed for car parks notes number plates on entry and, should the motorist fail to leave on time, issues a fine automatically.
The device was among an array of Orwellian technology on show at Parkex 2005, the parking industry trade show which opened in Birmingham yesterday, demonstrating that there is a lot of money to be made in an industry which is worth an estimated £3 billion a year.
An extension of the 'safety' camera that will doubtless be billed as the 'security' camera.
Extends the CCTV debate (see elsewhere on PH ... too fragile to go look now ... PH that is, not me!
)
Streaky
The ParkingEye looks little more than an ordinary pay and display machine at first sight. But one day it will instil as much fear into motorists as speed cameras.
Even Andrew McKerney, the managing director of the manufacturers, said the machine was "evil" - before correcting himself and describing it as merely "very efficient".
The on-street version of the six-foot tall device spots a car as it parks and sends a text message to a traffic warden within seconds if the motorist either doesn't pay or overstays.
"Traffic wardens won't roam any more," Mr McKerney said with evident glee, "They will respond."
The version of the machine designed for car parks notes number plates on entry and, should the motorist fail to leave on time, issues a fine automatically.
The device was among an array of Orwellian technology on show at Parkex 2005, the parking industry trade show which opened in Birmingham yesterday, demonstrating that there is a lot of money to be made in an industry which is worth an estimated £3 billion a year.
An extension of the 'safety' camera that will doubtless be billed as the 'security' camera.
Extends the CCTV debate (see elsewhere on PH ... too fragile to go look now ... PH that is, not me!
) Streaky
The real winners are the MD's of the companies that think these devices up.
Win, Win, Win.
Expensive to buy. Expensive to maintain.
Goverment spends a fortune on them.
Captain Gatso blows them up? - the MD has a wry smile while he reads the paper on his yacht.
An excellent market to be in though, and the do gooders boulster your cause, demanding these items be bought.
SPECS, Gatso, LTI, whatever. Good shares to have at the moment. The best scams since the Y2K bug.
Win, Win, Win.
Expensive to buy. Expensive to maintain.
Goverment spends a fortune on them.
Captain Gatso blows them up? - the MD has a wry smile while he reads the paper on his yacht.
An excellent market to be in though, and the do gooders boulster your cause, demanding these items be bought.
SPECS, Gatso, LTI, whatever. Good shares to have at the moment. The best scams since the Y2K bug.
streaky said:
as plans were announced for a professional qualification for parking attendants
yes and another government scam too - same as the one for professional qualification for clampers. Augments the % number of people with vocational qualifications
Enables govt to claim achieving high targets for qualifications of the general population
Inputs funds from wherever to further eduaction for these non-qualifications
Makes lots of money for the 'friends of the government' who teach these non-qualifications
leaving same otherwise unemployable lowlives roaming the streets making life even more umpleasant
mad? andygo said:
Not to mention the Bill Of Rights 
Oi councils, it's illegal to fine someone without taking them to court!
Whats happened to that issue? Not seen it mentioned for a while.
Any news guys?
At a guess, I'd suggest they aren't fining you before taking you to court.
You are "offered" the choice of paying the fine before you go, backed up with the threat of more costs (I got scammed recently and it's "you may be fined £10000").
It's pitiful, but it doesn't break that rule.
If you read the legal section of this you might just start frothing at the mouth!
www.abd.org.uk/jjleeming.htm
www.abd.org.uk/jjleeming.htm
telecat said:"'The evidence is fairly conclusive that speed limits, both in Britain and elsewhere, markedly reduce speeds and casualties, even though they are not universally obeyed.' Mrs Barbara Castle, Minister of Transport, May 1966"
If you read the legal section of this you might just start frothing at the mouth!
www.abd.org.uk/jjleeming.htm
As soon as you see any statement by a government minister that contains a qualification, as in "fairly conclusive" there is a good rule to apply ... it is likely that the contrary is true.
Streaky
autismuk said:I understand that much thought is that it does.
Not to mention the Bill Of Rights
Oi councils, it's illegal to fine someone without taking them to court!
Any news guys?
You are "offered" the choice of paying the fine before you go, backed up with the threat of more costs (I got scammed recently and it's "you may be fined £10000").
It's pitiful, but it doesn't break that rule.
The Bill of Rights 1689 contains the following section:
"That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void."
Note the "or promises".
In the 'Metric Martyrs' judgement the Lord Justices said:
"We should recognise a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: as it were 'ordinary' statutes and 'constitutional' statutes. The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights. [e.g. Magna Carta, Bill of Rights, Act of Union, Reform Acts - S]
Ordinary statutes may be impliedly repealed. Constitutional statutes may not."
I believe that Neil Herron is still awaiting progress on his letter to Newcastle City Council (of December 2004 IIRC) [someone may know differently - S].
It's an interesting defence. The issue appears to be that, if tried and upheld, then the Metric Marytr's judgement would have to be struck down as incorrect in law and would open an entire oil-drum of worms.
Streaky
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff