car dash cams

He's not lying. Unless you go around dressed in a clowns costume or similar, then it would be very unlikely he or she would remember you or any other particular driver from months ago; who just happened to turn up while they were writing a ticket. Something which probably happens all the time. As you say this is your first encounter with a traffic warden, whereas he or she is dealing with hundreds of drivers similar to yourself, every month. Similarly the parking people are probably dealing with hundreds of motorists every month who come out with a sob story of one kind or another. And so short of subjecting you all to aggressive interviews and lie detector tests they've got no real way of distinguishing between those amongst you who are trying it on, and those like yourself who are clearly as pure as the driven snow.

michael adams

...

If the fact that the owner returned while the warden was writing out a ticket was *relevant* (ie it made a difference as to whether or not the ticket was valid) the warden would record that fact somewhere on the ticket.

I suppose nowadays, if it was relevant, you could take a photo of the warden on your mobile phone: at least the fact that most people have phones nowadays makes that easier.

The fact that you can describe the warden ought to count in your favour, but whether it makes any difference to the outcome is debatable, given that every ticket that results in a fine is more income for the council (or whoever ultimately receives the money) - it's one of those "well he *would* say that" situations.

I do wonder what attracts people to become traffic wardens - or any other job such as tax inspector which makes you unpopular with the public. I would get a lot more job situation out of a job in which I *enabled* people to do something rather than one which *prevented* people doing something, and which made people like rather than hate me.

I once had a traffic warden who tried to claim that I needed a parking disc (and one issued by the correct local authority) in order to be allowed to park in a disc parking zone, whereas all discs are interchangeable and you don't even need one as long as you write on a piece of paper the time when you parked, which is all you are (effectively) doing when you set your arrival time on a parking disc. He was adamant that if you don't have the correct disc for the town, you must pay to park while you go find a shop that will give you one. When I asked him for his name so I could put it on the appeal, he called up someone on his radio and the outcome was that he backed down. I thanked him for checking and said "You'll know for next time".

They do, image quality isn't brilliant but it would have shown when that car door was opened. As far as a cards go, it's only VGA (640x480) so no need for an expensive Class 10, I think mine has a 32 GB Class 4 microSD in an adapter. The sound side has too much gain and clips if you have your tunes on at a reasonable level but will record conversation quite well.

Not everyone has a huge amount of choice about what they do.

I'm assuming you meant satisfaction?

You mean like enabling children to leave school safely by preventing idiots waiting on the school zig-zags?

Or allowing a pedestrian a clear view of the road to enable safe crossing, without having that view obscured by a van driver illegally parking on the zig-zags?

I have witnessed both these offences in the last week; the latter one causing a near-miss with a skip lorry as I walked across a zebra crossing.

I would have been very happy had a warden been available to penalise both of the dozy parkers.

Chris

In message , NY writes

Is that actually the law? I have a feeling it might be a case of wishful thinking.

I'm a great supporter of parking discs, and feel that they could be used in many more situations where it is deemed necessary to time-limit parking.

It would certainly be nice to have a UK-wide parking disc - but that could require local authorities to harmonise the way they work, and how the time is displayed.

The OP has given no reason as to why he's not liable for the fine.

The fact that the warden was writing the ticket when he returned is, all other things being equal, irrelevant. Similarly that fact that the OP could describe the warden is itself unremarkable given that he claims that this was his first encounter with a traffic warden. Possibly after another 20 such encounters this clearly significant event may have faded from his memory. Or there again, perhaps not.

All I was pointing out is that there is no reason to suppose that the warden is lying, in failing to remeber the incident. Or that there is anything else underhand going on.

michael adams

...

Presumably with most of them they can't find a better job.

Presumably some of them are power freaks that can't get a job as a cop etc.

Clearly some like Dennis are just s**ts by nature.

Sure, but some like Dennis obviously don?t operate like that.

Its hardly surprising that they mostly aren't exactly rocket scientist material.

On the contrary a large number of traffic wardens are ex-service. Why do you think that should be?

Aloysius wrote

For the first reason I listed.

Considering I bought a single one for =A310, that price is ridiculous.

-- =

The British government is going to impose a 40% tax on Aspirin. "Why" you ask? Well, primarily because it's white and it works.

Excellent answer, tells me all I need to know. Thanks, Dave.

Even the cheap ones have the option for ignition, motion, or continuous.

Bullshit. The camera uses about 2W. Even a small car battery can run 2W for 16 days, 24 hours a day.

In the case of the OP, he'd only need an hour.

We were standing by the offside wing, so I think that it would have photographed us.

Thank you, that's useful to know. 24 hours should be more than enough recording time and my cigar lighter socket it always on.

That's reassuring, thanks.

But what use is a photo of you being booked ?

That would only be useful if they deny that a particular parking goon with a record of lying about the situation had denied that he was the one who booked you etc.

This is the longer version of what happened:

I was going through a separation and the agreement at that time was that I had my children on one day each weekend. I was recommended to take them to a park in another town. I had not been there before.

I arrived at the park and was a little surprised that it was pay and display; none of the parks I have ever been to have had pay and display.

Not having been there before, I did not realise that the children's play area was at the far end of the park, nor did I realise that there was a second, smaller, car park at that end of the park. There was nothing to say that another car park existed.

We had a nice time in the park and in the children's area there were the usual swings, slides, etc. but the council also ran other activities such as boating on a lake, donkey rides, bouncy castles, crazy golf, electric go carts; all of these you had to pay for. The council also operated a kiosk from which they sold food and drinks.

I paid for various activities and I bought food and drinks and thus paid money to the council.

I was aware of the time and that it was a long walk to the car park but my youngest (age three) said he was too tired to walk the rest of the way. He was too heavy or I was too unfit (or a combination of both) for me to carry him.

Throughout the afternoon we had seen a miniature train going back and forth. It ran to the car park. I decided to catch the train. When the train was about to depart, more people ran across to catch it, so it waited for them.

By the time I realised I would not be back in time I was on a moving train and could do nothing about it.

When I got to the car park a man in a yellow jacket was by my car. I ran and explained everything and he said that this often happened; that the train was rather ad hoc and people often were a few minutes late. He said this had even happened to his grandchildren. He assured me that if I wrote to the council, the penalty would be cancelled. He told me he was going to make a note that I had returned to the car.

I wrote to the council, as the traffic warden had told me to do, but they sent me a boilerplate letter saying it was the driver's responsibility to return to their car on time.

I wrote to the CEO of the council but he refused to investigate, so I had to wait for a formal "notice to owner" letter.

I asked for the information relating to my case; none was supplied.

From what I have read on the internet, councils can cancel penalties and according to the internet, reasons to cancel penalties include: first time offences, and offences where the driver is unfamiliar with the area. I qualify under both of these.

The council claim there is a ten minute grace period. They say I was a couple of minutes over this.

When the notice to owner came, I did some more research on the internet and I found that the parking adjudicators report said that councils should not dismiss appeals out of hand and should not send boiler plate letters.

I also found DoT guidance that if the driver is present, the traffic warden should issue a caution, not a penalty.

So I put all of that into my submission.

The council dismissed my appeal. So I lodged the case with the parking adjudicator.

In the three letters I had sent the council previously, we had discussed me meeting the traffic warden. They said in the three letters that the penalty was issued at 16:08. They never disputed these facts.

In their submission to the adjudicator, they did a massive U-turn and now claim it was 16:10, two minutes later, and that the traffic warden has no recollection of ever meeting me and made no notes about meeting me. They claim the traffic warden has no grandchildren, so the story about his grandchildren getting a ticket when the train was late was another lie. They are implying that I have done all the lying, not the traffic warden. If this is the case, why did they not say this in their previous three letters?

It is because I have been lied to so many times by the traffic warden and now the council, that I am fighting this. I'll let you know how it goes.

Sorry for the late reply. This is exactly what happened.

Sorry for the late reply. Whilst what you said makes sense, the traffic warden said he would make a note in his note book. The note should have been made at the time so that he could remember me from all the other hundreds of motorists months later. Also he should not have lied saying this has happened to his family etc.