From the BBC News website...
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5170898.stm
"Wheelclamping for only the most persistent offenders
More transparency and information for road users
Dedicated training for those involved in civil parking enforcement
A more motorist-friendly appeals process
More powers for independent adjudicators when procedures have not been followed properly
Regular reviews of parking policies by local authorities
Persistent parking offenders targeted through a national database
The proposals, which affect England only, are expected to come in by the middle of next year. "
Will be interesting to see how it develops... doesn't mention "towing away" though.
Tim{P}
|
Interesting the data base - three tickets and you are out.
What happens if I buy a vehicle and unknown to me it has been clagged twice before ?
HMG Computors GIGO.
dvd
|
|
No problem! Jack Straw introduced a "Three hits and you get Life" policy for criminals when he was Home Secretary. I don't think the number of people serving life on this basis is yet in double figures! We have loads of laws and policies - what is needed is enforcement of what we have got not more half baked laws and nobody to enforce them!
|
|
|
|
The most worrything thing is that this will be used to sneak something else in which is their usual trick. Now that a judicial review has declared that decriminalised parking penalties are not fines it means that they are not enforeable by courts, so they must be contracts, that means that before they can give you a penalty, you have to have breached a contract which you agreed to, this doesn't happen at present. What's more, a penalty for breach of contract can only be for the amount that the innocent party in the breached contract has lost, so £60 for overstaying a meter by a few minutes is illegal.
|
|
|
|
Company cars? Hire cars? Great concept, total mess when executed, you can be sure.
|
The consultation documents are at: www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents...p
It appears that something went wrong with this consultation. Rather than being "pre-announced", the documents appear to have been released only shortly after the statement. Surely this cannot be intentional? It allows people to discuss the actual proposals, rather than concenrating on the spin.
|
|
|
|
|
The proposal does not actually appears to be a "three tickets and you're out" rule. Instead it's "three or more outstanding, unpaid and unchallenged" tickets
From the consultation document at tinyurl.com/okszv:
21. Where a vehicle already has 3 or more outstanding, unpaid and unchallenged PCNs the Government is of the view that the owner - a "persistent evader" - should be subject to the strongest possible means of enforcement if a further contravention takes place. When the vehicle of a persistent evader is found to be parked illegally, it should be immobilised after the appropriate period and the authority should seek payment of all outstanding penalty charges, no matter which local authority issued the previous PCNs
|
Can't they just try and instill something called common sense! If I turn up two minutes over the time and see a warden about to slap a ticket on why not give him the option of tearing it up, rather than this 'It's printed now, nuffin i can do mate' type approach?
We were in Valencia last year and saw a car being prepared to be towed away. The owner was sauntering back to the car, saw what was happening and ran over to the tow truck. There wasa bit of banter and everyone ended up laughing about something. The clampers simply unloaded the car and let the owner remove the car himself.
|
Can't they just try and instill something called common sense! If I turn up two minutes over the time and see a warden about to slap a ticket on why not give him the option of tearing it up, rather than this 'It's printed now, nuffin i can do mate' type approach?
I like that idea in principle, but I think the problem is that there is a mixture of lack of trust in the wardens, and a fear that they might be intimidated.
e.g.
* I return to my car, see a ticket being prepared, and offer the warden a tenner for his trouble if he tears up the ticket.
or
* I return to my car, see a ticket being prepared, and remind the warden that I know where his kids go to school.
At the moment, there's no percentage in that, 'cos the warden can't tear up the ticket.
But maybe there could be a compromise, where the warden could add a note to the ticket, allowing back-office people to assess and possibly withdraw it?
e.g. Warden's note: "Meter expired 16:34. Driver returned to car as ticket being pepared, and drove away at 16:40."
Back office looks at it, says hmm, wardens are required to allow five minutes grace, but this is maginal and the driver has no previous, so cancel the ticket.
|
|
|
That's because the Spanish, despite their excitable natures, haven't dehumanised everything and everyone like us stiff-upper lip Brits. A traffic warden is a bloke who works as a traffic warden, and his reactions are those of a person rather than a bloke in a silly outfit.
The amount of people I know who are nice outside of work but smarmy, corporate, devious two-faced idiots in work is astounding. I don't blame them, I blame our ridiculous culture. Class, background and accent may not be AS important, but if you lack the preceding you're expected to be a Gordon Gecko style prat willing to sell his grandmother for the sake of your company.
Rant over.
|
Point 20 of the consultation suggests that instead of the current rule whereby you can be clamped 15 minutes after being ticketed, it should be 60 minutes.
Sounds like another step in the right direction, but not far enough. I think it would be fairer to say two or three hours for some cases, and a lot more for others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
