"www.GymRatZ.co.uk" wrote in message
...

The contract is relating to "parking" but there is no legal definition
of the term "parking"

By stating you are wilfully NOT in contract therefore illegally
occupying a space it's not a matter of contractual law but one of
illegal occupation.

If there is, according to you, no legal definition of parking,
then how can anyone determine they are wilfully not in
contract in respect of something for which there is no
legal definition ?

Such as to distinguish parking from say "illegal occupation" ?


michael adams

....

Aloysius wrote
Rod Speed wrote

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.

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.

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

For the first reason I listed.

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 15:04:26 +0100, steve robinson wrote:

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 09:43:43 +0100, Mike Barnes
wrote:

Stephen wrote:
Hello,

Last year I met a traffic warden for the first time! The short version
of events is that I took my children to the park and when we returned
to the car, the traffic warden was issuing a penalty saying that our
pay and display had expired.

For months the council did not dispute that I met the traffic warden,
now they are doing a U-turn and are saying that he has no recollection
of meeting me and made no notes in his notebook about meeting me,
therefore, they conclude that I am lying about ever meeting the
traffic warden.

I have referred the case to the parking adjudicator and I have given
the adjudicator a description of the traffic warden but I wish I had
taken a picture of him. I never thought he would lie about meeting me!

I am hoping not to meet another parking warden but I wondered about
these dash cams. I know they are sold for filming your driving in case
there is an accident, but are any sold that will film whilst you are
parked?

Not only would it have helped me in this instance by proving I met and
spoke to the traffic warden, but it could help if someone hit your car
with a trolley in a supermarket car park, or reversed into you in a
car park, or crashed into you whilst you parked in the street, etc.

I would think a camera would be more useful filming when you were not
in the car than when you were. If anything having a gps-enabled camera
recording your speed could incriminate rather than help you!

My only concern is, are these cameras stealable? If you left one in
your car, would someone break a window to take it?

What makes and models do you recommend that work when the car is
stationary?

All those that I've seen only start taking pictures when parked if they
detect an impact. Even that can raise concerns about battery usage.
Recording all the time would be even more of a drain, and to make
matters worse the section you're interested in might well be overwritten
before you had a chance to keep it, unless you have an infeasibly large
amount of storage.


yes the kits available , you will need at least 4 cameras preferably
6 , sound recording and storage your looking around £1500 fully fitted
minimum and yes the it can be stolen.

Considering I bought a single one for £10, 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.

In message l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 09:37:01 +0100, News wrote:

Ignoring the weasel words, are these things really worth having, even if
only for daytime recording?

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.

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

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 09:43:43 +0100, Mike Barnes wrote:

Stephen wrote:
Hello,

Last year I met a traffic warden for the first time! The short version
of events is that I took my children to the park and when we returned
to the car, the traffic warden was issuing a penalty saying that our
pay and display had expired.

For months the council did not dispute that I met the traffic warden,
now they are doing a U-turn and are saying that he has no recollection
of meeting me and made no notes in his notebook about meeting me,
therefore, they conclude that I am lying about ever meeting the
traffic warden.

I have referred the case to the parking adjudicator and I have given
the adjudicator a description of the traffic warden but I wish I had
taken a picture of him. I never thought he would lie about meeting me!

I am hoping not to meet another parking warden but I wondered about
these dash cams. I know they are sold for filming your driving in case
there is an accident, but are any sold that will film whilst you are
parked?

Not only would it have helped me in this instance by proving I met and
spoke to the traffic warden, but it could help if someone hit your car
with a trolley in a supermarket car park, or reversed into you in a
car park, or crashed into you whilst you parked in the street, etc.

I would think a camera would be more useful filming when you were not
in the car than when you were. If anything having a gps-enabled camera
recording your speed could incriminate rather than help you!

My only concern is, are these cameras stealable? If you left one in
your car, would someone break a window to take it?

What makes and models do you recommend that work when the car is
stationary?

All those that I've seen only start taking pictures when parked if they
detect an impact.

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

Even that can raise concerns about battery usage.

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

Recording all the time would be even more of a drain, and to make
matters worse the section you're interested in might well be overwritten
before you had a chance to keep it, unless you have an infeasibly large
amount of storage.

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

--
Once upon a time, a long time ago, there was a land called Britain where sensible folk lived. These people used to laugh at their
American "cousins" for all the petty litigation they pursued in an attempt to get compensation for preceived injuries and
injustices...

On 25/04/2016 20:57, Richard wrote:

So, do you display a notice like this and park without paying?

No,
Where possible I park where free parking is available.
I keep meaning to print one off to keep in the car for such times as I'm
caught without change and need to leave the vehicle in order to get
change to buy a ticket.

B#stard of Torbay gave me a ticket when I went to get change from the
water park I was taking my son to. There was a queue and I was away from
the car for less than 10 minutes. Came back change in hand to find an
extortion/racketeer man in a hat writing up a ticket.

I'd happily display such notice to cover myself and if a ticket was
written I'd take it through the whole process.

On 25/04/2016 21:45, michael adams wrote:

If there is, according to you, no legal definition of parking,
then how can anyone determine they are wilfully not in
contract in respect of something for which there is no
legal definition ?

Such as to distinguish parking from say "illegal occupation" ?

Because as I stated, the definition of parking would be as per the
NOTICE of parking i.e. the definition of parking in context to the
contract being formed.
It's on open definition bounded by the definitions for that area to
which the NOTICE covers.

"Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)" wrote in message
...
On 25/04/2016 21:45, michael adams wrote:

If there is, according to you, no legal definition of parking,
then how can anyone determine they are wilfully not in
contract in respect of something for which there is no
legal definition ?

Such as to distinguish parking from say "illegal occupation" ?

Because as I stated, the definition of parking would be as per the
NOTICE of parking i.e. the definition of parking in context to the
contract being formed.
It's on open definition bounded by the definitions for that area to
which the NOTICE covers.

This is what you posted before

By stating you are wilfully NOT in contract therefore illegally
occupying a space it's not a matter of contractual law but one of
illegal occupation.

If the definition of parking is as given in the NOTICE of parking,
and someone is parking their car as defined in that notice, then how
can they claim they are wilfully not in contract ?

The notice defines what parking is, as per the contract.

If somebody then parks their car, then how can they be not
subject to that contract ?

Presumably they could only do that by arguing in some
way that they were not in fact parking their car.

When as far as everybody else was concerned, including
possibly even they themselves, they clearly were. Parking
their car that is.

Are you sure there isn't something you've left out
of this argument somewhere ? Some additional point ?

As to be quite frank with you, and without wishing to be too
unkind, as it stand, it really is a load of old cobblers.


michael adams

....

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 11:36:07 +0100, Roger Mills
wrote:

In summary, it's very unlikely that a dashcam would have helped you in
your parking dispute.

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

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 12:10:43 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:

32 GB card in my cheapy (=A320) holds about 24 hours of VGA
resolution. It's a cheapy "HD" but I don't think the sensor is "HD"
all that happens for 720p and 1080p is the aspect ratio changes and
is upscaled. In the process of checking if the 720p/1080p recordings
do offer a better visual resolution than the VGA mode.

If I bought one now it would need WiFi so I don't have to take it out
of the car to view/save/archive files it would also have to have a
full HD or better sensor.

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

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 04:19:18 -0700 (PDT), Tricky Dicky
wrote:

Our Nextbase can be set to record any incidents while parked but only if th=
e g-sensor detects some movement.

I downloaded a manual for a nextbase camera but it seemed to recommend
switching to motion detection when parked but switching motion
detection off when driving. Do you find that to be the case? I was
hoping to have something I could "set and forget", rather than have to
toggle each time I start/stop.

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 18:00:47 +0100, "Nightjar cpb" "insert my
surname here.me.uk" wrote:

My only concern is, are these cameras stealable? If you left one in
your car, would someone break a window to take it?

Nobody has in the several years since I fitted one.

That's reassuring, thanks.

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:53:33 +0100, "ARW"
wrote:

"Stephen" wrote in message
.. .
Hello,

Last year I met a traffic warden for the first time!


They are only doing their job. Mind you it's a ****s job and only a ****
would do it.

"Stephen" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 11:36:07 +0100, Roger Mills
wrote:

In summary, it's very unlikely that a dashcam would have helped you in
your parking dispute.

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

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.

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 18:15:15 +0100, "ARW"
wrote:

It does seem odd that it is taking months to sort out.

Every ticket I have contested is sorted within a few weeks.

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.

"fred" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 2:53:54 PM UTC+1, ARW wrote:
"Stephen" wrote in message
...
Hello,

Last year I met a traffic warden for the first time!


They are only doing their job. Mind you it's a ****s job and only a ****
would do it.

--
Adam

A bit unfair



A couple of years ago I was called out to fix the electric roller shutter
doors to an underground car park. I parked right in front of the doors and
staff at the shopping centre coned off my van. I still got a ticket.

I found the fault on the shutters - went to the wholesalers to get parts and
I got a second ticket as I had reparked in the same spot. The van was
blocking nothing but the entrance to the car park that no one could use
until I had fixed the doors.

When the doors were fixed I moved my van back to let someone out and then it
was time for home. The **** was waiting to give me another ticket.


**** said "You have moved it again so I am going to give you another ticket"
I said "I am not moving it - I am taking aim".

Best wheel spin I have done for a long time and the skid marks were in his
pants. I missed him by about 2 inches.

--
Adam

On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 05:21:58 +1000, "Jack Brown"
wrote:


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.


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

On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:44:43 +0100, "michael adams"
wrote:


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.

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.