On 24/04/2016 10:43, 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.


and unless you have a multi camera continual system, there is little
chance you will be in shot. A body worn cam could be handy for such a
situation. In the case mentioned though, if the ticket had expired,
what defence do you have?

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?

Thanks,
Stephen.

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.

--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England

"Stephen" wrote in message
...
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?

Some do, essentially to capture the footage of someone running
into your parked car, but those normally only keep the last x minutes
and save that when the car gets a significant impact so they don't
have to keep hours of footage in case you come back to your car
and find someone has run into it.

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.

Indeed.

I would think a camera would be more useful filming
when you were not in the car than when you were.

Not as far as evidence of who is at fault is concerned.
You are more likely to have an accident when in the car.

If anything having a gps-enabled camera recording
your speed could incriminate rather than help you!

Yeah, I hardly ever drive within the speed limit.

My only concern is, are these cameras stealable?

Of course they are. But it is certainly possible to
conceal them so they can still capture what you
need but aren't obvious to criminals who want
to steal them.

If you left one in your car, would
someone break a window to take it?

Yep, the worst of the crims certainly do that.

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

On 24/04/2016 09:35, 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?

Thanks,
Stephen.

I'm struggling to understand how proving that you 'met' a traffic warden
would affect whether or not a penalty notice was valid.

But, to answer your question . . .

A dashcam *can* record when the car is parked, provided it is supplied
with continuous power. [Mine is wired through the ignition, so only
works when that is turned on].

Most dashcams have g-sensors which are used to determine what and when
they record. If you wanted to record when parked, the usual way to set
one up would be to tell it *only* to record when it detected an impact
of some sort, rather than continuously. [They actually run all the time,
but only store the footage when told to do so - so if a recording is
triggered by an impact, they'll actually capture a bit of footage prior
to the impact - otherwise it would be of little use].

They can only record what's in their field of view, of course - which is
usually the view looking out through the windscreen - so if anything
happens at the rear or side of the car, they won't see it.

In summary, it's very unlikely that a dashcam would have helped you in
your parking dispute.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

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

... the traffic warden was issuing a penalty ...

Once they've started that's it, it's issued no argument. You have to
contest the legality of the issue, incorrect/missing signage, have
valid P&D ticket that was displayed, etc

... saying that our pay and display had expired. ...

Had it? If so by how long. There used to be a "grace" period of 5
mins(?) were the warden had to stand near the car before they could
start to issue the ticket. Does that still exist?

And of course you have the P&D ticket with the expiry date/time and
the penalty notice will have at least the date/time of it's issue and
probably date/time of the P&D and serial number of the P&D ticket it
has been issued against. They should all agree/be in the right
chonological order.

... but are any sold that will film whilst you are parked?

Some can be configured to do that or for a period after the igntion
is switched off.

I would think a camera would be more useful filming when you were
not
in the car than when you were.

Really needs to be complete all round coverage not just front view
and to be admissable as evidence I'd expect it to have to comply with
rules/regulations that cover CCTV. Security of media, security of
media storage, resolution of images, etc

If anything having a gps-enabled camera recording your speed could

incriminate rather than help you!

Only if you habitually break the speed limit...

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

It has been known.

Even that can raise concerns about battery usage.

Unless wired to some where that is permenantly live it'll have to
have it's own battery. In a modern car many places that were
permenant live aren't any more. Even the interior light in mine is
switched off about 10 mins after the ignition and I don't mean with
the interior light in "auto" I mean in "on".

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.

32 GB card in my cheapy (£20) 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.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article ,
Stephen wrote:
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.

Surely it all hinges round whether you had overstayed the time you'd paid
for?

--
*Cover me. I'm changing lanes.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Our Nextbase can be set to record any incidents while parked but only if the g-sensor detects some movement. You can leave it on continuous record but after 180mins it starts to record over previous recordings. As far as being a drain on the battery I have frequently forgotten to turn it off overnight with no impact on the car battery. If you have the screen on permenantly then drainage can be more significant although I have not noticed. We keep our screen on as its position makes it difficult to see the recording LED. By law you should blank the screen if it is anywhere in the drivers direct vision, ours is not. If you are fastidious enough you can download recordings and save them on a computer as it saves files in 3, 5 & 10 minute chunks depending on how you set the camera parameters.

Richard

In message , Stephen
writes
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?

I have a couple of ones that look like these

http://tinyurl.com/gvpwlxw

but I paid even less.

In the Octavia, power is always on in the cigar socket, but the socket
is in a stupid place so SWMBO often glitches the power. The camera
doesn't like this. But I have hours of recordings of our drive at night.

In the Disco, power came and went with ignition. In the Jeep I think one
socket is via ignition, one not.

The cameras are just about OK. No-one has ever seemed to want to steal
either.

Mobile phones in holders seem to shake as one drives, but I have got a
cheapo one, "Timmy", which has a rotating camera rather than one front
and one back. It has occurred to me that this might be mountable firmly
and less obviously, but I haven't tried.

Incidentally, the Timmy is Android 4.4, and, although it ought to be
able to, and has the commands to, log Bluetooth data this feature
doesn't work. If anyone knows of a very cheap phone where this does
work, I'd be interested. The feature is in Developer Options - Enable
Bluetooth HCI Snoop Log.
--
Bill

"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

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:16:45 +0100, Bill wrote:

In message , Stephen
writes
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?

I have a couple of ones that look like these

http://tinyurl.com/gvpwlxw

but I paid even less.

In the Octavia, power is always on in the cigar socket, but the socket
is in a stupid place so SWMBO often glitches the power. The camera
doesn't like this. But I have hours of recordings of our drive at night.

In the Disco, power came and went with ignition. In the Jeep I think one
socket is via ignition, one not.

The cameras are just about OK. No-one has ever seemed to want to steal
either.

I have one of those cameras recording continuously in my Octavia too.
The only difference is I did get one stolen when I had a break in, but
I was more concerned about the expense of replacing the SD card than
the camera.




--

Graham.

%Profound_observation%

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

On 24/04/2016 09:35, 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?

Thanks,
Stephen.

I'm struggling to understand how proving that you 'met' a traffic warden
would affect whether or not a penalty notice was valid.

Perhaps he took her/him for a romantic dinner, and ended up having
casual sex. Damnit, you'd be annoyed too if the ticket wasn't
cancelled.



--

Graham.

%Profound_observation%

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.

In article ,
steve robinson wrote:
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.

Be cheaper and less hassle to just pay the parking fine. ;-)

--
*Santa's helpers are subordinate clauses*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Roger Mills wrote:
On 24/04/2016 09:35, 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?

Thanks,
Stephen.

I'm struggling to understand how proving that you 'met' a traffic
warden would affect whether or not a penalty notice was valid.

But, to answer your question . . .

A dashcam *can* record when the car is parked, provided it is supplied
with continuous power. [Mine is wired through the ignition, so only
works when that is turned on].

Most dashcams have g-sensors which are used to determine what and when
they record. If you wanted to record when parked, the usual way to set
one up would be to tell it *only* to record when it detected an impact
of some sort, rather than continuously. [They actually run all the
time, but only store the footage when told to do so - so if a
recording is triggered by an impact, they'll actually capture a bit of
footage prior to the impact - otherwise it would be of little use].

They can only record what's in their field of view, of course - which
is usually the view looking out through the windscreen - so if
anything happens at the rear or side of the car, they won't see it.

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

My dash cam is set to record continuously if 12V is present.
With a 4G memory chip and 720p picture, I would guess the recording time
as a few hours before being overwritten. I've not measured the current
consumption.

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 15:30:40 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
steve robinson wrote:
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.

Be cheaper and less hassle to just pay the parking fine. ;-)

Allot cheaper, once you get into multi camera systems your outside the
diy throw it on the dash and plug it into the fag lighter Kit

On 24/04/2016 09:35, Stephen wrote:
....
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!

That depends upon whether or not you keep to the speed limits.

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.

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

RoadHawk supply dash cams that have an option to video when parked. I've
not used that option on mine, but it overwrites old data after about a
day or so (depending upon the memory card you fit), so you would need to
keep making backups, if you wanted to have a complete history available.

Roadhawk are primarily aimed at the commercial vehicle market, so are
not the cheapest dash cams you can buy.

https://www.roadhawk.co.uk/


--
Colin Bignell

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Stephen wrote:
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.

Surely it all hinges round whether you had overstayed the time you'd paid
for?


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

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

--
Adam

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:16:45 +0100, Bill wrote:

I have a couple of ones that look like these

http://tinyurl.com/gvpwlxw

That looks identical to the cheapy I have. Weasel wording in the
description:

6 LED's, support night vision.

Well yes, provided there isn't a bit of glass in front of the camera
otherwise it blinds itself. B-)

1920 x960 video resolution

Odd ratio but note "video resolution".

Image Sensor: 1/4 color CMOS Image Sensor

No sensor x/y pixel count...

It works, and now doesn't randomly forget the date and time since I
reflowed one of the battery springy contact wires to the PCB.

Set to "1080p" (1280x736 according to VLC) during the day it takes
about 300 KB for each 3 min file, at night that drops to 150 KB / 3
min. Set to VGA (640x480) day is around 150 KB / 3 min, night 100 KB.
32 GB card with 5 GB of saved stuff has 4h47m of "1080p" in the
remaining 26 GB.

There is no noticeable difference in image quality between "1080p"
and "VGA". Number plates of cars in front only become legible when
they are closer than about 15 to 20'. I'll be switching back to
VGA...

If you edit consecutive files together there are no missing frames,
there may actually be a 1 frame overlap.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In message l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
There is no noticeable difference in image quality between "1080p" and
"VGA". Number plates of cars in front only become legible when they are
closer than about 15 to 20'. I'll be switching back to VGA...

This, and all the other points, including the earlier suggestion of
something with a wireless connection being needed to get the data off
without poking at the memory card, all fit exactly with my experience.
Sometime last year I decided that VGA recorded for longer with no
significant loss of quality, and set mine to that.

I do wonder if the ones for around a fiver are seconds.
--
Bill

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 23:11:36 +0100, Bill wrote:

There is no noticeable difference in image quality between "1080p"
and
"VGA". Number plates of cars in front only become legible when
they are
closer than about 15 to 20'. I'll be switching back to VGA...

This, and all the other points, including the earlier suggestion of
something with a wireless connection being needed to get the data off
without poking at the memory card, all fit exactly with my experience.

I take the camera out of the car and plug it in via USB as a mass
storeage device. Far to fiddly to hoik the card in and out with the
camera half hidden by the interior mirror. The standard camera thread
screw mounting was a PITA but I got a cheap magnetic phone screen
mount which, makes removal easy. Came with a couple of thin
self-adhesive steel plates that could stick on the battery cover,
Wasn't convinced about how secure the battery cover is so I used a
1/16" thick bit of steel and large headed counter sunk screw to
attach it via the normal mounting thread.

I do wonder if the ones for around a fiver are seconds.

Mine ought to have been with the battery spring dry joint but wasn't
I think I paid about £12 for it. Problem didn't show up until a
couple of months had passed.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In message l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:16:45 +0100, Bill wrote:

I have a couple of ones that look like these

http://tinyurl.com/gvpwlxw

That looks identical to the cheapy I have. Weasel wording in the
description

Ignoring the weasel words, are these things really worth having, even if
only for daytime recording? Looking at eBay, similar car cameras seem
to start at around £6.50 including postage from the Far East. A
reasonable buy for the price, or complete waste of money? From what has
been said, it seems they do actually work. I realise a card will be
extra.

--
Graeme

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

Many years ago I parked on a yellow line and came back to find the warden writing up the ticket. Fair do's. I took a chance. But then I noticed he had given me two tickets. One for parking and one for no tax disc displayed. The previous night I had asked SWMBO to put the new tax disc on the windscreen, which she had done, only put it on back to front. So I showed it to the warden. He said he couldn't cancel the ticket but made a note t of what had happened on the ticket and advised me to appeal it. I appealed it and got a cancellation, but they cancelled the parking fine instead of the tax disc fine (Which was much larger). I wrote back telling them of their mistake so they cancelled the tax disc fine as well. Result no penalty at all. Happy days.

I often take a chance parking on yellow lines for business reasons and am happy to pay the penalty if caught, which rareley happens, fingers crossed

On 25/04/2016 09:37, News wrote:
In message l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:16:45 +0100, Bill wrote:

I have a couple of ones that look like these

http://tinyurl.com/gvpwlxw

That looks identical to the cheapy I have. Weasel wording in the
description

Ignoring the weasel words, are these things really worth having, even if
only for daytime recording? Looking at eBay, similar car cameras seem to
start at around £6.50 including postage from the Far East. A reasonable
buy for the price, or complete waste of money? From what has been said,
it seems they do actually work. I realise a card will be extra.


I've no idea what you get for £6.50! My BlackVue camera cost in the
region of £200 about 4 years ago. That does provide footage which could
potentially be used in evidence if required, but I'm a bit disappointed
that number plates can only be read when they're really close.

It would have been useful for my wife to have had one a few days ago.
She damaged her door mirror when it hit the open door of a parked car.
She thinks the door was opened just as she approached, giving her no
chance of avoiding it. The car owner says it had been open for a while,
and she should have seen it. A camera would have proved that one way or
the other.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

"fred" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 2:53:54 PM UTC+1, ARW wrote:
"Stephen" wrote in message
They are only doing their job. Mind you it's a ****s job and only a ****
would do it.
A bit unfair

Many years ago I parked on a yellow line and came back to find the warden
writing up the ticket. Fair do's. I took a chance. But then I noticed he
had given me two tickets. One for parking and one for no tax disc
displayed. The previous night I had asked SWMBO to put the new tax disc on
the windscreen, which she had done, only put it on back to front. So I
showed it to the warden. He said he couldn't cancel the ticket but made a
note t of what had happened on the ticket and advised me to appeal it. I
appealed it and got a cancellation, but they cancelled the parking fine
instead of the tax disc fine (Which was much larger). I wrote back telling
them of their mistake so they cancelled the tax disc fine as well. Result
no penalty at all. Happy days.

I often take a chance parking on yellow lines for business reasons and am
happy to pay the penalty if caught, which rareley happens, fingers crossed

I rarely park on double yellow lines - and if I do it's usually for a minute
or so while my wife pops into a shop for something very quick while I stay
in car. If I get caught on a double yellow line or anywhere that I'm not
allowed to park, I accept that I should be fined.

What does get my goat is when I park in an authorised space but outstay my
welcome. The concept of paying to park at a meter or in a car park is one
that I loathe, and I usually do my best to avoid paying, even if that means
parking slightly further away on an unrestricted bit of road.

I'd like to see a three-tier level of parking fines: very high fine where it
blocks other cars from getting in/out or where it's dangerous (close to
junction); high fine for parking where it's expressly forbidden (eg on
double yellow lines); nominal fine (probably no more than twice the parking
charge that you should have paid) for parking where it's allowed but staying
longer than you've paid for.

I once got fined for parking in a car park which said "50p for 30 mins". I
wanted to stay an hour so I put in a pound which was registered on the
ticket, but the expiry time was still 30 mins. I ringed the two conflicting
pieces of information and added a note: "I've paid for 60 mins but ticket is
only showing 30 mins". The traffic warden said that I should have
interpreted the sign as meaning "maximum parking time 30 mins, no matter how
much you pay". I appealed but didn't get anywhere, though I noticed that the
wording on the sign was made a bit more explicit.

On 24/04/2016 23:11, Bill wrote:
In message l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
There is no noticeable difference in image quality between "1080p" and
"VGA". Number plates of cars in front only become legible when they
are closer than about 15 to 20'. I'll be switching back to VGA...

This, and all the other points, including the earlier suggestion of
something with a wireless connection being needed to get the data off
without poking at the memory card, all fit exactly with my experience.
Sometime last year I decided that VGA recorded for longer with no
significant loss of quality, and set mine to that.

I do wonder if the ones for around a fiver are seconds.

Could be that the buyers simply don't have the brains to work it so it
is returned as faulty and then resold cheaply.

"Stephen" wrote in message
...
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!


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

....

"michael adams" wrote in message
...

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!


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.

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".

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? Looking at eBay, similar car cameras seem
to start at around £6.50 including postage from the Far East. A
reasonable buy for the price, or complete waste of money? From what has
been said, it seems they do actually work.

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.

--
Cheers
Dave.

NY 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.

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

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'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

--
Remove prejudice to reply.

In message , NY
writes





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.

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.

--
Ian

"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"michael adams" wrote in message
...

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!


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.

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.

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

....

On 25/04/2016 11:46, NY wrote:

What does get my goat is when I park in an authorised space but outstay my
welcome. The concept of paying to park at a meter or in a car park is one
that I loathe, and I usually do my best to avoid paying, even if that means
parking slightly further away on an unrestricted bit of road.

You might like this one then...
http://www.nickfreemansolicitors.co....arking-letter/

"The position in respect of any normal user of the car park is that, by
entering and parking their vehicle, they are entering into a contract
with the Council to pay a sum of money in return for the Council
allowing them to leave their vehicle for a specified amount of time.

If the vehicle is left for longer than the paid for time, no payment is
made, or there is a failure to comply with parking regulations, there
is, in effect, a breach of contract which entitles the Council to make a
penalty charge.

In the case of the travellers, they were on the car park as illegal
occupiers and, as such, there was no contract with them as the purpose
for which they entered was not permitted.

In the circumstances the appropriate course of action was not for
‘breach of contract’ but for ‘illegal occupation’.

Mr Freeman said:

If that is the case, then motorists using public car parks, where
charges are enforced, can legitimately put a note on their windscreen
saying: ‘I'm here illegally, I am not entering a contract and I do not
accept your T&C's’.

From a legal perspective the authority is handcuffed because of the
absence of any agreement entering into a contract.

It is almost the analogous to car squatting!

Mr Freeman added: I must stress, the motorist must make it clear he or
she is not entering into any contract, either expressed or implied, and
is therefore not subject to any of the Ts and Cs, and the sign must be
visible."



As an addition defence print out some of these "formation of contract"
tax disc replacements..
https://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/Parking-Notice

"www.GymRatZ.co.uk" wrote in message
...
On 25/04/2016 11:46, NY wrote:

What does get my goat is when I park in an authorised space but outstay my
welcome. The concept of paying to park at a meter or in a car park is one
that I loathe, and I usually do my best to avoid paying, even if that means
parking slightly further away on an unrestricted bit of road.

You might like this one then...
http://www.nickfreemansolicitors.co....arking-letter/

"The position in respect of any normal user of the car park is that, by
entering and parking their vehicle, they are entering into a contract
with the Council to pay a sum of money in return for the Council
allowing them to leave their vehicle for a specified amount of time.

If the vehicle is left for longer than the paid for time, no payment is
made, or there is a failure to comply with parking regulations, there
is, in effect, a breach of contract which entitles the Council to make a
penalty charge.

In the case of the travellers, they were on the car park as illegal
occupiers and, as such, there was no contract with them as the purpose
for which they entered was not permitted.

In the circumstances the appropriate course of action was not for
‘breach of contract’ but for ‘illegal occupation’.

Mr Freeman said:

If that is the case, then motorists using public car parks, where
charges are enforced, can legitimately put a note on their windscreen
saying: ‘I'm here illegally, I am not entering a contract and I do not
accept your T&C's’.

But if the reason they entered the car park was to park their car,
rather than illegal occupation as in the case of the travellers,
then they're not in the car park illegally, are they ?
Whatever they might claim to the contrary.

To prove an intention of illegal occupation, rather than legal
parking, they'd need to leave their cars in the car park for an
extended period, quite possibly for 48 hrs of more.


michael adams

....

On 25/04/2016 19:01, michael adams wrote:

But if the reason they entered the car park was to park their car,
rather than illegal occupation as in the case of the travellers,
then they're not in the car park illegally, are they ?
Whatever they might claim to the contrary.

To prove an intention of illegal occupation, rather than legal
parking, they'd need to leave their cars in the car park for an
extended period, quite possibly for 48 hrs of more.

But by stating they are not in agreement with the contract and do not
concede to the contract the contract can not and is not formed as it
requires both parties to accept the terms.
The term "occupation" has no time constraint e.g. the regular toilet
cubicle was occupied so he made use of the unoccupied disabled facilities.

He may well have driven into the carpark to park his car but the
contract was to park his car by terms of displayed contract therefore
his car wasn't actually parked by contract definition it was occupying a
space illegally for as long as he was he required or until such measures
were imposed to retain posession of the occupied land.

Also... there is a huge difference between the term "driving" and
"travelling" the former is a regulated "in commerce" activity while
the latter is non-commerce act of moving from one location to another
and under no such obligation of regulation.

"www.GymRatZ.co.uk" wrote in message
...
On 25/04/2016 19:01, michael adams wrote:

But if the reason they entered the car park was to park their car,
rather than illegal occupation as in the case of the travellers,
then they're not in the car park illegally, are they ?
Whatever they might claim to the contrary.

To prove an intention of illegal occupation, rather than legal
parking, they'd need to leave their cars in the car park for an
extended period, quite possibly for 48 hrs of more.

But by stating they are not in agreement with the contract and do not
concede to the contract the contract can not and is not formed as it
requires both parties to accept the terms.

Regardless of what they may or may not say, by the very fact
of parking their car in the car park they are thereby accepting
the terms of the contract.

With the exception of long stay car-parks at airports, and commuters
parking near railway stations "parking" is normally taken to mean
leaving a car in a car park for say less than say 4 hrs.

He may well have driven into the carpark to park his car but the
contract was to park his car by terms of displayed contract therefore
his car wasn't actually parked by contract definition

But it was. The material facts are that he parked his car in
somebody elses car park. By the very fact of parking his car
he was agreeing to the stated terms.

It would be very convenient in many circumstances to
try and ignore unfavourable terms in all sorts of contracts
- in this case having to pay to park your car on somebody else's
property - but fortunately or unfortunately depending on one's
point of view this simply isn't possible.


michael adams

....

"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"michael adams" wrote in message
...

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!


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.

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.

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 by nature.

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.

Sure, but some like Dennis obviously don’t operate like that.

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".

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

On 25/04/2016 19:54, michael adams wrote:


But it was. The material facts are that he parked his car in
somebody elses car park. By the very fact of parking his car
he was agreeing to the stated terms.

It would be very convenient in many circumstances to
try and ignore unfavourable terms in all sorts of contracts
- in this case having to pay to park your car on somebody else's
property - but fortunately or unfortunately depending on one's
point of view this simply isn't possible.

The contract is relating to "parking" but there is no legal definition
of the term "parking" (that I can find) therefore this would have to be
defined exactly in the contractual "NOTICE" displayed in the area of
land referred to by the claimant as "the car park" this would then
subsequently require the alleged offender to admit liability by
disclosure of intention to "park" needless to say this is where most
would trip-up through the use of ambiguous terms but a careful man who
chose his words wisely could state non-intention to "park" by definition
of contractual NOTICE.

It's not about ignoring certain aspects of a contract it's about either
being in contractual agreement (subject to contract law) or not.
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.

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

On 25/04/2016 19:54, michael adams wrote:


But it was. The material facts are that he parked his car in
somebody elses car park. By the very fact of parking his car
he was agreeing to the stated terms.

It would be very convenient in many circumstances to
try and ignore unfavourable terms in all sorts of contracts
- in this case having to pay to park your car on somebody else's
property - but fortunately or unfortunately depending on one's
point of view this simply isn't possible.

The contract is relating to "parking" but there is no legal definition
of the term "parking" (that I can find) therefore this would have to be
defined exactly in the contractual "NOTICE" displayed in the area of
land referred to by the claimant as "the car park" this would then
subsequently require the alleged offender to admit liability by
disclosure of intention to "park" needless to say this is where most
would trip-up through the use of ambiguous terms but a careful man who
chose his words wisely could state non-intention to "park" by definition
of contractual NOTICE.

It's not about ignoring certain aspects of a contract it's about either
being in contractual agreement (subject to contract law) or not.
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.



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

On 25/04/2016 20:28, 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?