Some observations

The_Slithy_Tove

I've been off on mytravels recently, and made a number of observations around various car parks,which may be worthy of comment.

National Park
On one day, I parkedin a car park in the Lake District National Park. The car park is, as far as Iknow, owned by the National Park authority, but is now managed by our friendsParking Spy, and controlled by ANPR. When I saw this, I was very tempted to paynothing, but I think the proceeds do actually go to the National Park, not toPE. I also through of simply thwartng their system by "accidentally"entering the wrong registration number, or covering my number plate on exit,but didn't in the end. I wonder if they would send a ticket if I drove in,decided I didn't want to pay £7 for the day, and drove back out again. As thepark authority are a government body, are they able to "fine"? Iguess not, as the signs talked about Parking Charge Notices for contraventions.

National Trust
As a member, I parkfor free with my windscreen sticker. However, I read the notice, and it talkedabout non-payers being prosecuted! I wondered under what criminal law thatwould be carried out. Maybe I should ask them.

Hotel Car Park
Happened to notice aprivate hotel car park which said permits required, and if not shown they maybe "fined". Probably self-ticketing operation if that, as there wereno details on the sign. Another private yard had a sign saying cars will be clamped,release fee (a very reasonable) £40, and a phone number. No more detail, so Isuspect a non-SIA registered operator there.

Motorway Services
These crop up a loton this forum. I noticed at Keele services (horrible place), the signs actuallygive a charge for staying over 2 hours, it's £10 for up to some other number ofhours (can't remember the details), but that you could pay in WHSmith. Is thisa ploy to claim that there is a legitimate way to pay to park, in order to tryto make their Parking Charge Notices for not paying somehow legitimate?

Don't think I pickedup any bogus tickets anyway, but will watch the post and have my waste paperbin at the ready.

give_them_FA

Interesting. I believe that the term "prosecute" is applicable to a civil as well as a criminal case. And that Government bodies cannot issue fines unless specifically authorised by statute?

muckybutt

give_them_FA wrote: »

Interesting. I believe that the term "prosecute" is applicable to a civil as well as a criminal case. And that Government bodies cannot issue fines unless specifically authorised by statute?

I remember a case on pepipoo a good few years ago where someone got "fined" in one of the royal parks, advice was to ignore

give_them_FA

I did that too, ignored, never heard no more about it.

Coupon-mad

muckybutt wrote: »

I remember a case on pepipoo a good few years ago where someone got "fined" in one of the royal parks, advice was to ignore

But it's confusing.

There was also this one which against all common sense was a fixed penalty which was ridiculously 'upheld' in a way at Maggy's Court - the OP was declared 'guilty' but was completely discharged anyway without penalty:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=65279&st=60

''Result in court today = guilty -

...but discharged , no fine, no other punishment on the grounds that I was parked there with good reason.

The Prosecutor and cop floundered trying to show that there was a case to answer but the magistrates (all lay magistrates) seemed unwilling to say that the the Police had no right to police disabled parking throughout the many royal parks - the Clerk seemed furious and was basically telling the worships to dismiss as the crown could put no evidence that any legislation existed but sadly they fudged it. Copper was just blustering that because the Park authority put the signs up they must be legal.

Moral victory only and I'm no worse off...''

What a waste of public money.:eek: