Parking fine while picking up children

Rover_Driver

If the 'parking people' were CEOs, they cannot deal with obstruction, that offence would be dealt with by a police Fixed Penalty Notice.

Rover_Driver

WTFH wrote: »

We do know some facts, but your friend who you "like" without reading their posts has already said that the facts don't make a difference.

It was only the three 'facts' in your post that are not relevant, as I have stated earlier.

Jamie_Carter

iammumtoone wrote: »

I will still write/speak to the authorities will be interesting to hear what they have to say.

Remember, causing an obstruction can also be on the footpath.

DirectDebacle

Rover_Driver wrote: »

If the 'parking people' were CEOs, they cannot deal with obstruction, that offence would be dealt with by a police Fixed Penalty Notice.

I suspect the school has an ongoing parking problem and on that particular day a
concentrated enforcement excercise had been organised. Civil enforcement agencies often request a police presence on such excercises.

And you know the packs of parking people consisted entirely of CEO because......?

Rover_Driver

DirectDebacle wrote: »

And you know the packs of parking people consisted entirely of CEO because......?

I said 'if', I would have expected the OP to mention it if it was a police officer.

WTFH

18 pages of "ifs and mays" against facts and questions.

If I ruled the world, I might make a civility test mandatory, along with a common sense one. Then again, I might also ban all weapons and spend defence budgets on mixed faith/mixed race education. Since adults have lost the ability to think of others, the only hope is to teach the children how to think for themselves and how to think about how their decisions impact others.

DirectDebacle

Rover_Driver wrote: »

I said 'if', I would have expected the OP to mention it if it was a police officer.

You don't know who issued the ticket or even why it was issued. I was merely speculating as are you.

Look at the facts in Post#1. Post according to what you are presented with not what you would expect to be presented with.

Read the last line of Post#335
Then try to post something useful.

Tilt

WTFH wrote: »

We do know some facts, but your friend who you "like" without reading their posts has already said that the facts don't make a difference.

We are not told if the child required escorting to school. Because the OP was talking about picking them up from school. Throughout this thread you have been arguing about taking the child from the car to the school. You've got it completely the wrong way round.
We know that for sure.
We know several other things to - such as some people on here suffer from intolerance to facts and an irrational fear of saying thanks to someone when they put up a good post.

:eek: SHOCK HORROR! You got me!!!

But sadly I think there will be some posts where I got it the right way round.

In any event, it would not be a significant 'error' because IF the OP had grounds to appeal under boarding and alighting guess what, the 'boarding' part of the exemption would cover it!

George_Michael

Am I the only person who thinks that it's time to get this particular thread closed?

All we are getting now is constant repeat comments and the whole thing is more like a school playground "My dad's bigger than your dad" type of argument.

Tilt

George_Michael wrote: »

Am I the only person who thinks that it's time to get this particular thread closed?

All we are getting now is constant repeat comments and the whole thing is more like a school playground "My dad's bigger than your dad" type of argument.

Yeah lets... I just get hacked off at being accused of giving out inaccurate information when clearly I wasn't. I also got accused of suggesting that the OP lies in an appeal... I ain't havin' that!