IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Council refuses to accept 20p debt.
GMR
post Aug 18 2009, 07:48 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



Good policing by the council or just madness?

Commuter accuses West Berkshire Council of having no common sense for refusing her offer to pay 20p parking debt

A commuter has accused West Berkshire Council of having no common sense, after it refused to let her pay a 20p ‘debt.’
Deborah Clarkson, of East Grafton, who regularly commutes to work from Hungerford train station, accidentally paid the old fee of £2.20 for a day’s parking in the station car park, about two weeks after the charge had risen to £2.40 in April.

Rest of the story below:

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=10818



What do you think? Should she have been allowed to have paid the extra 20p or were WBC right to persecute her until she pays up or suffers a public hanging; in other words... should she have been more observant?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jamoza
post Aug 18 2009, 07:57 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 65
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 17



I think they should have aloud her to pay the 20p. She didn't know that the prices had changed, not everyone looks at the sign & surly the ticket machine should have been updated & not let her pay the old price? All the council want is the £75 fine payment they don't care otherwise!


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Aug 18 2009, 08:10 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (Jamoza @ Aug 18 2009, 08:57 PM) *
I think they should have aloud her to pay the 20p. She didn't know that the prices had changed, not everyone looks at the sign & surly the ticket machine should have been updated & not let her pay the old price? All the council want is the £75 fine payment they don't care otherwise!



It has a lot to do with power; give officials power and all common sense goes out of the window. The money is irrelevant. The authority is all empowering.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sarah
post Aug 18 2009, 08:25 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 239
Joined: 12-July 09
Member No.: 191



QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 18 2009, 09:10 PM) *
It has a lot to do with power; give officials power and all common sense goes out of the window. The money is irrelevant. The authority is all empowering.


That's a slight exaggeration isn't it, I would think it's more a case of doing everything by the book, and being unable to function without it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
spartacus
post Aug 18 2009, 08:30 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,833
Joined: 24-July 09
Member No.: 221



Anyone who gets no joy from their Council when they appeal against what they consider to be an unfair ticket should always be given the option of taking their appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/site/index.php

The TPT are no real friend of the Local Authority and if there is even a margin of doubt in a case, they will often find in favour of the motorist. Should only be used if the motorist feels strongly that they have been hard done by. IMHO I reckon WBC should just take the 20p 'as a gesture of goodwill' and accept that she may just be a blond having 'a blond moment'. (The excuse that 'not everyone looks at the sign' though is a bit weak.... "Sorry officer, I didn't know it was 30mph as I don't bother looking at signs...)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Aug 18 2009, 08:46 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (Sarah @ Aug 18 2009, 09:25 PM) *
That's a slight exaggeration isn't it, I would think it's more a case of doing everything by the book, and being unable to function without it.



Whether it is a slight exaggeration or not is neither here nor there. It is more about wetting peoples appetite and getting them to give their opinion. My side comments are irrelevant as the true story can be gleamed by reading the link. All it is is showmanship to get people interested. BT Barnum had it spot on. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Aug 18 2009, 08:49 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



Wonder if anyone at WBC has ever seen the Merchant of Venice.....


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sarah
post Aug 18 2009, 08:57 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 239
Joined: 12-July 09
Member No.: 191



QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 18 2009, 09:46 PM) *
Whether it is a slight exaggeration or not is neither here nor there. It is more about wetting peoples appetite and getting them to give their opinion. My side comments are irrelevant as the true story can be gleamed by reading the link. All it is is showmanship to get people interested. BT Barnum had it spot on. wink.gif


Really?. So not content to play Devil's Advocate, you now want the role of Court Jester too. tongue.gif

Anyway you have my opinion for what it's worth.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Aug 18 2009, 09:00 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 18 2009, 09:49 PM) *
Wonder if anyone at WBC has ever seen the Merchant of Venice.....



Now you are being silly; can you really image anybody from the council being interested literature? Mention Shylock or William Shakespeare and their first thoughts would be pub. Then they’ll probably look on the local register to see if they are paying taxes; if not why not and what can we screw out of them. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Aug 18 2009, 09:01 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (Sarah @ Aug 18 2009, 09:57 PM) *
Really?. So not content to play Devil's Advocate, you now want the role of Court Jester too. tongue.gif

Anyway you have my opinion for what it's worth.



I'll play any role if it gets the punters in. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Aug 18 2009, 09:14 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 18 2009, 10:00 PM) *
Now you are being silly; can you really image anybody from the council being interested literature? Mention Shylock or William Shakespeare and their first thoughts would be pub. Then they’ll probably look on the local register to see if they are paying taxes; if not why not and what can we screw out of them. wink.gif



That probably explains why the Library is gradually being turned into a free child care facility and bear garden.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Aug 18 2009, 09:17 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 18 2009, 10:14 PM) *
That probably explains why the Library is gradually being turned into a free child care facility and bear garden.



Yes - more productive tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
spartacus
post Aug 18 2009, 09:24 PM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,833
Joined: 24-July 09
Member No.: 221



QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 18 2009, 10:14 PM) *
That probably explains why the Library is gradually being turned into a free child care facility and bear garden.

That sounds quite dangerous. Lickle children in a pen with Grizzlies. What's the world coming to... rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Aug 18 2009, 10:04 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (spartacus @ Aug 18 2009, 10:24 PM) *
That sounds quite dangerous. Lickle children in a pen with Grizzlies. What's the world coming to... rolleyes.gif



A good one I hope wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darren
post Aug 18 2009, 10:30 PM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,251
Joined: 15-May 09
Member No.: 61



Back to the original topic... wink.gif

The expression "Familiarity breeds contempt" springs to mind. Just because it was that price last week, doesn't mean it's the same this week.

Also, why are they being charged £75? The penalty is £50 for not paying the parking charge. Off street, in the lower tarriff

http://www.westberks.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.a...d=18059&p=0

If you pay within 14 days, the fine is reduced by 50%.

QUOTE
cool.gif If you wish to appeal:

1. Appeals made within 14 days:

When a penalty charge notice is issued the motorist must either pay or appeal. If the penalty charge notice is paid within 14 days there is a 50% discount. Where an appeal is made within 14 days (it is known at this stage as a "Challenge") and the appeal is allowed there is nothing to pay: if the appeal is rejected another 14 days will be given to pay the penalty charge notice at the discounted rate. Please use the link opposite to download a form to make an informal challenge. Alternatively, you may make a challenge by e-mail contacting the Parking Service. If you wish to submit documents in support of your appeal (e.g. a permit or a pay and display ticket) please send these under separate cover and it is always advisable to submit a copy of the original.


Me thinks we are not being told the full story here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Aug 18 2009, 10:57 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Darren @ Aug 18 2009, 11:30 PM) *
Also, why are they being charged £75? The penalty is £50 for not paying the parking charge. Off street, in the lower tarriff If you pay within 14 days, the fine is reduced by 50%. Me thinks we are not being told the full story here.

Is it not the case if one appeals, you lose the discount if you are unsuccessful?

In this instance, it seems to me this was a mistake and the Council, or whoever is responsible, are being unreasonable. I can't see someone trying to 'save' 20p at risk of getting a parking fine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darren
post Aug 18 2009, 11:04 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,251
Joined: 15-May 09
Member No.: 61



As per the quoted items, the discount still applied for 14 days after an unsuccessful appeal.

QUOTE
if the appeal is rejected another 14 days will be given to pay the penalty charge notice at the discounted rate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy
post Aug 18 2009, 11:19 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 318
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 26



She didn't read any of the advance notices, new tariff signs or published literature, so it's nobody's fault but her own if she got things wrong.

If she'd not bothered paying any of the £2.40 would it still not seem harsh being fined £75?...No. That's why the line is there and high fine amounts in place to deter non and under paying parkers. That line is set and it's no one else's fault bar the punter if they cross it.

Lesson will no doubt have been learnt and she'll no doubt read tariffs and rules more carefully in the future.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Aug 18 2009, 11:28 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Andy @ Aug 19 2009, 12:19 AM) *
She didn't read any of the advance notices, new tariff signs or published literature, so it's nobody's fault but her own if she got things wrong.

I don't think she is denying fault.

QUOTE (Andy @ Aug 19 2009, 12:19 AM) *
If she'd not bothered paying any of the £2.40 would it still not seem harsh being fined £75?...No.

But she did pay £2.40, so it is besides the point.

QUOTE (Andy @ Aug 19 2009, 12:19 AM) *
That's why the line is there and high fine amounts in place to deter non and under paying parkers. That line is set and it's no one else's fault bar the punter if they cross it. Lesson will no doubt have been learnt and she'll no doubt read tariffs and rules more carefully in the future.

The fine is savagely disproportionate to the offence. I once was caught doing 42 in a 30 and didn't get fined that much. A few years ago I forgot to by a ticket and didn't get fined that sort of amount.

Pay and display is crap; at least pay on exit, as places like the Kennet Shopping have got, avoids this sort of thing, except if you lose your ticket of course! A friend of mine lost his ticket and got charged the full day, despite it being early afternoon.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy
post Aug 18 2009, 11:47 PM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 318
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 26



QUOTE (Iommi @ Aug 19 2009, 12:28 AM) *
But she did pay £2.40, so it is besides the point.


No read the story properly....she paid £2.20 hence the fine!!!!

QUOTE (Iommi @ Aug 19 2009, 12:28 AM) *
The fine is savagely disproportionate to the offence.


Exactly as I stated, it's meant to be a deterrent



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th November 2021 - 01:59 PM