Story here.

Chap parks at Thatcham Station in the snow, and the snow is heavy on the ground so he doesn't see that he's actually on double yellow lines. And he gets a parking ticket.

He appeals to the council twice, but they dismiss his appeal, and his £35 fine is doubled to £70 because he doesn't pay promptly.

The Council agree that there was snow on the ground, but rules is rules.

Chap isn't deterred and take the matter to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, whereupon the council relent and cancel the ticket.

Now FFS, wouldn't it have just been better for everyone if the council had cancelled the ticket at the first appeal? It was daft to issue the ticket, but OK, daft things happen, but wouldn't everyone have come out of this better if at the first appeal the council had simply said - sorry, that was a bit daft, we'll say no more about it? As it turns out I think the council just look like a bunch of jobsworths.

Tell me Simon, do you believe absolutely EVERYTHING you read in the newspaper? I think you may find there's a bit of Newbury journalistic license being used.

He parks there on a regular basis but claims he couldn't remember where the double yellow lines were?

How so?

Meh. Maybe he took advantage, maybe he didn't see the double-yellows. Was it worth arguing the tos5 over when there was a reasonable possibility that, like he said, he just didn't see the double yellows for the snow? If the council felt his appeal had no merit then they should have defended the tribunal, because as it is it looks to me as though they dismissed the appeal as a matter of policy and only gave a thought to its merits when they weren't in charge.

I watched a program about parking tribunals a while back, and the councils would end up in an appeal hearing almost every time. They were often I'll prepared and unaware of the cases against them. I suspect they follow through as a matter of course on the off chance most people will relent and pay.

That's what I thought.

...and then I thought that too.

So can we park wherever we like when it snows then?

It's called discretion, without it we would live in Germany!

Hmmm.........I don't think I'll risk it!

I think in a car park, between two other already (unticketed) parked cars is different to "anywhere we like".

Sorry, reading the article I thought he was parked on the road or on council owned property?
He must have been if it was a council-issued fine?
If he was in the car park he would have been under the jurisdiction of APCOA?

Sorry - double post!

Me too. I'm also certain that the council must have a steady stream of people who receive a ticket and then try it on. If this guy provided the same story to the council that he did to the NWN, then it wouldn't take a genius at the council to work out that he knew what he was doing. If I were them I would pursue it.

Mmmm, possibly. I didn't think there was much parking down there, but I guess the one way way bit must get used a bit for parking? I assumed the car park, but it is not mentioned in the article.

I didn't think there was much on street parking down there also, but the station car park is not WBC.

That's fair enough, but an independent arbiter said that the council was wrong. And that is that.

Seems odd. Wardens would normally take photos of the site when issuing a ticket. Front/back/wheel position (tyre gauge used as a reference point for position)/surrounding detail. The photos would show the extent of snow coverage.

Someone's tried it on and they've either got away with it or it's hardly been worth taking the case further and arguing the toss. The argument would probably have been how much snow was present when they parked, how much when the ticket issued, how much more could have fallen during the day. Too many vague areas for TPT to rule fully in favour of taking money out of someone's pocket.

The car park on the town side is WBC. The official station car park on the other side is not.