The 45-second parking ticket

First published in News Swindon Advertiser: Photograph of the Author by

WHEN it came to being quick out of the blocks you had to admire his blistering speed, grim determination and sheer breakneck desperation to hit me with that parking ticket as swiftly as possible.

Usain Bolt could hardly have reacted quicker. Within 30 seconds – 45 max – of removing a bulky plastic bagful of clothes from the boot of my car and conveying it into a Swindon charity shop he had nailed with me with a £35 fine – £70 if I am not a good boy and cough-up soon.

But it poses an important question, and one that is very much in the public interest, to wit: has Swindon Borough Council instructed its traffic wardens to hang around charity shops in order to pinch motorists who have momentarily parked on double-yellow lines in order to donate goods to a worthy cause?

Or was it a case of a lone warden, fired with fervour and enthusiasm, using his own vulture-like instincts, complete lack of fair play and any semblance of common decency, to chalk up a brisk hit?

Flashback to Thursday, at exactly 11.19am and I am easing my car into a space a couple of feet from the Sue Ryder charity shop in Victoria Road, just opposite the Advertiser offices.

Over the years we have donated a lot of decent stuff – clothes, books, CDs – to Sue Ryder in Old Town.

It is an outstanding charity that largely exists on donations in order to provide vital nursing care for thousands of elderly and disabled people, and it is always nice to contribute.

As anyone who has ever dropped off donations to this particular shop will know, there is nowhere convenient to park. You could, of course, shove some money into a Swindon council meter at the Prospect Place car park around the corner and spend some time lugging your boxes and bags to Sue Ryder from there.

But we are only human and it just takes a minute or so – often less – to despatch a bagful of items into the storeroom behind the counter while leaving your car on yellow lines. Pretty much everyone does it.

Having done exactly this, I immediately returned to the car to find a traffic warden was hovering over it.

I assumed he had just approached the said vehicle and I was about to say something along the lines of: “Hold on mate, I’ve only been here a few seconds and I’m off right now.”

And then it dawned that during the fleeting moments I had left the vehicle, he had already typed my car registration, make and model into his hand-held device, checked my tax disc, printed out a parking ticket and sealed it in his plastic ‘penalty charge notice’ envelope.

Speedy Gonzales was then placing it on the windscreen when I grabbed the thing and stuffed it into my pocket.

I was trying to explain that I had made a charity donation and was not attempting to park the car while I did the shopping or even pop into the Post Office. I wasn’t blocking anything in either.

But he would have none of it. Technically, he was right. But have you ever heard of such mean-spirited behaviour? At this juncture I have to confess that in a state of disbelief, anger and exasperation, an expletive or two may have fallen from my lips.

As I was about to drive off he knocked on the window, gave me a smug nod and grinned “Have a nice day.” It was reassuring to meet someone with such enormous job satisfaction. And at least he had a sense of humour. The parking ticket – printed on the left – pretty much speaks for itself, saying my car had been “observed from 11.20 to 11.20.” That’s right, less than a minute.

The obvious conclusion was that he was waiting for me to take the bag into the charity shop and swooped with lightning speed before I could get out seconds later. Perhaps he was lurking in a nearby shop doorway, eager to pounce on a supporter of charity?

I was keen to discover the identity of this redoubtable employee of Swindon Borough Council. But his ‘signature’ is an unintelligible scrawl. About an hour later I rang the Sue Ryder shop and informed assistant manager Debbie Bradley what had happened.

“Oh yes, you were the man with the black plastic bag – you were only in here a few seconds,” she said. Debbie, who has worked at the shop more than four years was alarmed and concerned at the incident.

“No that’s never happened before as far as I am aware,” she said. “I spoke to a traffic warden once and they said they usually gave people five minutes while they dropped off donations to us.”

She added: “This is wrong. If traffic wardens are targeting motorists outside our shop then people won’t make donations anymore.”

A Swindon Borough Council spokesman said: “The driver in question was issued with a ticket because he illegally parked at a bus stop, despite the fact there are signs warning drivers not to park in that area.

“If he had parked on normal double yellow lines he would have been entitled to park and unload, however, this was not the case.

“The council’s civil enforcement officers are neither told to prey on people in certain parking hotspots nor set targets for the number of tickets they should issue. Penalty Charge Notices are only issued to drivers who park illegally, as in this particular case. Our enforcement officer was not waiting for vehicles to park in this area, in fact our computer logs show that he moved from the square near the Locarno and along Wood Street to Victoria Road as part of his beat, where he then took a picture of the illegally parked vehicle and issued a ticket.

“Once a ticket has been issued it cannot be withdrawn by the enforcement officer. A well-established and independent appeals process, as laid out by the Traffic Management Act, is available if anyone wants to challenge why they were ticketed.”

Comments (35)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:38am Sat 29 Mar 14

nobody says...

Stop moaning and pay up.
Stop moaning and pay up. nobody
  • Score: 1

9:24am Sat 29 Mar 14

adsinibiza says...

I have always thought that you were allowed ten minutes 'loading time' unless you are in a specific no waiting area?
I have always thought that you were allowed ten minutes 'loading time' unless you are in a specific no waiting area? adsinibiza
  • Score: 8

10:51am Sat 29 Mar 14

AJP1960 says...

I believe that the law says that a double yellow is always "no stopping, no waiting and no dropping off" unless modified by a sign on a pole.

However, I believe that a 5 minute window is frequently accepted by anyone involved with enforcement.

However, the comment from SBC indicates that Barry was stopped in a Bus Stop - and because of the focus on the smooth running of public transport - there is no leeway, no stopping means exactly that.

BH must have been desperate for something to write about this week to even think about turning it in to a whinging column.
I believe that the law says that a double yellow is always "no stopping, no waiting and no dropping off" unless modified by a sign on a pole. However, I believe that a 5 minute window is frequently accepted by anyone involved with enforcement. However, the comment from SBC indicates that Barry was stopped in a Bus Stop - and because of the focus on the smooth running of public transport - there is no leeway, no stopping means exactly that. BH must have been desperate for something to write about this week to even think about turning it in to a whinging column. AJP1960
  • Score: 18

1:29pm Sat 29 Mar 14

faatmaan says...

unless specifically sign posted , there is an unofficial 5 minutes grace policy for those delivering and collecting heavy goods. what amazes me is their zeal to punish people continually in one specific area, yet neglect real problem parking in other areas, why should the bulk of us go to the trouble of parking legally when others abuse their position by parking continually on double yellows on junctions etc. since the duty was taken over by the council from the Police the quality of service has dramatically fallen, you barely see an enforcement officer out of the town centre, yet alone in the evenings or at weekends, yet the same employees are swarming over council car parks, another disincentive for shoppers to use central Swindon,
and where did the budget for traffic wardens go ? one for the Adver to follow up, if its not scared of one of its largest clients !
unless specifically sign posted , there is an unofficial 5 minutes grace policy for those delivering and collecting heavy goods. what amazes me is their zeal to punish people continually in one specific area, yet neglect real problem parking in other areas, why should the bulk of us go to the trouble of parking legally when others abuse their position by parking continually on double yellows on junctions etc. since the duty was taken over by the council from the Police the quality of service has dramatically fallen, you barely see an enforcement officer out of the town centre, yet alone in the evenings or at weekends, yet the same employees are swarming over council car parks, another disincentive for shoppers to use central Swindon, and where did the budget for traffic wardens go ? one for the Adver to follow up, if its not scared of one of its largest clients ! faatmaan
  • Score: 2

2:03pm Sat 29 Mar 14

Captain T says...

So hold on, this guy works for the Adver? If so, then what he's saying is instead of parking wherever he would normally park and WALK from the offices to the charity shop, he took his car to the charity shops virtually opposite his place of work and unloaded it? Unless he was donating something like a 50 inch TV would it have been unreasonable for him to have put his donations in the office and then walked them over at some point in the day?

Basically he parked in a bus stop, you're not allowed to do it and because it was for a charity he thinks he should be absolved of all responsibility. Well guess what, Jimmy Saville did a lot for charity to but....
So hold on, this guy works for the Adver? If so, then what he's saying is instead of parking wherever he would normally park and WALK from the offices to the charity shop, he took his car to the charity shops virtually opposite his place of work and unloaded it? Unless he was donating something like a 50 inch TV would it have been unreasonable for him to have put his donations in the office and then walked them over at some point in the day? Basically he parked in a bus stop, you're not allowed to do it and because it was for a charity he thinks he should be absolved of all responsibility. Well guess what, Jimmy Saville did a lot for charity to but.... Captain T
  • Score: 25

3:05pm Sat 29 Mar 14

Klinkerhoffen says...

Sorry, got to agree with a lot of the previous comments: Vic Hill is a pretty hectic and potentially dangerous bit of road. The stretch in which the writer had stopped has two pedestrian crossings as well as a bus stop on either side. You have a busy junction and mini roundabout at the top of the road and an awkward junction by Longs just a couple of hundred yards down the road. Its not a safe place to be stopping. What you are stopping for should be immaterial - its not as though the warden has (or ought to have) the discretion to ticket the bloke who's buying his fags, but not the fine upstanding journalist dropping off some charity clothes. There are real issues with parking and either the lack of proper enforcement or stupidly over-zealous enforcement, but I don't think this is a very good example to be honest.
Sorry, got to agree with a lot of the previous comments: Vic Hill is a pretty hectic and potentially dangerous bit of road. The stretch in which the writer had stopped has two pedestrian crossings as well as a bus stop on either side. You have a busy junction and mini roundabout at the top of the road and an awkward junction by Longs just a couple of hundred yards down the road. Its not a safe place to be stopping. What you are stopping for should be immaterial - its not as though the warden has (or ought to have) the discretion to ticket the bloke who's buying his fags, but not the fine upstanding journalist dropping off some charity clothes. There are real issues with parking and either the lack of proper enforcement or stupidly over-zealous enforcement, but I don't think this is a very good example to be honest. Klinkerhoffen
  • Score: 12

5:47pm Sat 29 Mar 14

FLOGGITLAD says...

I drove up cricklade road last night at approx 8.45, and I counted at least 15 cars parked on double yellow lines so where are the police or traffic wardens or doesnt it matter at night..
I drove up cricklade road last night at approx 8.45, and I counted at least 15 cars parked on double yellow lines so where are the police or traffic wardens or doesnt it matter at night.. FLOGGITLAD
  • Score: 7

7:41pm Sat 29 Mar 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

FLOGGITLAD wrote:
I drove up cricklade road last night at approx 8.45, and I counted at least 15 cars parked on double yellow lines so where are the police or traffic wardens or doesnt it matter at night..
Unfortunately parking is decriminalised which means the Police have virtually no responsibility for enforcing it, and to be honest based on experience even when it falls under their remit they can't be bothered.

As for a traffic warden working at 8.45pm, are you serious? when was the last time you saw someone from the council working into the evenings!
[quote][p][bold]FLOGGITLAD[/bold] wrote: I drove up cricklade road last night at approx 8.45, and I counted at least 15 cars parked on double yellow lines so where are the police or traffic wardens or doesnt it matter at night..[/p][/quote]Unfortunately parking is decriminalised which means the Police have virtually no responsibility for enforcing it, and to be honest based on experience even when it falls under their remit they can't be bothered. As for a traffic warden working at 8.45pm, are you serious? when was the last time you saw someone from the council working into the evenings! LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 3

8:24pm Sat 29 Mar 14

molly60 says...

The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.
The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further. molly60
  • Score: 2

7:53am Sun 30 Mar 14

semitonic says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
FLOGGITLAD wrote:
I drove up cricklade road last night at approx 8.45, and I counted at least 15 cars parked on double yellow lines so where are the police or traffic wardens or doesnt it matter at night..
Unfortunately parking is decriminalised which means the Police have virtually no responsibility for enforcing it, and to be honest based on experience even when it falls under their remit they can't be bothered.

As for a traffic warden working at 8.45pm, are you serious? when was the last time you saw someone from the council working into the evenings!
In residential parking areas of old town they 'work' from 6am to 10 at night with the specific aim of trying to punish people who can't find a space to park their cars.

Absolutely nothing to do with road safety or reducing congestion and everything to do with revenue collection, since they often park their own council vehicles on double yellow lines so they can jump out and ruin someone's day wherever possible. In nearly all cases the person will have already forked out about ninety quid for a permit.

And where does the money go?

Ricky Hunt's back pocket probably.
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FLOGGITLAD[/bold] wrote: I drove up cricklade road last night at approx 8.45, and I counted at least 15 cars parked on double yellow lines so where are the police or traffic wardens or doesnt it matter at night..[/p][/quote]Unfortunately parking is decriminalised which means the Police have virtually no responsibility for enforcing it, and to be honest based on experience even when it falls under their remit they can't be bothered. As for a traffic warden working at 8.45pm, are you serious? when was the last time you saw someone from the council working into the evenings![/p][/quote]In residential parking areas of old town they 'work' from 6am to 10 at night with the specific aim of trying to punish people who can't find a space to park their cars. Absolutely nothing to do with road safety or reducing congestion and everything to do with revenue collection, since they often park their own council vehicles on double yellow lines so they can jump out and ruin someone's day wherever possible. In nearly all cases the person will have already forked out about ninety quid for a permit. And where does the money go? Ricky Hunt's back pocket probably. semitonic
  • Score: 7

8:19am Sun 30 Mar 14

house on the hill says...

So what you are saying is that it is ok to break the law if you don't consider it dangerous? Who are you to decide whether you have the right to break the law? People who park on the pavement or double yellows are just ignorant and deserve everything they get. If you are not prepared to respect the law why should expect ant in return? Typical double standards Britain!
So what you are saying is that it is ok to break the law if you don't consider it dangerous? Who are you to decide whether you have the right to break the law? People who park on the pavement or double yellows are just ignorant and deserve everything they get. If you are not prepared to respect the law why should expect ant in return? Typical double standards Britain! house on the hill
  • Score: 6

8:56am Sun 30 Mar 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

molly60 wrote:
The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.
If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.
[quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.[/p][/quote]If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 2

9:07am Sun 30 Mar 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

semitonic wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
FLOGGITLAD wrote:
I drove up cricklade road last night at approx 8.45, and I counted at least 15 cars parked on double yellow lines so where are the police or traffic wardens or doesnt it matter at night..
Unfortunately parking is decriminalised which means the Police have virtually no responsibility for enforcing it, and to be honest based on experience even when it falls under their remit they can't be bothered.

As for a traffic warden working at 8.45pm, are you serious? when was the last time you saw someone from the council working into the evenings!
In residential parking areas of old town they 'work' from 6am to 10 at night with the specific aim of trying to punish people who can't find a space to park their cars.

Absolutely nothing to do with road safety or reducing congestion and everything to do with revenue collection, since they often park their own council vehicles on double yellow lines so they can jump out and ruin someone's day wherever possible. In nearly all cases the person will have already forked out about ninety quid for a permit.

And where does the money go?

Ricky Hunt's back pocket probably.
If they cannot find a valid space for their car, then that doesn't give them the right to park inappropriately/inco
nsiderately/illegall
y.

As a former old town resident (just off Eastcott hill), I know the council over issue the parking permits, allowing 2 per household (at least it use to be) plus visitor permits.

If you don't want the wardens, send them down to RedHouse to get the cars parked on roundabouts and the entrances to junctions.
[quote][p][bold]semitonic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FLOGGITLAD[/bold] wrote: I drove up cricklade road last night at approx 8.45, and I counted at least 15 cars parked on double yellow lines so where are the police or traffic wardens or doesnt it matter at night..[/p][/quote]Unfortunately parking is decriminalised which means the Police have virtually no responsibility for enforcing it, and to be honest based on experience even when it falls under their remit they can't be bothered. As for a traffic warden working at 8.45pm, are you serious? when was the last time you saw someone from the council working into the evenings![/p][/quote]In residential parking areas of old town they 'work' from 6am to 10 at night with the specific aim of trying to punish people who can't find a space to park their cars. Absolutely nothing to do with road safety or reducing congestion and everything to do with revenue collection, since they often park their own council vehicles on double yellow lines so they can jump out and ruin someone's day wherever possible. In nearly all cases the person will have already forked out about ninety quid for a permit. And where does the money go? Ricky Hunt's back pocket probably.[/p][/quote]If they cannot find a valid space for their car, then that doesn't give them the right to park inappropriately/inco nsiderately/illegall y. As a former old town resident (just off Eastcott hill), I know the council over issue the parking permits, allowing 2 per household (at least it use to be) plus visitor permits. If you don't want the wardens, send them down to RedHouse to get the cars parked on roundabouts and the entrances to junctions. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 1

11:13am Sun 30 Mar 14

molly60 says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
molly60 wrote:
The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.
If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.
If you get a ticket showing "0" value logic says you were not parked, nothing to do with getting out of paying.
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.[/p][/quote]If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.[/p][/quote]If you get a ticket showing "0" value logic says you were not parked, nothing to do with getting out of paying. molly60
  • Score: 2

12:52pm Sun 30 Mar 14

MrAngry says...

molly60 wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
molly60 wrote:
The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.
If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.
If you get a ticket showing "0" value logic says you were not parked, nothing to do with getting out of paying.
Complete nonsense. He got out of the car to go into the shop. A stationary car with no driver is parked.

The journalist has admitted to parking for 45 seconds. That is 0.75 minutes not zero. Since when did something not happen just because is lasted less than a minute.

If he appeals, it will be thrown out because the fool has admitted to the offence in the local paper.

The argument that he was using a charity shop is also irrelevant. He was probably dropping off some old tat and decided that the queue at the charity shop was shorter that at the tip.
[quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.[/p][/quote]If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.[/p][/quote]If you get a ticket showing "0" value logic says you were not parked, nothing to do with getting out of paying.[/p][/quote]Complete nonsense. He got out of the car to go into the shop. A stationary car with no driver is parked. The journalist has admitted to parking for 45 seconds. That is 0.75 minutes not zero. Since when did something not happen just because is lasted less than a minute. If he appeals, it will be thrown out because the fool has admitted to the offence in the local paper. The argument that he was using a charity shop is also irrelevant. He was probably dropping off some old tat and decided that the queue at the charity shop was shorter that at the tip. MrAngry
  • Score: 8

2:35pm Sun 30 Mar 14

Raef Barnes says...

'“If he had parked on normal double yellow lines he would have been entitled to park and unload, however, this was not the case'

That's very clear, not sure what the 'story' is here. The author of the article would have been fine to unload whilst parked on double yellow lines, but not when parked at a bus stop.

Stop your whinging and pay up, you made a mistake, it's a fair cop.
'“If he had parked on normal double yellow lines he would have been entitled to park and unload, however, this was not the case' That's very clear, not sure what the 'story' is here. The author of the article would have been fine to unload whilst parked on double yellow lines, but not when parked at a bus stop. Stop your whinging and pay up, you made a mistake, it's a fair cop. Raef Barnes
  • Score: 4

3:17pm Sun 30 Mar 14

molly60 says...

MrAngry wrote:
molly60 wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
molly60 wrote:
The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.
If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.
If you get a ticket showing "0" value logic says you were not parked, nothing to do with getting out of paying.
Complete nonsense. He got out of the car to go into the shop. A stationary car with no driver is parked.

The journalist has admitted to parking for 45 seconds. That is 0.75 minutes not zero. Since when did something not happen just because is lasted less than a minute.

If he appeals, it will be thrown out because the fool has admitted to the offence in the local paper.

The argument that he was using a charity shop is also irrelevant. He was probably dropping off some old tat and decided that the queue at the charity shop was shorter that at the tip.
In this country you can only be convicted of an offence supported by evidence. In this case the evidence is that the value of the ticket is "0" therefore no offence has been committed. What was admitted or said is irrelevant as it can always be withdrawn or denied unless supported by EVIDENCE i.e. a recording or witness etc. therefore don't pay up ,argue your case Remember SBC and others have to prove that an offence has been committed not the other way round...............
............Yes you Honour the defendant was parked for "0" minutes.............
...............PLONK
ER.................
[quote][p][bold]MrAngry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.[/p][/quote]If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.[/p][/quote]If you get a ticket showing "0" value logic says you were not parked, nothing to do with getting out of paying.[/p][/quote]Complete nonsense. He got out of the car to go into the shop. A stationary car with no driver is parked. The journalist has admitted to parking for 45 seconds. That is 0.75 minutes not zero. Since when did something not happen just because is lasted less than a minute. If he appeals, it will be thrown out because the fool has admitted to the offence in the local paper. The argument that he was using a charity shop is also irrelevant. He was probably dropping off some old tat and decided that the queue at the charity shop was shorter that at the tip.[/p][/quote]In this country you can only be convicted of an offence supported by evidence. In this case the evidence is that the value of the ticket is "0" therefore no offence has been committed. What was admitted or said is irrelevant as it can always be withdrawn or denied unless supported by EVIDENCE i.e. a recording or witness etc. therefore don't pay up ,argue your case Remember SBC and others have to prove that an offence has been committed not the other way round............... ............Yes you Honour the defendant was parked for "0" minutes............. ...............PLONK ER................. molly60
  • Score: -1

7:47pm Sun 30 Mar 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

molly60 wrote:
MrAngry wrote:
molly60 wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
molly60 wrote:
The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.
If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.
If you get a ticket showing "0" value logic says you were not parked, nothing to do with getting out of paying.
Complete nonsense. He got out of the car to go into the shop. A stationary car with no driver is parked.

The journalist has admitted to parking for 45 seconds. That is 0.75 minutes not zero. Since when did something not happen just because is lasted less than a minute.

If he appeals, it will be thrown out because the fool has admitted to the offence in the local paper.

The argument that he was using a charity shop is also irrelevant. He was probably dropping off some old tat and decided that the queue at the charity shop was shorter that at the tip.
In this country you can only be convicted of an offence supported by evidence. In this case the evidence is that the value of the ticket is "0" therefore no offence has been committed. What was admitted or said is irrelevant as it can always be withdrawn or denied unless supported by EVIDENCE i.e. a recording or witness etc. therefore don't pay up ,argue your case Remember SBC and others have to prove that an offence has been committed not the other way round...............

............Yes you Honour the defendant was parked for "0" minutes.............

...............PLONK

ER.................
So what would actually happen in court would be:

Prosecution: was your car stationary at the specified location
Defendant: Yes

Prosecution: Was the engine running:
Defendant: No

Prosecution: Were you at the vehicle the entire time it was stationary
Defendant: No

Prosection: Would you agree you vehicle was parked at the location albeit for a very short period of time
Defendant: Yes


There is your evidence; an admission of guilt. Unless your suggesting the driver would lie in court and contradict their own story.

Just because the ticket shows 0 minutes, it still counts as a ticket and is evidence. The fact it was issued and the driver wasn't present is evidence. The best piece of evidence though, is the newspaper article which admits committing a parking infringement.

You're right about one thing though, the driver is a plonk er,
[quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MrAngry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.[/p][/quote]If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.[/p][/quote]If you get a ticket showing "0" value logic says you were not parked, nothing to do with getting out of paying.[/p][/quote]Complete nonsense. He got out of the car to go into the shop. A stationary car with no driver is parked. The journalist has admitted to parking for 45 seconds. That is 0.75 minutes not zero. Since when did something not happen just because is lasted less than a minute. If he appeals, it will be thrown out because the fool has admitted to the offence in the local paper. The argument that he was using a charity shop is also irrelevant. He was probably dropping off some old tat and decided that the queue at the charity shop was shorter that at the tip.[/p][/quote]In this country you can only be convicted of an offence supported by evidence. In this case the evidence is that the value of the ticket is "0" therefore no offence has been committed. What was admitted or said is irrelevant as it can always be withdrawn or denied unless supported by EVIDENCE i.e. a recording or witness etc. therefore don't pay up ,argue your case Remember SBC and others have to prove that an offence has been committed not the other way round............... ............Yes you Honour the defendant was parked for "0" minutes............. ...............PLONK ER.................[/p][/quote]So what would actually happen in court would be: Prosecution: was your car stationary at the specified location Defendant: Yes Prosecution: Was the engine running: Defendant: No Prosecution: Were you at the vehicle the entire time it was stationary Defendant: No Prosection: Would you agree you vehicle was parked at the location albeit for a very short period of time Defendant: Yes There is your evidence; an admission of guilt. Unless your suggesting the driver would lie in court and contradict their own story. Just because the ticket shows 0 minutes, it still counts as a ticket and is evidence. The fact it was issued and the driver wasn't present is evidence. The best piece of evidence though, is the newspaper article which admits committing a parking infringement. You're right about one thing though, the driver is a plonk er, LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 5

7:51pm Sun 30 Mar 14

knittynora says...

Shame they aren't so zealous outside the town centre and Old Town. I have friends who have been trying for 15 years to get some action taken against parking on grass verges and open spaces on Parks and Walcot. Contacted Parking enforcement many times, councillors, housing dept , antisocial behaviour you name it. Nobody wants to know. Still I suppose patrolling key areas and car parks is easier and keeps the fines rolling in.
Shame they aren't so zealous outside the town centre and Old Town. I have friends who have been trying for 15 years to get some action taken against parking on grass verges and open spaces on Parks and Walcot. Contacted Parking enforcement many times, councillors, housing dept , antisocial behaviour you name it. Nobody wants to know. Still I suppose patrolling key areas and car parks is easier and keeps the fines rolling in. knittynora
  • Score: 4

8:24pm Sun 30 Mar 14

MrAngry says...

molly60 wrote:
MrAngry wrote:
molly60 wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
molly60 wrote:
The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.
If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.
If you get a ticket showing "0" value logic says you were not parked, nothing to do with getting out of paying.
Complete nonsense. He got out of the car to go into the shop. A stationary car with no driver is parked.

The journalist has admitted to parking for 45 seconds. That is 0.75 minutes not zero. Since when did something not happen just because is lasted less than a minute.

If he appeals, it will be thrown out because the fool has admitted to the offence in the local paper.

The argument that he was using a charity shop is also irrelevant. He was probably dropping off some old tat and decided that the queue at the charity shop was shorter that at the tip.
In this country you can only be convicted of an offence supported by evidence. In this case the evidence is that the value of the ticket is "0" therefore no offence has been committed. What was admitted or said is irrelevant as it can always be withdrawn or denied unless supported by EVIDENCE i.e. a recording or witness etc. therefore don't pay up ,argue your case Remember SBC and others have to prove that an offence has been committed not the other way round...............

............Yes you Honour the defendant was parked for "0" minutes.............

...............PLONK

ER.................
Incorrect.

Parking on double yellow lines has been decriminalised and is now administered by the council.

If it were a criminal offence it would have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. As a civil case, a judgement would be made based on the balance of probabilities.

The guy has already admitted his guilt in the paper.

A complete non-story. He should be more concerned about keeping his job if he continues to write this drivel.
[quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MrAngry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molly60[/bold] wrote: The issue here is how long the car was parked. 11.20--11.20 is 0,therefore you were not parked. Appeal on the mathematics on the ticket. Write to the relevant SBC department send them a copy of the ticket and ask them the question, how can they fine you if you were parked from 11,20 to 11.20 (their reply should be interesting from my experience, very similar scenario concerning time on the ticket ) and wait for their response. If they don't cancel the ticket definitely take it further.[/p][/quote]If the car is stationary and the engine is off then it is parked. If the driver was there they would have driven off before the ticket was issued, so claiming that a ticket shows 0 mins as a way of getting out of paying it pathetic.[/p][/quote]If you get a ticket showing "0" value logic says you were not parked, nothing to do with getting out of paying.[/p][/quote]Complete nonsense. He got out of the car to go into the shop. A stationary car with no driver is parked. The journalist has admitted to parking for 45 seconds. That is 0.75 minutes not zero. Since when did something not happen just because is lasted less than a minute. If he appeals, it will be thrown out because the fool has admitted to the offence in the local paper. The argument that he was using a charity shop is also irrelevant. He was probably dropping off some old tat and decided that the queue at the charity shop was shorter that at the tip.[/p][/quote]In this country you can only be convicted of an offence supported by evidence. In this case the evidence is that the value of the ticket is "0" therefore no offence has been committed. What was admitted or said is irrelevant as it can always be withdrawn or denied unless supported by EVIDENCE i.e. a recording or witness etc. therefore don't pay up ,argue your case Remember SBC and others have to prove that an offence has been committed not the other way round............... ............Yes you Honour the defendant was parked for "0" minutes............. ...............PLONK ER.................[/p][/quote]Incorrect. Parking on double yellow lines has been decriminalised and is now administered by the council. If it were a criminal offence it would have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. As a civil case, a judgement would be made based on the balance of probabilities. The guy has already admitted his guilt in the paper. A complete non-story. He should be more concerned about keeping his job if he continues to write this drivel. MrAngry
  • Score: 6

8:35pm Sun 30 Mar 14

madreeves says...

"has Swindon Borough Council instructed its traffic wardens to hang around charity shops in order to pinch motorists who have momentarily parked on double-yellow lines in order to donate goods to a worthy cause?" What a nasty little comment. You were parked in a bus stop you idiot. Park on double yellows for a few seconds to carry out your saintly deed - no problem. Park somewhere where you block a bus which then has to block a road which then causes obstruction to a lot of drivers is wrong. The mere fact you have used the charity stick to try and beat shame into the Council is appalling reporting.
"has Swindon Borough Council instructed its traffic wardens to hang around charity shops in order to pinch motorists who have momentarily parked on double-yellow lines in order to donate goods to a worthy cause?" What a nasty little comment. You were parked in a bus stop you idiot. Park on double yellows for a few seconds to carry out your saintly deed - no problem. Park somewhere where you block a bus which then has to block a road which then causes obstruction to a lot of drivers is wrong. The mere fact you have used the charity stick to try and beat shame into the Council is appalling reporting. madreeves
  • Score: 8

9:06pm Sun 30 Mar 14

Maxwell'79 says...

madreeves wrote:
"has Swindon Borough Council instructed its traffic wardens to hang around charity shops in order to pinch motorists who have momentarily parked on double-yellow lines in order to donate goods to a worthy cause?" What a nasty little comment. You were parked in a bus stop you idiot. Park on double yellows for a few seconds to carry out your saintly deed - no problem. Park somewhere where you block a bus which then has to block a road which then causes obstruction to a lot of drivers is wrong. The mere fact you have used the charity stick to try and beat shame into the Council is appalling reporting.
I agree with the comment entirely. A waste of print putting this article in the adver.

The biggest issue here isn't the ticket that this man deservedly got and incorrectly is moaning about, no. The biggest issue is the editing of these pointless stories that constantly end up in the adver. If it isn't this ridiculous article which should never have been published it is 15 articles about some useless failed criminal bugging himself up as Mr Swindon or another headline grabbing story about someone who had had his puppies stolen. Twice in a week or two.

Get your act together Adver and start printing real news and not this utter dirge.
[quote][p][bold]madreeves[/bold] wrote: "has Swindon Borough Council instructed its traffic wardens to hang around charity shops in order to pinch motorists who have momentarily parked on double-yellow lines in order to donate goods to a worthy cause?" What a nasty little comment. You were parked in a bus stop you idiot. Park on double yellows for a few seconds to carry out your saintly deed - no problem. Park somewhere where you block a bus which then has to block a road which then causes obstruction to a lot of drivers is wrong. The mere fact you have used the charity stick to try and beat shame into the Council is appalling reporting.[/p][/quote]I agree with the comment entirely. A waste of print putting this article in the adver. The biggest issue here isn't the ticket that this man deservedly got and incorrectly is moaning about, no. The biggest issue is the editing of these pointless stories that constantly end up in the adver. If it isn't this ridiculous article which should never have been published it is 15 articles about some useless failed criminal bugging himself up as Mr Swindon or another headline grabbing story about someone who had had his puppies stolen. Twice in a week or two. Get your act together Adver and start printing real news and not this utter dirge. Maxwell'79
  • Score: 8

9:43pm Sun 30 Mar 14

semitonic says...

house on the hill wrote:
So what you are saying is that it is ok to break the law if you don't consider it dangerous? Who are you to decide whether you have the right to break the law? People who park on the pavement or double yellows are just ignorant and deserve everything they get. If you are not prepared to respect the law why should expect ant in return? Typical double standards Britain!
'Why should expect ant in return'

What does this have to do with insects?

Agree though, it's typical double-standards Britain, perfectly OK for idiotic half-wit traffic wardens to park illegally in order to punish residents (who pay their wages) but who are unable to park themselves.

Terrific.

You are always banging on about working for the council, guessing you were/are a traffic warden. Sadly it's brainless jobsworth people like you who make this country a more miserable to live in.
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: So what you are saying is that it is ok to break the law if you don't consider it dangerous? Who are you to decide whether you have the right to break the law? People who park on the pavement or double yellows are just ignorant and deserve everything they get. If you are not prepared to respect the law why should expect ant in return? Typical double standards Britain![/p][/quote]'Why should expect ant in return' What does this have to do with insects? Agree though, it's typical double-standards Britain, perfectly OK for idiotic half-wit traffic wardens to park illegally in order to punish residents (who pay their wages) but who are unable to park themselves. Terrific. You are always banging on about working for the council, guessing you were/are a traffic warden. Sadly it's brainless jobsworth people like you who make this country a more miserable to live in. semitonic
  • Score: 0

9:47pm Sun 30 Mar 14

Dickdock says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
semitonic wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
FLOGGITLAD wrote:
I drove up cricklade road last night at approx 8.45, and I counted at least 15 cars parked on double yellow lines so where are the police or traffic wardens or doesnt it matter at night..
Unfortunately parking is decriminalised which means the Police have virtually no responsibility for enforcing it, and to be honest based on experience even when it falls under their remit they can't be bothered.

As for a traffic warden working at 8.45pm, are you serious? when was the last time you saw someone from the council working into the evenings!
In residential parking areas of old town they 'work' from 6am to 10 at night with the specific aim of trying to punish people who can't find a space to park their cars.

Absolutely nothing to do with road safety or reducing congestion and everything to do with revenue collection, since they often park their own council vehicles on double yellow lines so they can jump out and ruin someone's day wherever possible. In nearly all cases the person will have already forked out about ninety quid for a permit.

And where does the money go?

Ricky Hunt's back pocket probably.
If they cannot find a valid space for their car, then that doesn't give them the right to park inappropriately/inco

nsiderately/illegall

y.

As a former old town resident (just off Eastcott hill), I know the council over issue the parking permits, allowing 2 per household (at least it use to be) plus visitor permits.

If you don't want the wardens, send them down to RedHouse to get the cars parked on roundabouts and the entrances to junctions.
Oh, but they are above the Law, I have a recent letter from the council explaining this, I was parked in wood street, one evening, opposite The kings, the sign clearly states parking charges are between 8am and 6pm, so fine it is 8pm, so no problem left the car for an hour and a half, when I returned there were 3 traffic wardens in wood street ticketing cars in this area, when I asked why they had ticketed my car,, they pointed to a small sign that said no parking between the hours of 6pm and 8am, this sign I did not see earlier, and wrote to the council to explain my mistake, but still had to pay the fine, so yes the parking wardens do work in the evening and they travel in Packs,
But when I explained to the council that they had parked there car in the same area as me, I was told that the parking restriction did not apply to them as they had to have a place of safety nearby, because people get angry with them and they need to be able to escape to the safety of there car,
On another note, I was sat in my car in the car park at the Locarno, there were 3other cars in the car park, the traffic warden drove in the car park and parked checked the 3 cars, then came to me, asked if I wanted to pay £70.00, when I said no, I am just waiting for my wife to come out of the hairdressers, he said well I suggest you buy a ticket from the machine , I said seriously? I am only here a couple of minutes, his reply was well £70.00 will be a lot of money, so I suggest you get a ticket from the machine.
Just a shame they don't implement the rules so robustly in all areas of swindon, I am sick of seeing cars parked on pavements, and grass verges all over town, they only need to take a drive along drakes way on a football night
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]semitonic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FLOGGITLAD[/bold] wrote: I drove up cricklade road last night at approx 8.45, and I counted at least 15 cars parked on double yellow lines so where are the police or traffic wardens or doesnt it matter at night..[/p][/quote]Unfortunately parking is decriminalised which means the Police have virtually no responsibility for enforcing it, and to be honest based on experience even when it falls under their remit they can't be bothered. As for a traffic warden working at 8.45pm, are you serious? when was the last time you saw someone from the council working into the evenings![/p][/quote]In residential parking areas of old town they 'work' from 6am to 10 at night with the specific aim of trying to punish people who can't find a space to park their cars. Absolutely nothing to do with road safety or reducing congestion and everything to do with revenue collection, since they often park their own council vehicles on double yellow lines so they can jump out and ruin someone's day wherever possible. In nearly all cases the person will have already forked out about ninety quid for a permit. And where does the money go? Ricky Hunt's back pocket probably.[/p][/quote]If they cannot find a valid space for their car, then that doesn't give them the right to park inappropriately/inco nsiderately/illegall y. As a former old town resident (just off Eastcott hill), I know the council over issue the parking permits, allowing 2 per household (at least it use to be) plus visitor permits. If you don't want the wardens, send them down to RedHouse to get the cars parked on roundabouts and the entrances to junctions.[/p][/quote]Oh, but they are above the Law, I have a recent letter from the council explaining this, I was parked in wood street, one evening, opposite The kings, the sign clearly states parking charges are between 8am and 6pm, so fine it is 8pm, so no problem left the car for an hour and a half, when I returned there were 3 traffic wardens in wood street ticketing cars in this area, when I asked why they had ticketed my car,, they pointed to a small sign that said no parking between the hours of 6pm and 8am, this sign I did not see earlier, and wrote to the council to explain my mistake, but still had to pay the fine, so yes the parking wardens do work in the evening and they travel in Packs, But when I explained to the council that they had parked there car in the same area as me, I was told that the parking restriction did not apply to them as they had to have a place of safety nearby, because people get angry with them and they need to be able to escape to the safety of there car, On another note, I was sat in my car in the car park at the Locarno, there were 3other cars in the car park, the traffic warden drove in the car park and parked checked the 3 cars, then came to me, asked if I wanted to pay £70.00, when I said no, I am just waiting for my wife to come out of the hairdressers, he said well I suggest you buy a ticket from the machine , I said seriously? I am only here a couple of minutes, his reply was well £70.00 will be a lot of money, so I suggest you get a ticket from the machine. Just a shame they don't implement the rules so robustly in all areas of swindon, I am sick of seeing cars parked on pavements, and grass verges all over town, they only need to take a drive along drakes way on a football night Dickdock
  • Score: 1

12:06am Mon 31 Mar 14

Moth says...

AJP1960 wrote:
I believe that the law says that a double yellow is always "no stopping, no waiting and no dropping off" unless modified by a sign on a pole.

However, I believe that a 5 minute window is frequently accepted by anyone involved with enforcement.

However, the comment from SBC indicates that Barry was stopped in a Bus Stop - and because of the focus on the smooth running of public transport - there is no leeway, no stopping means exactly that.

BH must have been desperate for something to write about this week to even think about turning it in to a whinging column.
Odd that SBC put bus stops on the zig zag lines of crossings or just before and after them.. That is illegal and is a menace to both pedestrians and motorists. Pinehurst Road is an example of that and if memory serves me right, the bus stop by the Adver office is also very close to the crossing. What gets me is why they've got away with breaking the law of the land.

In this case, OK, it's naughty to park on double yellows/bus stop but even the ticket says it was less than a minute. Typical SBC jobsworth - wears a uniform (of a kind) and the power goes to their head.
[quote][p][bold]AJP1960[/bold] wrote: I believe that the law says that a double yellow is always "no stopping, no waiting and no dropping off" unless modified by a sign on a pole. However, I believe that a 5 minute window is frequently accepted by anyone involved with enforcement. However, the comment from SBC indicates that Barry was stopped in a Bus Stop - and because of the focus on the smooth running of public transport - there is no leeway, no stopping means exactly that. BH must have been desperate for something to write about this week to even think about turning it in to a whinging column.[/p][/quote]Odd that SBC put bus stops on the zig zag lines of crossings or just before and after them.. That is illegal and is a menace to both pedestrians and motorists. Pinehurst Road is an example of that and if memory serves me right, the bus stop by the Adver office is also very close to the crossing. What gets me is why they've got away with breaking the law of the land. In this case, OK, it's naughty to park on double yellows/bus stop but even the ticket says it was less than a minute. Typical SBC jobsworth - wears a uniform (of a kind) and the power goes to their head. Moth
  • Score: 2

8:33am Mon 31 Mar 14

Captain T says...

I'm surprised we haven't yet had a photo of the reporter standing in front of the bus stop with his arms folded
I'm surprised we haven't yet had a photo of the reporter standing in front of the bus stop with his arms folded Captain T
  • Score: 5

12:41pm Mon 31 Mar 14

Claypers says...

Captain T wrote:
I'm surprised we haven't yet had a photo of the reporter standing in front of the bus stop with his arms folded
He can't have had a pair of varifocals to complete the required 'outraged resident' look!
[quote][p][bold]Captain T[/bold] wrote: I'm surprised we haven't yet had a photo of the reporter standing in front of the bus stop with his arms folded[/p][/quote]He can't have had a pair of varifocals to complete the required 'outraged resident' look! Claypers
  • Score: 0

2:42pm Mon 31 Mar 14

Grimly Feendish says...

You were illegally park at a bus stop. If I'd have got into you car, showed you my travel card would you have taken me to North Swindon Orbital? No? Well pay up or I will complain to the police that you were fraudulently posing as a bus driver. I've got your name, and your statement of admission is above. Get over yourself!!
You were illegally park at a bus stop. If I'd have got into you car, showed you my travel card would you have taken me to North Swindon Orbital? No? Well pay up or I will complain to the police that you were fraudulently posing as a bus driver. I've got your name, and your statement of admission is above. Get over yourself!! Grimly Feendish
  • Score: 1

2:47pm Mon 31 Mar 14

Wright852 says...

. . I had a warden run across the road to my vehicle after just 30 secs, as I had just parked outside NatWest bank in Commercial road, as I went to use the ATM, he was hiding around the corner and appeared to already have filled out the parking ticket. As I turned around in front of the ATM I was delighted to see his crest fallen face as he went to slap the ticket on my windscreen and he finally saw my correctly displayed disabled blue badge. Tatty Hilarious!
. . I had a warden run across the road to my vehicle after just 30 secs, as I had just parked outside NatWest bank in Commercial road, as I went to use the ATM, he was hiding around the corner and appeared to already have filled out the parking ticket. As I turned around in front of the ATM I was delighted to see his crest fallen face as he went to slap the ticket on my windscreen and he finally saw my correctly displayed disabled blue badge. Tatty Hilarious! Wright852
  • Score: 0

3:09pm Mon 31 Mar 14

bellyup says...

It sucks but you have to accept that you parked illegally sp pay up. Maybe the Adver will pay it for you as you got a little story out of nothing. "Man gets the hump over parking fine".
It sucks but you have to accept that you parked illegally sp pay up. Maybe the Adver will pay it for you as you got a little story out of nothing. "Man gets the hump over parking fine". bellyup
  • Score: 2

9:02pm Mon 31 Mar 14

timt1964 says...

the adver have managed to scrape the barrel even more than usual with this "story".if you park illegally dont moan if you get a ticket! doesnt matter how long you parked for,using your gallant trip to a charity shop as an excuse to hide your disregard for common sense is even worse.please please please tell your editor there are far more important things happening in swindon than your lack of brain cells.
the adver have managed to scrape the barrel even more than usual with this "story".if you park illegally dont moan if you get a ticket! doesnt matter how long you parked for,using your gallant trip to a charity shop as an excuse to hide your disregard for common sense is even worse.please please please tell your editor there are far more important things happening in swindon than your lack of brain cells. timt1964
  • Score: 1

9:41pm Mon 31 Mar 14

FLOGGITLAD says...

The first thing he could do is go and photograph those cars in cricklade road and then ask why should I pay if they can park on yellows for nothing even at night.. the council needs to get on top of this..
The first thing he could do is go and photograph those cars in cricklade road and then ask why should I pay if they can park on yellows for nothing even at night.. the council needs to get on top of this.. FLOGGITLAD
  • Score: 1

8:14am Tue 1 Apr 14

madred says...

You broke the law, you got caught, boo hoo, pay up and stop whinging....
You broke the law, you got caught, boo hoo, pay up and stop whinging.... madred
  • Score: 0

11:40am Tue 1 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

On one of the busiest sections of road in the town you parked illegally, there are ample car parks and even a work car park across the road I am sure the Adver would of let you use.

People complain buses are late and offer a poor service if less people parked in the bus lanes maybe they would be better?
Didn`t you tell the person doing their job "who you are"?
On one of the busiest sections of road in the town you parked illegally, there are ample car parks and even a work car park across the road I am sure the Adver would of let you use. People complain buses are late and offer a poor service if less people parked in the bus lanes maybe they would be better? Didn`t you tell the person doing their job "who you are"? Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 1

10:04pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Iheartswindonia says...

I agree with the zero timing line of argument....do you know why? It is because I am a blithering idiot.
I agree with the zero timing line of argument....do you know why? It is because I am a blithering idiot. Iheartswindonia
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree