Parking enforcement officals

[Lawboy]

I saw two of Southwark's finest parking enforcement officers issuing tickets to cars parked in the bus-stand outside Christ Church at the top of Barry Road near the Plough at 0745 on Saturday morning. The tickets being issued were being issued correctly. However, as you will see from the attached photo, the parking of those issuing the tickets was itself worthy of a penalty charge notice. Unfortunately, I don't have the power to issue PCNs so I post the picture here for review, noting the car is parked, with no occupants, a good distance away from the kerb, on a double yellow line, on a bend and opposite a junction from which the 12 bus struggles to turn at the best of times. All this despite there being a perfectly legal space to park two car lengths down the road....All seems a little unfair to me.

[reetpetite]

Well you know the saying..one rule for them another rule for us !

[Ladymuck]

Good for you Lawboy!(tu)

[Narnia]

I think you will find that the law protects them in carrying out their duties. Which is a load of bo**ix.

[Gimme]

Hope you don't mind lawboy but I passed this thread link to the manager responsible for parking at Southwark Council.

He said - last time I sent him a photo of someone in his parking team parked outrageously - that he would be raising it with the contractor involved but that has obviously been ignored. Will pass on response if I get one.

[sweetgirl]

GOOD FOR YOU GIMME!!!!!! LETS HOPE SOMETHING WILL BE DONE ABOUT IT!!!!!!! ;-)

[Ladymuck]

Yep...well done Gimme.(tu)

[northlondoner]

Gimme please let us know the outcome of this. It would be utterly outrageous if these scoundrels can create a hazard without suffering serious consequences.

[Jeremy]

I don't see why they need cars in the first place. A bicycle or scooter - or even travelling on foot - would be perfectly adequate.

[Gimme]

Reply from Nicky Costin ([email protected] for anyone who wants to raise similar concerns with him) was as follows:

"Thank you for bringing it to my attention. I will raise it again with the contractor re-emphasising the importance of parking appropriately when carrying out their duties."

Pretty standard reply. Have replied to ask what sanctions he will take next time he gets a photo of one of the parking enforcement officers parked dangerously.

[TheAllSeeingEye]

I saw the usual red Smart car with periscope parked this morning outside the Black Cherry waiting to catch minor offences, and then saw a huge delivery van park perfectly legally right next to it perfectly blocking the periscopes view of all the traffic and making them redundant for at least half an hour. Haha. Result for all SE22 residents !!

[kford]

I saw that Orwellian smart car parked opposite the Bishop, in the bus lane, causing more congestion than the roadworks outside the post office, ironically trying to nab people driving and parking in the bus lane.

[TJ]

Does anyone else have an overwhelming desire to climb on top of their car and rip the carera off the roof, followed by a Fawlty Towers style car-thrashing using said camera?

[kford]

Yes. Especially as it was there again this morning, blocking my bus.

[TheAllSeeingEye]

Causes more problems than it solves ... I also noticed the temporary sign they attached to the lamppost warning of traffic cameras so they can claim its in the name of safety rather than fund-raising.

Quick question .. if its for safety/traffic flow why park there where you are causing an obstruction ?? and if its for fund raising, how many people are you likely to catch speeding on the busiest junction in town by a roundabout ?? none.

Madness.

[ruffers]

I don't think that's why it's there. From memory if an authority is keeping the money raised then it has to make sure it's made people aware the cameras are there with a prominent sign, hence the sign on the lamppost as well as the one on the cars.

[DJKillaQueen]

Has always mystified me why anyone does a job that causes so much misery to others. I'll bet parking wardens would be in the top ten of most hated officials consistently. They have no common sense whatsoever so why expect them to consider their own obstruction to other road users.

[Huguenot]

I guess there are quite a lot of jobs out there that cause short term misery for the long term good - dentists for example.

Wardens enforce parking restrictions for the benefit of all road users and pedestrians and in the long term keep traffic flowing smoothly to the benefit of all motorists.

Occasionaly this may result in short term blips, but you can't make an omelette etc.

I'm also guessing that it's impossible to characterise all wardens as numpties.

I'm sure there are some that are better than others, and some that receive such unecessary abuse from people that they've built up psychological barriers that may make them appear indifferent to other folk.

[DJKillaQueen]

Ah but the majority of road fines are given to vehicles NOT causing obstruction to traffic flow. In fact it used to be that you couldn't be fined or to#owed etc unless you were causing obstruction. The vast majority of fines are the result of money making schemes by local authorities, notably parking. Also I have seen for example a drain cleaning van being ticketed because he was on a double yellow line while sucking out the contents of a blocked drain into the tank on the back of his lorry. How else can he do that job? Where was the common sense of that traffic warden. It is also widely known in Westminster that wardens intentionally patrol streets where vehicle parking is about to expire so that they hcan slap on a ticket the second a car goes over. These are not isolated incidents. The whole system is rotten to the core and unfair in many cases.

[Huguenot]

Obstruction can be caused to pedestrians and businesses as well as other motorists.

If you've got ageing or infirm people in the family you'll know how vital dropped kerbs are. It's also not just the kerb - if private motorists park across corners then so can vans and MPVs - blocking visibility especially for children.

It's noticeable that an earlier poster argued that they were parked okay because they weren't 'jutting out' a tell-tale sign that they're thinking about motorists, not pedestrians.

If you run a business you'll be familiar with people parking in you rloading bay and then disappearing off to Sainsbo's - hurting your own business.

As for commercial vehicles, there is a process to go through to obtain permits to block the road. If they can prove it was an emergency then the ticket will be dropped - but it's not up to the warden to be judge, jury and executioner...

[DJKillaQueen]

An obstruction is an obstruction but businesses don't own the highway outside their door so it's no argument to say they might miss out on passing trade if someone parks there illegally. As for pedestrians, I can't think of any vehicle parked at the kerb obstruscting a pedestrian. There are crossings for safely crossing a road and rightly so, a vehicle parked on those is causing an obstruction. As for corners, the highway code says that you can't park within a minumum distiance of a corner so yes that would be deemed as a reasonable obstruction. The fact remains that the vast majority of vehicles fined are causing no obstruction whatsoever to anyone, but simply parked along a point of a kerb that says they can't.

[snowy]

You're not a wheelchair / pram user are you DJ?

[DJKillaQueen]

I'm not but i know plenty of people who are and know where you are going with this. All that needs to be unobstructed for pedestrians are corners and crossings, which are part of the highway code and enforced. That's all that pedestrians need to cross the road safely, with ramps for wheel chairs user and the disabled. Some boroughs might have more or less of those and that's an issue for roads management. To argue that pedestrians should be given access over parked vehicles to other kerb space (apart from the obvious like bus stops) is not a valid arguement imo. That's what crossings exist for. Annd most road management teams will try to balance the needs of pedestrians and vehicles alike. But some pedestrians think they should be able to cross a road wherever they like, even when the safe option of a crossing exists. It's got to be a balance.

[Huguenot]

I don't know where you're coming from about the kerb and crossings sweetie. You've made that up as an argument you can win, but noone else is talking about it. We're talking about loading bays, obstructing dropped kerbs and poor parking at corners.

"The fact remains that the vast majority of vehicles fined are causing no obstruction whatsoever to anyone, but simply parked along a point of a kerb that says they can't."

Can you prove that? I don't think you can.

As for vehicles not causing an obstruction, well that doesn't really deserve a response.

As for 'crossings'... erm? What? In residential areas? LOL! I think if you lived on the north side of Nutbrook Street you'd not be able to get off the block because you couldn't cross the road for want of a 'crossing'

DJKillaQueen, I think you've got so het up about winning an argument that you're not thinking straight.

Parking restrictions are far from arbitrary. They're carefully considered and conconsistently applied.

[DJKillaQueen]

First of all I'm not your sweetie. You don;t need to patronise anyone.

I didn't mention pedestians at all. I was replying to a point made elsewhere by SOMEONE ELSE. If you'd read the thread properly you'd see that.

I'm not het up about anything...simple engaging is a discussion.

Is it possible for you to post a reply to anyone without personally attacking them? Very easy thing to do behind the anonymity of a PC granted because if you patronise people like that face to face you can't have any friends.