Beware: Parking inspectors everywhere

[portioncontrol]

Suddenly parking inspectors are all over lordship lane and surrounding streets, clearly they have nothing better to spend money on than sending 20 a day to this area. Particularly around the Goose Green end of Lordship Lane they are waiting in the side roads to ticket you.

[Jules-and-Boo]

regulating parking restrictions? that's a completely valid thing to spend money on

[alice]

Wasn’t there just millions been spent on lots of traffic wardens that we no longer need because of the cutbacks on the CPZ? 

[Rockets]

Yes they signed a £11.5m contract with APCOA on the basis of area-wide CPZs so now they have more wardens than parking zones to patrol so they are all hang around Lordship Lane hunting for victims!!!

[teddyboy23]

Yes another 48 traffic wardens 

[Penguin68]

2 minutes ago, Rockets said:

Yes they signed a £11.5m contract with APCOA on the basis of area-wide CPZs so now they have more wardens than parking zones to patrol so they are all hang around Lordship Lane hunting for victims!!!

And it's so near Christmas - when pressures are on people. Parking offences are, frankly, victimless 'crimes' - so creating Christmas victims to met a budget overspend fuelled by hubris is exactly what we might expect this council, who despises us, to do.

[malumbu]

Not sure why you are defending people for parking where they shouldn't or over-running on paid parking.  I'd happily take much stronger enforcement on those that regularly park on double lines and zig zags.  The <removed comment> as you get on Forest Hill Road by the Turkish Supermarket doesn't wash.  Yes, I've had parking fines, when I've took a chance and thought I'd get away on a meter for a few minutes over (yes it was last century)

Edited December 16, 2023 by Administrator
Removed contentious comment

[Rockets]

The problem is Malumbu that with the increased number of wardens the pressure  mounts on them to issue tickets and they may throw tickets around where discretion and a sense of seasonal goodwill may have prevented them from issuing them previously as they look to make sure they hit whatever quota they have.

 

The way councils do this is incredibly underhand and snake-like way - the fact the council has spent £11.5m of tax-payers money to then raise more money from issuing fines to the very people they represent is ludicrous.

 

But I did get in an Addison Lee recently where a driver said he had an airport pick-up in Greenwich and he pulled up outside the person's house and got a £100 fine for doing so as it was being monitored by CCTV. He showed me the letter and it confirmed he had stopped for 45 seconds but it costs him £100 - and this is someone who works very hard to earn £100. It's shameless really.

 

 

[malumbu]

Then take it up with Southwark, your MP, the communities minister or whoever.  You are not going to convince me that the above is a common occurrence, the way I see it is you have a big issue with Southwark over LTNs and you are going to look for every bit of dirt on them.  If nobody abuses the parking rules then there will be some unemployed enforcement officers in times to come.  It's always a balance, to have the correct number of officers to provide a deterrent, and to have too few or too many.  Wouldn't you agree with me (for once??)

And yes I have been done for parking (in Westminster) to pop into a shop (long long time ago), and yes I have been done for drifting into a bus lane for a few metres, and yes I was unhappy.  But life moves on.

[Rockets]

You're right Malumbu,.life moves on...and in Southwark life moves on with a million new ways for them to take your hard-earned money from you.

The whole point of this thread is  the fact there are swarms of parking wardens now descending on Lordship Lane. Why? Because Southwark has spent £11.5m of our money on securing more parking wardens to police the CPZ zones that there is absolutely zero need for (except of course if you are a council desperately trying to drain every £ from your constituents).

 

And the laughable thing is they claim to be socialists....

Edited December 15, 2023 by Rockets

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

5 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

Parking offences are, frankly, victimless 'crimes' - 

This is rubbish. Parking in unlawful places creates hazards, slows traffic, and increases congestion. Overstaying reduces the turnover of safe parking spaces so people can stop while shopping etc. It harms everyone.

Just today I saw a guy park on zigzags at a zebra crossing at school kicking out time so he could go and buy a coffee without walking another 50 feet from a legal spot. Another couple of cars were parked in a spot reserved for an ambulance. Too bad there weren't any parking wardens around. It's not like there is a shortage of people parking illegally.

[snowy]

5 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

And it's so near Christmas - when pressures are on people. Parking offences are, frankly, victimless 'crimes' - so creating Christmas victims to met a budget overspend fuelled by hubris is exactly what we might expect this council, who despises us, to do.

I found  the story of Joseph and Mary getting a ticket for parking their donkey on the double yellows of the dusty road truly a parable for our times.
 

Christmas victims of socialism apparently. 
 

 

[Rockets]

But don't for one minute believe that the aforementioned things are what the council is trying to reduce - all they want to do is raise revenue. And they have gone out of their way to try to create parking pressures in the Dulwich area (extension of double-yellow lines to the legal maximum a few years ago).

 

£11.5m is an absurd amount of money to spend on a contract with a third -party parking enforcement company when the council bleats on and on about reductions in council budgets and a cost of living crisis - around £9m of that is funding the 48 new traffic wardens - many of whom are circling Lordship Lane daily like vultures.....

 

 

2 minutes ago, snowy said:

I found  the story of Joseph and Mary getting a ticket for parking their donkey on the double yellows of the dusty road truly a parable for our times.
 

Christmas victims of socialism apparently. 
 

 

Yes Joseph parked in front of the hospital as Mary was giving birth but upon appeal the council said that giving birth to baby Jesus was not grounds for them to overturn the parking fine on their donkey. The donkey had also inadvertently passed through the Dulwich Village LTN camera zone twice on its way and had also paused, momentarily, in a CPZ parking bay near Melbourne Grove as Mary was having a contraction. In total the council issued four fines, doubled them because Joseph had not received the fine notification in the post because the local postal service was appalling, and Cllr McAsh said (allegedly): "A donkey emits more emissions than a bicycle so we cannot agree to over-turning the fines - Mary and Joseph should have used one of our rentable cargo bikes because you can leave those anywhere without any form of recourse. The good news is Mary and Joseph's fines now take the council's Punish The Hard-Working People of Dulwich (They All Send Their Kids to Private School You know) accumulator to over £20m - a new record - hurrah - that'll learn them."

He went on to, allegedly, add: "I am a socialist not a marxist, honestly...why doesn't anyone believe me..we really, really, really are socialists - we'd like to thank APCOA for their help in achieving our goals!"

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

2 hours ago, Rockets said:

£11.5m is an absurd amount of money to spend on a contract with a third -party parking enforcement company

How much do you think it should cost?

[portioncontrol]

On 15/12/2023 at 13:32, malumbu said:

Not sure why you are defending people for parking where they shouldn't or over-running on paid parking.  I'd happily take much stronger enforcement on those that regularly park on double lines and zig zags.  The <removed> as you get on Forest Hill Road by the Turkish Supermarket doesn't wash.  Yes, I've had parking fines, when I've took a chance and thought I'd get away on a meter for a few minutes over (yes it was last century)

The point is that the council should spend their money on much better things. What a waste of public resources.

Edited December 16, 2023 by Administrator
Removed contentious comment in quoted post

[first mate]

Back to the Daily Mail trope. Stereotyping is the laziest of ways to try to make a point.

As for 11.5 million spent on traffic wardens, I cannot believe others here really think that is okay? The council have spent money to try to create a parking problem and are now spending money to "police" it with a load of wardens who are, for the most part, lurking around on residential side streets trying to find cars to ticket, or congregating for fag puffing socials. Them mounds of cigarette butts on the end of my street have noticeably risen. Courtesy of Southwark Council making my road safer and greener...allegedly.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

3 hours ago, first mate said:

The council have spent money to try to create a parking problem.

Cobblers. The number of cars, people and journeys has risen massively since East Dulwich was built, and even since the 70s when the idea you could just drive and park anywhere for free in London took off. That was always a dream, and it's dead. Even if your only desire in life was to provide enough free parking to meet demand, you'd have to copy Denver or Dallas and simply bulldoze half of East Dulwich to create more car parks.

[Romnarz]

A number of comments on here are missing the main point. Of course parking in dangerous spots should not be done for obvious reason. The fact remains Southwark have employed too many 'enforcement ' officers in anticipation of the huge money to be made as a result of trying to completely undemocratically  steamroller a CPZ across the whole of Dulwich. Along most of Lordship lane there is 30 minute parking at some times. In the 'old days' an 'operative' would very slowly  stroll up and down the lane writing down the time and number of each car. The chances of getting a ticket were remote, if you were unluckily and there was a bit of a Q in the post office you would get away with it. The inconsiderate  idiot who took up a space for hours probably did get a ticket. now with technology they photograph each car with a time stamp, if your there in  another 35 minutes you will get a fine. Ultimately if you park 'illegally' you cant moan if you get a ticket but the odds are now stacked against you. This could well effect the foot fall on the shops in Lordship lane. BTW don't pull into a bus lane to let a emergency vehicle through, you will be get a fine. All done by camera with no humans heart involved !

[Moovart]

40 minutes ago, Romnarz said:

BTW don't pull into a bus lane to let a emergency vehicle through, you will be get a fine. All done by camera with no humans heart involved !

The issue of a fine is automated but if you appeal, esp if the photo they provide shows you avoiding an emergency vehicle, the fine will be cancelled.

That's what happened to me driving South on Grove Vale by the petrol station as there is a bus lane camera just before the garage so don't pull across the bus lane as you approach the roundabout.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

43 minutes ago, Romnarz said:

 Southwark have employed too many 'enforcement ' officers

In the 'old days' an 'operative' would very slowly  stroll up and down the lane writing down the time and number of each car. The chances of getting a ticket were remote

How many enforcement officers should Southwark have?

[Romnarz]

1 hour ago, Moovart said:

The issue of a fine is automated but if you appeal, esp if the photo they provide shows you avoiding an emergency vehicle, the fine will be cancelled.

That's what happened to me driving South on Grove Vale by the petrol station as there is a bus lane camera just before the garage so don't pull across the bus lane as you approach the roundabout.

This example proves my point! you need to put your case- if the photo does not catch the emergency vehicle as well as your car you will find it difficult to prove that you moved into bus lane for a 'valid' reason . 

[snowy]

So the Highway Code is now also incorrect?

[Penguin68]

4 hours ago, Dogkennelhillbilly said:

How many enforcement officers should Southwark have?

I would guess sufficiently few that they travel singly and not in groups, as a start. Their recruitment was based on 100% CPZ in Southwark, which they now don't have and are unlikely to get at least in the 3 southernmost wards. For the forseeable future. 

[malumbu]

<removed - going off topic and not relevant to wider debate>

PS why do so many of you treat traffic wardens like they are from another planet?

Edited December 16, 2023 by Administrator
Removed off topic discussion

[Rockets]

Southwark Labour's new tagline is now: For the money from the many!

It really amazes me how far socialism has come from its for the people beginnings that loads of folks come on here defending the council for doing this. I do think Corbyn managed to detach elements of Labour from their sociaist principles that some are struggling to shake off. If it was the Tories doing it they would be up in arms....#theblinkerednatureofpoliticstoday

 

Bottom line is Southwark is spending huge amounts of constrained money on purging money from their own constituents and it is utterly shameless and utterly indefensible...

Edited December 16, 2023 by Rockets