Parking crisis 'threat to shops'

Alan Roden
Transport Reporter
The Scotsman
A LACK of parking spaces in Edinburgh's West End is driving the area's unique collection of upmarket shops and small boutiques out of business, it was claimed today.
The council was today urged to build a new car park in the city centre, possibly underground in Melville Street, to protect the Capital's traders.

The Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce (ECC) said the West End's Bohemian shopping quarter has the potential to rival London's Notting Hill.
But, with more than half a dozen shops in the area closing in the last year, there are fears that it could instead become a ghost town.
Motorists from the Capital, as well as visitors from other parts of Scotland, are shunning the area, because there are no large car parks closer than Morrison Street or Castle Terrace.
The Chamber of Commerce, which has told transport chiefs about its concerns, was today backed by the West End Traders' Association.
And local businesses said takings are down by up to 50 per cent in the area, with many more shops set to close this year.
Graham Bell, a spokesman for the ECC, said: "Last year, we persuaded the council that cars are an important mix in how to make a city centre successful.
"There have been a number of key changes, such as extending the maximum waiting times and these have benefited shops, particularly in the East End.
"But Edinburgh is unique in that it has a fantastic mix of shops, with some wonderful small boutique-like shops in the West End. This makes the city an unrivalled shopping experience, but we are in danger of losing that unless something can be done to boost parking in the West End.
"Without drastic action to bring motorists to this part of town, we will lose these small shops and Edinburgh will be dominated by larger chain stores.
We believe that a new car park development in the West End is needed to fulfil demand from visitors to the city from the north and west."
The West End was hit particularly hard by the council's controversial traffic management shake-up, which proved so unpopular that councillors ordered officials to reverse some of the changes.
In recent months, a number of businesses have closed their doors, including Di Rollo's art gallery, Simon's Sandwiches, the Klick photography shop and the Granary bar and café. Jeweller Joe Goodwin, whose antiques business has operated in the West End for more than 40 years, said many other shops will be forced to close soon.
"The council's policies have had a devastating effect on locally owned indigenous businesses," he said.
"All these wonderful shops in the West End will be replaced with multinational faceless chain stores unless something can be done and I blame the council 100 per cent for this."
Futuristic car parks, which lower cars into the ground and automatically park them, are currently being considered for Edinburgh, with Chambers Street favourite for a trial. But the West End Traders' Association today said Melville Street would be ideal for subterranean facilities.
Chairman Michael Apter said: "We would love to see a new car park in the West End, which would bring a definite boost for the area."
The city's transport leader Andrew Burns said: "I welcome the Chamber of Commerce's input. As with all feedback we receive, we will seriously consider their suggestions. Nothing in the strategy is set in stone, but I hope all participants keep in mind that we must balance the needs of thousands of people."

'Parking fines from CCTV cameras are killing trade'

ic Croydon

FURIOUS traders and residents have called for a red route CCTV camera to be removed to save the future of Coulsdon's businesses.

They hope a petition will help put an end to "ridiculous" parking fines being dished out to people stopping in Brighton Road to make deliveries.

Greengrocers MC Perrin has collected more than 100 signatures after being stung with £600-worth of fines from the CCTV camera while unloading outside the shop in Brighton Road at 7am.

The petition calling for the camera to be removed was presented to Croydon Council by Coulsdon West Councillor David Osland on Monday.

Residents and traders believe that the camera is causing serious harm to the viability of businesses in the town centre.

Although there is a loading bay outside the greengrocers, they cannot park in it until 10am, which is too late for them to unload the day's produce.

Jimmy Curtis, of MC Perrin, said: "Everyone in Coulsdon is up in arms about it. It has united the residents. We have had hundreds of people coming in saying they have been caught out by the camera.
"It is entrapment, I feel sorry for all the people that come to Coulsdon and have never seen a red route before.
"I thought CCTV was to protect Coulsdon but this is helping to kill some of the businesses including us and the takeaways.
"Delivering is part and parcel of everyday life and to not be able to deliver will kill the high street."

Parking fines greet whale rescue teams

Published: Tuesday, 24 January, 2006, 09:33 AM Doha Time
Gulf Times
LONDON:
Volunteers who attempted to save the whale have received parking fines totalling £300.
Members of British Divers Marine Life Rescue spent Friday and Saturday trying to rescue the stranded creature from the shallow waters of the Thames. Many of them parked their cars in the city before rushing to the river to help lift the northern bottlenose whale on to a barge and keep it doused with water. The whale died on Saturday night after its condition deteriorated.

The divers later returned to their vehicles to find parking tickets on their windscreens. The BDMLR has advised its volunteers to appeal. Tony Woodley, a director of the charity, said: “Parking tickets are an unfortunate thing to come back to, particularly after we had tried our best to rescue the animal. We are hoping to get them waived.”
A Westminster council spokesman said its parking department would be “able and happy” to use its discretion to consider waiving the fines.
Meanwhile a tabloid has launched a fundraising appeal to save the skeleton of the whale.
“We have teamed up with experts and conservationists to help preserve the skeleton for crucial scientific research,” said The Sun, which hopes to raise £10,000.
“We also want to provide a lasting tribute to the whale that captivated the world by swimming up the Thames into central London.” it said.
The northern bottle-nosed whale, which the Sun nicknamed “Wally” and said was an adolescent female, belongs to the reigning British monarch under an ancient salvage law passed in 1324, the newspaper said.
“So we have joined forces with Her Majesty’s Receiver of Wrecks, who is responsible for dead whales in UK waters, and the Natural History Museum to save Wally’s bones from an anonymous grave,” it said. – Agencies

Town halls defy law to milk millions from parking ticket fines

By David Millward,
Transport Correspondent(Filed: 23/01/2006)
Daily Telegraph

Town halls are illegally using motorists as a cash cow by flouting government guidelines and turning parking control into a money-making business.
While Whitehall insists that local authorities should use their powers only to improve traffic management, increasing numbers of motorists are finding that town halls see parking as a multi-million-pound source of revenue.
This is despite the efforts of the parking industry to improve its image while satisfying the demands of local authorities that employ them.

An investigation by The Daily Telegraph has uncovered an array of abuses.
They include the issuing of thousands of illegal parking tickets, many of which are quashed on appeal. Some contractors have set "benchmarks" for the number of penalty charge notices that each attendant should issue on their shifts.
On occasions fines are increased substantially when collection is handed over to debt enforcement agencies that obtain county court judgments against motorists who are unaware that any "hearing" has taken place.
While the biggest problems are in London - where local authorities have been responsible for parking control since 1994 - motorists elsewhere are now starting to face similar treatment.

There are 144 councils outside the capital that have been given the power to police parking within their area and the Department of Transport is considering applications from a further 18.
According to Edmund King, the executive director of the RAC Foundation, complaints about parking enforcement are directly linked to the process of "decriminalisation" - handing over enforcement to town halls.
"We have had a lady in Norfolk whose pay and display ticket fell off the windscreen because of condensation and she was issued with a ticket. She was able to prove she had paid, but the council refused to quash the ticket," he said.
Other incidents include a woman being issued with a penalty charge notice because she had not returned to her car from the pay and display machine quickly enough.
Earlier this week the National Parking Adjudication Service, which handles appeals against parking tickets, singled out Bristol for criticism after a motorist's car was towed away because the driver had underpaid a parking fee by £1.50.
Motorists can appeal to an independent adjudicator, but lose the 50 per cent discount for swift payment.
While contractors maintain that incentive schemes linking parking attendants' pay and job security to the number of tickets issued have been scrapped in recent years, some examples remain.
The Transport and General Workers Union is in dispute with Central Parking Systems, the contractor in Hackney, east London, over a proposed bonus scheme that depends on the number of vehicles clamped.
Last year a central London industrial tribunal was told that a parking attendant in Kensington was expected to issue 1.4 tickets an hour. Delivery drivers and courier drivers have complained of wrongly being issued with scores of parking tickets.
In December the House of Commons Transport Select Committee was told that Tradeteam, which delivers beer, successfully appealed against 1,039 parking tickets in 2004, saving itself £70,000.
Tony Scott, 46, a courier in London, has received about 100 parking tickets over the past two years. All except one were quashed on appeal.
Other complaints in London include the number of judgments entered against motorists at Northampton county court on behalf of 33 London authorities. In 2003-4 the figure reached nearly 875,000.
One of those to fall foul of that court was Tom Conti, the actor. "I was given a parking ticket and you could not read the registration number of the car," he said. "I contacted Camden council."
His initial challenge was rejected. "At the beginning of this year I received something saying judgment had been entered against me at Northampton county court.
"I was not told a hearing was taking place. It is amazingly Stalinist." With additional costs, his parking fine had reached £390.
Keith Banbury, chief executive of the British Parking Association, admitted that public confidence in his industry was low and called for fundamental reforms in the contracts agreed between contractors and councils

The way thousands of drivers can avoid paying parking fines

The Times
By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent

THOUSANDS of drivers are paying unfair parking penalties because councils fail to make clear that they have a right to appeal to an independent body, a study suggests.

A record eight million parking penalties were issued in England and Wales in 2004, one for every three cars on the road. But only 60,000 drivers appealed to independent adjudicators against their fines. Nearly two thirds (62 per cent) of those who did were successful.

Two councils, Islington and Trafford, lost more than 90 per cent of motorists’ appeals made against their fines. In contrast, Harrogate lost only 21 per cent of appeals.

More than half of all drivers do not realise that they can ask for their case to be considered by an independent lawyer, according to a survey by Birmingham University, commissioned by the National Parking Ajudication Service (NPAS).
The overwhelming majority of drivers who did not appeal believed that they would not have got a fair hearing. But 91 per cent of those who went through the appeals process believed that it was “completely impartial”.

Councils fail to mention on parking tickets that there is a right of appeal to an independent body. Drivers are informed of this only if they write to the council to contest the ticket and have their case rejected.

Caroline Sheppard, the chief parking adjudicator, said that many drivers who believed a penalty had been imposed unfairly chose to pay it anyway.

Drivers are offered a 50 per cent discount if they pay within 14 days but have to pay the full rate if they pursue the case through to an appeal and lose.

Ms Sheppard told The Times: “People do not know at the beginning of the process that if they feel strongly that the ticket was unfair, they can have their case decided by an independent lawyer.
“It would help if councils made that clear at the outset.” A lack of awareness of the appeals process meant that thousands of drivers were paying fines that would probably have been cancelled had they appealed.
“If you are a gambling person, your chances of winning an appeal are high. But if you lose, you will probably have to pay the full rate,” she said. The full rate in London is £100, reduced to £50 if paid within 14 days. Outside London, the full rate is £60, with £30 discount.

Ms Sheppard said that councils had ignored her request to publish annual reports on their parking performance. She said that this allowed failing councils to conceal poor records.Nick Lester, of the Association of London Government, said: “We are changing penalty charge notices to make them more explanatory.”

The NPAS report also warned that some councils may risk breaking article one of the Human Rights Act if they clamped and towed away vehicles in unreasonable situations.

HOW TO APPEAL

Step 1 Object in writing to the council within 14 days

Step 2 Council sends “Notice to Owner” to you, giving you 28 more days to make formal representation

Step 3 If council refuses to waive charge it will issue a “Notice of Rejection of Representations”. You have 28 days to appeal to the independent adjudicator, based on written material or at a personal hearing

Towing away cars could be breach of human rights

By David Millward Transport Correspondent
Telegraph(Filed: 18/01/2006)

Councils that tow away cars run the risk of breaking human rights legislation, the parking appeal service has said.
Yesterday it said they must use the power to clamp and remove vehicles reasonably if they were to avoid being held to have broken the law.
The advice was contained in the annual report of the National Parking Adjudication Service, which hears appeals against tickets issued by councils outside London.
One of its 30 adjudicators, all lawyers, said that towing away without good reason represented a breach of article 1 of the Human Rights Act, which protects property.
Cars should be removed only when they were causing an obstruction. That was especially the case in the evenings when there was less public transport.
"There must be significant justification for towing away a vehicle at night," the report said. "In some cases removal may even jeopardise a vulnerable driver's safety."
The report criticised an unnamed council for removing a car parked in a designated bay because the driver had not displayed a ticket.
Another motorist's car was towed away for non-payment of a £1.50 parking fee. The service described that as "disproportionate". It emerged that Bristol city council was responsible in both cases.
Bristol is one of seven authorities outside London with the power to remove cars. The others are Birmingham, Blackpool, Brighton, Manchester, Nottingham, and Oxfordshire.
Bristol, which towed away 6,256 cars last year, was singled out for special criticism after it emerged that it had not contested nearly half of the 70 appeals against removal made to the adjudication service.
"We are assessing the document and its implications," the council said last night. "Since the data for this report were collated in 2004 we have agreed a new strategy which involves a review of our enforcement policies, including tow-away procedures."
The adjudication service received 10,441 appeals in 2004.
Paul Watters, of the AA Motoring Trust, expressed disquiet at the behaviour of some councils. "It is pretty fundamental that the draconian powers to remove a car should be reserved for serious offences and persistent offenders," he said.
Across the country, 176 councils have taken over parking enforcement from the police. Twenty-two others have applied to do so.
The number of parking tickets has soared as councils try to cash in on the power to issue parking tickets, clamp and tow away cars. In many cases the service is carried out by private contractors.

Hackney parking attendants say they will ballot for strikes

T&G
17 Jan 2006

A meeting of parking attendants in the London Borough of Hackney, who work for contractor CPS, last night agreed to call for a formal strike action ballot and to challenge the company over its 'derecognition' of their trade union.

The Hackney parking attendants, who are all members of the Transport and General Workers Union, told union officers they were unhappy with an imposed bonus scheme on car clamping, which they said was unrealistic, as well as a poor pay rise which was being imposed and changes to rotas involving late night working with no safety assessment being made. Paul Fawcett, T&G regional industrial organiser and spokesman for the sixty plus parking attendants, said it was an emotional meeting with some people in tears at the treatment they were receiving from the company.

"Instead of engaging positively and talking through issues, CPS has just acted like a playground bully," said Mr. Fawcett. "Unrealistic targets on car clamping, which will only antagonise Hackney drivers and add to the pressure on the parking attendants, are simply being imposed. Late night rotas, including working up to 11.00pm, are being brought in with no apparent assessment being made as to our people's safety."

Mr. Fawcett said CPS had also taken the surprising step of withdrawing the recognition of the T&G as the union representing the parking attendants and tried to control who attended last night's meeting by organising a staff meeting around the same time. He said these aggressive tactics showed a real lack of respect for people who do one of the hardest jobs in the public sector for low pay and little praise.

"We will be challenging the company's moves through the legal channels on trade union recognition," added Mr. Fawcett. "Far from averting industrial action, the company's attitude has brought it several steps nearer."

Pay talks began in November but hit an immediate barrier when CPS sought to impose a bonus scheme before discussing basic pay. The union said it was prepared to discuss bonus schemes but that it was logical and reasonable to look at the basic pay packages first. No progress was made and the company walked out of the talks process just before Christmas.

Last week the T&G revealed that a union shop steward was under investigation following an incident when he was defending a colleague. "We now fear for the jobs of our stewards," added Mr. Fawcett. He also highlighted attempts by the company to prevent the union organising following an instruction to the effect that any union meeting must take place outside of working hours and away from any work premises.

Surprise as Bank Holiday motorists hit with parking fines

Bucks Free Press

THE new year got off to a bad start for several drivers in High Wycombe when they received penalty fines for parking in the High Street on the festive Bank Holiday.
Motorists parking in bays close to the Woolworths store were surprised to see tickets on their windscreens, as it was a public holiday.
Drivers believed regulations would not apply and they would not get a fine.
Libbi Fairfax, of Church Road, Lane End, said: "As it was a bank holiday, I assumed parking would be free. I have parked there on many occasions on bank holidays with no problem.
"However, the parking attendant who was issuing the tickets advised me it was not considered a bank holiday by them and their instructions were to issue tickets. There were two parking attendants on duty and they were having a field day with us all."
However, Bucks County Council has confirmed that parking regulations apply on Bank Holidays unless signs in the area specifically say otherwise.

Dock users fury

DOCK users have told of their fury at new parking enforcement along a road used by thousands of vehicles travelling to the Port of Felixstowe.

Lorry drivers and businesses say they are being stung with £117 parking tickets along Parker Avenue in Felixstowe when stopping in the road for a matter of minutes.

The road is privately owned by Trinity College in Cambridge and is home to a number of haulage firms and offices.

Managing agents Bidwells, based in Martlesham, have confirmed it has employed an enforcement agency to patrol the area following complaints about the numbers of lorries and vehicles stopping along the route, which has double yellow lines.

But workers have described the move as an unfair money-making scheme and say they were given no warning over the new patrols.

Cathy Hoye, who has been delivering sandwiches and other vending machine products to offices along the route for the past 15 years, received a ticket for £117 on Thursday after leaving her car for a few minutes while she dropped off an order.
“I've been parking outside there for 15 years with my hazard lights on. This morning I came out after a few minutes and a fixed ticket was on my side screen," she said.“I'm furious. We can't even read the notices that are out there and I hadn't even noticed them. I would have thought we would have had a warning about it first.
“It's a money making scheme. Alright £30 but £117 is ridiculous. I can't afford it - my husband has just been made redundant. I've been doing this job for 25 years and I've never had a parking ticket.”

Andy Hart, property administrator for Bidwells, said there had been traffic regulations and double yellow lines along the road for several years and said it received no cash from the fines.“Obviously, there are those who think they are a law upon themselves in where they park,” he said.“We have had complaints from several tenants saying their businesses are affected by lorries parking up and delivering. We've had complaints from the council and Suffolk Constabulary about parking down there and congestion on the road.
“We have the right to enforce these obligations in accordance with their leases. We have employed traffic wardens down there with Suffolk Constabulary for 10 years now. This is nothing new.
“There are 60 signs in place on all the private roads. All the signs are legal. The enforcement agents we are now using are to back up the traffic wardens.“We are now looking at a major health and safety issue down there. I have seen several near head on collisions because lorries park up.”

But one angry business owner, who did not want to be named, said: “If they are so worried about health and safety regulations, then why weren't they down here gritting the road during the snow last week?”

The man said one of his drivers had already received a ticket for £117 for popping into the office for a matter of moments.
“They're not here as a deterrent. They're here to make money. It's £40 in town, why is it £117 with VAT which a driver can't claim back?” he added.“Everybody is up in arms about it. It will affect business tremendously as my drivers used to stop outside and pop in and they can't now because it will cost them £117.”

Mr Hart said another 40 signs warning of the enforcement were due to go up in the area.

Chiefs to probe shorter parking time slots for mobile users

TRANSPORT chiefs are set to investigate if motorists who pay to park using their mobile phones can buy shorter time slots.
The council is planning to introduce new measures in Edinburgh that will mean drivers get exactly the time they pay for in parking bays if using cash.

In what the council believes is a first for Scotland, street parking meters are set to be reprogrammed in response to complaints from the public, who do not believe they are getting value for money.
But the popular mPark system, which enables motorists to call a hotline on a mobile phone and pay via credit card, was not included in the plans.
Tory councillor Kate Mac- Kenzie will ask transport chiefs to investigate the issue at an environmental quality scrutiny panel on Wednesday.
At present, mPark payments can only be made in one-hour increments, but Councillor MacKenzie believes this should be reduced to 30 minutes.
A council executive report has already recommended changing the cash system for pay-and- display machines, which currently goes up in 15-minute increments, a system used in most other UK cities.
The council says that paying for time by the minute will give motorists better value and allow them more flexibility.
The change, which will have an initial minimum purchase time of 15 minutes, could be in place within months.
At the moment, where parking costs 40p for 15 minutes, inserting £1 into the ticket machine would only buy half an hour's parking. Under the new system drivers will get exactly 38 minutes for £1.
Transport chiefs say the change will cost just a few hundred pounds to put in place.

4000 hit by Bank Holiday parking fines

Alan Roden Transport Reporter

THOUSANDS of motorists have been hit with "sneaky" fines dished out by parking enforcers over the festive bank holidays.
Nearly 4000 drivers were given penalties over just three days - meaning city parking chiefs raked in at least £116,000.

The local authority ordered Edinburgh's notorious parking Enforcers to work on all but one of the Christmas and New Year holidays, sparking condemnation from motoring groups and business leaders.
But the tactic means the council, which is facing a huge shortfall in parking income this year, pocketed fines from hundreds more drivers than on a normal working day. Last Monday, the number of £30 penalties issued was around two-and-a-half times higher than on average.
The RAC today said the council had not done enough to warn motorists the restrictions would be enforced, and accused parking chiefs of showing "a lack of goodwill".
Head of campaigns Sue Nicholson said: "There was clearly an element of confusion in the city. The council should have publicised this better.
"I would have preferred it if they had been more tolerant, and had a more generous approach to parking at holiday time. I think a relaxation of restrictions is preferable at this time of year, because people have a drink and leave their car overnight. We don't want them driving in the morning.
"If Edinburgh really is interested in welcoming motorists, then this would have been a good time to demonstrate that."
On Monday, a bank holiday in lieu of New Year's Day, 1768 cars were slapped with tickets, with 1297 motorists also hit on December 27. On Tuesday this week, 804 people were caught illegally parked.
The figures are far higher than for the average working day, when fewer than 700 tickets are handed out. In total, 21,620 penalties were issued in December.
The city council today defended its parking strategy, and said the number of fines issued was lower than last year on two of the public holidays. However, the total number of penalty notices - 3869 - was slightly higher than in 2004-5.
Bruce Young, Lothian co-ordinator for lobby group the Association of British Drivers, said: "They just can't help themselves, can they?
"It was very sneaky of the parking chiefs to send out the Enforcers on public holidays.
"Why is it that Edinburgh's Labour administration can succeed only by deceit of the very people who elected them?"
Enforcing parking rules on bank holidays has been a controversial topic in Edinburgh ever since restrictions came into force more than 30 years ago.
While public holidays follow a "rollover" principle if they occur at the weekend, as they did this year, the dates on which parking regulations are lifted are specified in legislation. Although the city council was within its rights to issue fines, other local authorities, including Glasgow City Council, chose to lift any restrictions. Dundee and Aberdeen, however, also insisted on enforcement.
Nigel Duncan, Lothian branch vice-chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses, said the strict enforcement of parking rules in the city would not encourage motorists back from out-of-town shopping centres.
"They were wrong to send the Enforcers out - it doesn't give out the right message," he said.
"At this time of year, people want to visit the sales.
"Next time, they will go to the Gyle Shopping Centre or Ocean Terminal, because they don't want the hassle of receiving a parking fine."
Tory transport spokesman, Councillor Allan Jackson, added: "It is quite obvious that the good citizens of Edinburgh thought they had a few days off. However, the council was looking around for money, and they succeeded in finding a lot of it."
But city transport leader Andrew Burns said parking restrictions were designed to provide access to the city for as many residents as possible. "Like many Scottish cities, we enforce parking regulations during busy shopping days during the holidays; though, in fact, we enforce fewer days than some cities, such as Aberdeen and Dundee, which enforce parking regulations on Boxing Day as well," he said.
"The days around Christmas and New Year are some of the busiest in the city centre, and without parking controls, some motorists could park all day in busy areas, which would mean residents, disabled people and other shoppers wouldn't be able to access parking at all.
"Cities around the world with dense city centres and limited on-street parking like Edinburgh, use regulations to control traffic at busy times, making sure parked cars don't dangerously block traffic and cause congestion."

Drivers on the warpath

Wood and Vale News
editorial@hamhigh.co.uk
06 January 2006
by Andy Tristem
ANGRY motorists have slammed a new system of £100 fines for motorists caught breaking rules.

Westminster Council started handing out the fines to motorists spotted ignoring road signs, blocking box junctions and misusing bus lanes on Tuesday.

Drivers have condemned the move as a new tax on motorists aimed at plugging the council's plummeting parking revenues.

Vaughan Smith, who commutes from East Anglia to run the Frontline Club in Paddington each day, said: "This will make my life miserable. It's not as if we have a transport system to offer the car user an alternative. It's just bad government. They should not be handing out fines in this way."

Police gave local authorities the power to fine motorists for the driving misdemeanours in November.

Motoring campaigner Barry Segal, owner of appealnow.com, which fights unfair parking fines, said: "I am concerned that single-frame photos will be used to show motorists inside a box junction when the reality is they are driving through.
"It also worries me that councils will change the parameters for handing out the fines to meet revenue targets. They will send out the fines and wait to see which idiots pay up."

Westminster Labour leader Paul Dimoldenberg claims the council has been forced into using the fines after a U-turn in its traffic ticketing policy last year.

The council scrapped a system that rewarded the wardens who handed out most tickets. Ticketing revenue has dropped by 30 per cent in the last six months.

Councillor Dimoldenberg said: "Westminster is desperate to find any way of raising money and as in the past, motorists are seen by the council as fair game."
Having bungled the parking income calculation, which has resulted in a £12million hole in the parking finances, it looks as if Westminster City Council is trying to make up the gap with these fines.
"At the start of the year they calculated that their draconian ticketing and clamping policy would raise a huge amount of money but because of the outcry from angry motorists they were forced to do a U-turn."

Westminster parking chief Alastair Gilchrist said the borough is using 21 fixed cameras at motoring trouble spots linked to three CCTV screens.

He estimates that 40,000 tickets will be handed out in the first year but the £1.1million scheme will not break even until 2007.

A council spokesman added: "This is absolutely not a revenue raising measure. It is about changing the behaviour of motorists who behave illegally and cause dangerous situations. The scheme will take 12 months to break even and then all the money will be put back into transport."

John Falding, chairman of the St Marylebone Society, said: "It would be nice to have traffic wardens who police traffic flow rather than act as council tax collectors."

Over £1m paid in parking fines

Daily Post
Jan 04, 2006

DRIVERS and businesses have warned Liverpool council not to treat motorists as "cash cows" after it emerged more than £1m was paid in parking fines in the city in 2005.
Information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act shows how much income is obtained from each of the council's 80 car parks and parking bays in the city centre.
The 12-storey Mount Pleasant car park raised more than £1.1m alone in the 12 months to October 2005.
The Victoria Street car park generated more than £404,000. Other big earners included William Brown Street with £88,359 and Rodney Street with £68,000.
But Ed Oliver, of Liverpool's stores committee, said: "Our concern is that there are not enough parking spaces and as the city grows it cannot meet demand.
"There should be serious investment in public transport and park and ride schemes.
"What is the council and Merseytravel going to do now the tram has bitten the dust?"
Steve Doran, who owns a graphic design firm with offices in Rodney Street, said: "My business attracts a lot of people to this part of the city centre, and if they have a good experience, it's likely they will return.
"The problem is that too often they do not. The road works have been horrendous and the traffic wardens are always ready to pounce."
Council parking services manager Roy Tunstall said: "Every penny of that income is ring-fenced meaning it can only be spent on schemes to make parking easier."