Huge profit from council parking fines

Barnet and Potters Bar Times

Barnet Council made more than £4 million profit from parking fines and fees last year, figures have revealed.
Out of the £9.5 million income in 2004-05, £5m was from penalty charge notices issued by parking attendants and £615,000 was received from drivers illegally using bus lanes.
The council also received £875,000 from parking permits and more than £2 million from pay-and-display machines.

More than £8m was invested into travel schemes including free bus passes for the elderly and disabled, while £5.8m was filtered into highways improvements.
Cabinet member for environment and transport, Councillor Matthew Offord, said: "The law states that these services are some of those on which parking surplus must be spent, and clearly we invested more than was made.
"Investment on this scale, without using parking revenue, would only be possible if it was taken solely from the council tax.
"Parking is not a money-making exercise for the council, in fact we are forbidden to do this by law. This year we have actually reduced our projected parking income by £1.2m which is a result of our customer-focussed parking review.
"We are well aware that the improvements we have made to create a fairer system for the motorist will result in less income, particularly giving pay-and-display users a five-minute grace period."
Councillor Alison Moore, leader of Barnet Labour Group, said: "They Barnet Council have made a lot of money though not as much as they would have liked to have made. I've had numerous case work from residents where traffic wardens have abused their powers and residents have had to fight for justice.
"The Conservative administration have pinned their whole budget over the last two years on the amount of money they get through parking fines and residents have come to feel that it's more about generating income for the council than actually dealing with genuine traffic or parking problems"
One such resident, Abel Westerhof, 41, from Garratt Road, Edgware, said: "It's okay to issue fines to those who are illegally parked, but so many tickets are issued unfairly and that's what I have a problem with.
"In my road, we pay a lot of money for permits every year, but have still been duped for ridiculous reasons on numerous occasions."
In April, a new set of measures was introduced by the council's parking service, including freezing residents' parking permit charges until April 2008; a review of all existing controlled parking zones; and a five-minute grace period for pay-and-display users after the expiry of a ticket.
Households buying a parking permit will also be given five free visitor vouchers and parking attendants will now wait and make observations for at least five minutes to check if a delivery vehicle parked on a double or single yellow line is loading or unloading.
u Figures released yesterday by the Association of London Government show Barnet Council issued a total of 202,098 penalty charge notices between March 2005 and April this year, compared to 172,344 tickets in the previous 12 months.
Included in this year's figure were 33,417 tickets issued to people for driving in bus lanes, the fifth highest total in London.
6:15pm Thursday 31st August 2006

Almost half of all parking fines overturned

Hornsey and Crouch End Journal 24
30 August 06

PARKING wardens and traffic cameras are dishing out more and more undeserved or incorrect fines on hundreds of motorists in Haringey.
Figures for the first three months of 2006 reveal that nearly half of all parking fines in Haringey contested by drivers were overturned, and nearly a quarter of those cases were not even contested by the council's lawyers.
Results from independent parking adjudicators, the Parking And Traffic Appeals Service (PATAS), reveal a 38 per cent jump in drivers contesting parking fines - up from 224 (October to December) to 310 (January to March) - but crucially, the success rate of appeals also rose from 45 per cent to 49 per cent.
Simon Aldridge, director of London Motorists' Action Group and a resident of Christchurch Road, Crouch End, said: "They don't actually look at their evidence, I don't think, until somebody goes to the adjudicator and they have to produce that evidence. They are wasting everyone's time."
During the first quarter of 2006, PATAS resolved 226 disputes, with 116 in favour of the council and 110 in favour of the driver.
The council did not contest 28 of those disputes.
Bus lane disputes saw 38 per cent of appeals won by drivers between January and March, but this was out of just 32 appeals decided.
Haringey has progressively issued more and more Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) since 2000-01, when it issued 142,484 tickets, excluding bus lane fines.
In 2004-05, it issued 200,630 PCNs, including bus lane fines.
Mr Aldridge added: "The council won't see more than 65 per cent of tickets paid. They will cancel 15 to 20 per cent of PCNs themselves, after informal challenges, and another 15 per cent will be written off because the car is unregistered and that sort of thing."
PATAS dealt with 995 disputes between April 1, 2005, and March 31, 2006, in Haringey.
More than half of those appeals - 530 - were allowed, and 143 cases were not contested by council lawyers. PATAS refused 465 appeals and a further three were withdrawn.
Transport for London also manages numerous roads in the borough including Seven Sisters Road and the A10 route.
It lost 59 per cent of appeals in the capital over the same period - 1,020 out of 1,729 cases.
A Haringey Council spokeswoman said: "The council has sought legal advice and is confident that all PCNs issued comply with the legislation, and will be enforced.

Parking fiasco could cost thousands

Norwich Evening News
28th August 06

Motorists in Norwich who have received parking fines are being urged to check their tickets after it emerged they may have been handed out “illegally” by traffic wardens.
Thousands of tickets handed out across the city could be invalid because they do not include the correct information required by law.
A High Court case earlier this month ruled that parking tickets should state clearly both the date the ticket was issued and the date the offence took place, even if they were on the same day.
Norwich City Council is one of several authorities across the county which has had to change the wording on its tickets over fears it did not contain the correct information.
The council claims people who have already paid their fines stand little chance of recouping their money as they have admitted guilt.
However, these claims have been shot down by appealnow.com, the national group behind the original case, which says motorists could use the courts to get their money back.
It is however believed that the council will be powerless to stop drivers who have not yet paid their fines and have the “illegal” tickets, from simply ignoring them.
Barrie Segal, founder of appealnow.com, told the Evening News today: “It is well worth people checking their tickets because unless they have these two dates they are unenforceable.
“I also believe that if people have already paid they can claim it back, but we are waiting to see if that will happen.
“I have seen literally thousands of tickets all over the country that are invalid. This could cost council's hundreds of thousands.”
The case has also given hope to motorists in Norwich embroiled in rows with the authority over their tickets.
Army veteran John Adamson, 70, from Wymondham, was recently told by the authority that a fine, given to him when he visited his son's Norwich flat, would stand even though he had a visitor's permit that had been blown off the windscreen by the wind.
He said: “I am going to be checking this out. It would serve them right to be honest, they wouldn't give me any leeway so why should I them?”
John Sampson, 43, from Clover Hill Road, Bowthorpe, who is appealing a ticket given to him on a Sunday for parking in St Benedict's, where the nearest sign said this was okay, said: “The ticket they gave me was completely unfair and I will certainly be checking this out.”
Traffic wardens issued 35,549 penalty charge notices (PCN's) in the city between April 1, 2005 and March this year and recouped £320,000 in profits for tickets in 2004/05, which it says was pumped back for road improvements.
A council spokeswoman said: “Norwich City Council's penalty charge notice, in common with many other councils in the country, did not show a date of issue and a date of offence, although in our case these would be the same.
“Whilst we wait for clarification of what the judgement means, we have temporarily changed our system to show both dates.
“This does not mean that people who failed to comply with parking regulations are entitled to a refund.
“They have accepted they were at fault and have paid their penalty.”
Have you successfully challenged a parking fine issued in Norwich?
Contact David Powles on 01603 772447 or via email on david.powles@archant.co.uk

Parking fiasco could cost thousands

Norwich Evening News

Motorists in Norwich who have received parking fines are being urged to check their tickets after it emerged they may have been handed out “illegally” by traffic wardens.
Thousands of tickets handed out across the city could be invalid because they do not include the correct information required by law.
A High Court case earlier this month ruled that parking tickets should state clearly both the date the ticket was issued and the date the offence took place, even if they were on the same day.
Norwich City Council is one of several authorities across the county which has had to change the wording on its tickets over fears it did not contain the correct information.
The council claims people who have already paid their fines stand little chance of recouping their money as they have admitted guilt.
However, these claims have been shot down by appealnow.com, the national group behind the original case, which says motorists could use the courts to get their money back.
It is however believed that the council will be powerless to stop drivers who have not yet paid their fines and have the “illegal” tickets, from simply ignoring them.
Barrie Segal, founder of appealnow.com, told the Evening News today: “It is well worth people checking their tickets because unless they have these two dates they are unenforceable.
“I also believe that if people have already paid they can claim it back, but we are waiting to see if that will happen.
“I have seen literally thousands of tickets all over the country that are invalid. This could cost council's hundreds of thousands.”
The case has also given hope to motorists in Norwich embroiled in rows with the authority over their tickets.
Army veteran John Adamson, 70, from Wymondham, was recently told by the authority that a fine, given to him when he visited his son's Norwich flat, would stand even though he had a visitor's permit that had been blown off the windscreen by the wind.
He said: “I am going to be checking this out. It would serve them right to be honest, they wouldn't give me any leeway so why should I them?”
John Sampson, 43, from Clover Hill Road, Bowthorpe, who is appealing a ticket given to him on a Sunday for parking in St Benedict's, where the nearest sign said this was okay, said: “The ticket they gave me was completely unfair and I will certainly be checking this out.”
Traffic wardens issued 35,549 penalty charge notices (PCN's) in the city between April 1, 2005 and March this year and recouped £320,000 in profits for tickets in 2004/05, which it says was pumped back for road improvements.
A council spokeswoman said: “Norwich City Council's penalty charge notice, in common with many other councils in the country, did not show a date of issue and a date of offence, although in our case these would be the same.
“Whilst we wait for clarification of what the judgement means, we have temporarily changed our system to show both dates.
“This does not mean that people who failed to comply with parking regulations are entitled to a refund.“They have accepted they were at fault and have paid their penalty.”
Have you successfully challenged a parking fine issued in Norwich?
Contact David Powles on 01603 772447 or via email on david.powles@archant.co.uk.

Disabled drivers ' will not pay parking charges'

This is Lancashire
By Ed Chadwick

DISABLED drivers are unlikely to face parking charges after councillors said they would not back plans to hit blue badge holders with fees.
Leaders of Bolton Council's ruling Labour group say they are opposed to proposals mooted in a report by council officers who want to end abuse of the blue badge scheme.
It had been suggested that introducing charges would remove the incentive for a growing number of people who fraudulently use disabled badges to park for free.
The plans were revealed in the Bolton Evening News last week, and attacked by opposition members on the council and disabled drivers.
Following a discussion with officers who recommended the plan, Cllr John Byrne, the council's executive member for the environment, said he and colleagues were opposed to the proposals in principle.
"On a personal level, it's not something I will be offering my support to and I'm confident that I have the full backing of other members in my party," he said.
"The council is carrying out a full review of its parking strategy this year. This was one of a number of proposals put forward but I don't feel it's the right thing to do.
"I still haven't seen the report, but don't support the principle of introducing new charges."
Both Tory and Liberal Democrat councillors attacked the plans when they were unveiled.
Cllr Stuart Lever said the Conservatives were opposed to any increases in parking fees because they risked driving shoppers away from Bolton.
Lib Dem Cllr Roger Hayes said charging blue badge holders was not the correct way to tackle parking cheats.

Parking ticket error row

EDP24
SHAUN LOWTHORPE
26 August 2006 08:30
Thousands of motorists have been slapped with “illegal” parking fines in Norwich, it emerged last night after the city council admitted its tickets did not conform to the rules.
Norwich City Council yesterday conceded it had been forced to change its system for handing out parking tickets after failing to show the dates of issue and offence on them.
City Hall insisted that drivers who have paid up stood little chance of getting their money back as the error was a technicality and they had already acknowledged their guilt.
But it faces a possible legal challenge and a referral to the district auditor from campaigners who insist the authority should pay up.
The council took action after receiving guidance from the National Parking Adjudication Service on August 14 after a high court hearing indicated that failure to state clearly the date a ticket was issued and the date of the offence meant the ticket was void.
Last night one legal expert predicted the move could pave the way for a legal challenge against the council.
But the situation remains in limbo until the written judgment is produced next month.
Traffic wardens issued 35,549 penalty charge notices (PCNs) in the city between April 1 2005 to March 2006.
The council made a £320,000 profit in 2004/05 which was ploughed back to Norfolk County Council and used to fund road works and improvements in the Norwich area.
A city council spokesman last night admitted that the authority had changed its system. But council lawyers still believes that the issue is a technicality and are waiting on the written ruling to clarify the situation.
“On 14 August we were informed by the National Parking Adjudication Service of the potential consequences of the judicial review against the London Borough of Barnet,” she said. “The final judgement has not yet been published.“Norwich City Council's penalty charge notice, in common with many other councils in the country, did not show a date of issue and a date of offence. Although in our case these would be the same.
“While we wait for clarification of what the judgment means we have temporarily changed our system to show both dates. This does not mean that people who failed to comply with parking regulations are entitled to a refund. They have accepted that they were at fault and have paid their penalty.”
Neil Herron, a campaigner from the People's No Campaign an offshoot of the Metric Martyrs, which is pursuing the parking issue, with City Hall, said the council must drop any action it is currently taking against people issued with the flawed tickets.“What they have got to do is create a 'year zero' from when they can enforce the correctly worded tickets,” he said. “They can't legally pursue anybody who has been issued with an unlawful ticket. And that also includes anybody who has yet to pay or who is going through the appeals procedure.”
Mr Herron has submitted a detailed freedom of information request to City Hall asking if the authority will suspend enforcement and detail how many people have been issued with the wrong tickets and how much money was raised. He said a similar tough line in Sunderland saw the council hand back £60,000.“You can't have a local authority saying it has put its house in order and everything is fine, because it isn't. If they don't suspend enforcement and continue to take the money we will put in a complaint to the district auditor,” he added.
Simon Nicholls, solicitor at Belmores, said: “Potentially this could mean that the parking tickets issued could be challenged. It just depends if someone wants to go to court over a £30 fine.”
After the ruling councils in London were given guidance from the Association of London Government on August 9 telling to them to make sure their tickets complies to the correct format “as a matter of urgency”.
But it said that councils “do not need to refund any payments already made. The adjudicators have already considered, and rejected a bid to re-open any previously closed cases on the issue.”
A spokeswoman at Barnet Council which took the case to the case to the High Court, said much of the problem lays with the lack of clarity in the Road Traffic Act giving councils the power to issue parking fines“If people have paid the penalty charge they have accepted that they were in the wrong,” she said.

Parking fines ‘are not legal’

This is Lancashire
By Paul Keaveny

A ONE-MAN crusader against parking injustice is going to war with Bolton Councilclaiming ALL the town's parking tickets are illegal.
Neil Herron, founder of The People's No Campaign, says a High Court ruling this year has rendered the town's parking tickets null and void due to incorrect wording.
He is now demanding that Bolton Councilconfesses to knowlingly distributing misleading and incorrect parking tickets and to suspend all fines until it issues new ones.
He said: "In their rush to get to the cash cow, councils like Bolton have cut corners and not had things properly checked legally. They have played this aggressive game for some time but now the boot is on the other foot."
Mr Herron, a former fishmonger from Sunderland, crusades against what he calls "unacceptable or unaccountable governance." He began investigating Sunderland City Council's errors in 2004 and this has led him on to a nationwide search for justice.
He claims that a High Court Judicial Review, concluded this month, heard by Mr Justice Jackson ruled that tickets without separate sections for date of issue and date of contravention - as is the case in Bolton - are not legitimate.
He also believes that Bolton Council's issuing of the incorrect tickets could lead to formal complaints of misconduct in public office being made to the police with possible complaints of maladministration to the Local Government Ombudsman.
He said: "The Judge mentioned in his judgment that the requirement of the two dates had been mentioned by adjudicators on more than one occasion.
"He emphasised that the statutory requirement of the form of the PCN were simple and clear - compliance was not difficult and a specimen had been available for more than 10 years.
Enforcing authorities therefore had no excuse for non-compliance," said Mr Herron.
He has now sent a Freedom of Information request demanding the council answer, among other questions, the following:
Will Bolton Councilsuspend enforcement of its parking ticket regime forthwith?
Will the council not pursue ANY outstanding incorrectly worded parking tickets and withdraw any bailiff's actions?
What does the council intend to do with regard to non-compliant parking tickets issued which have been paid?
A spokesman for Bolton Councilsaid: "We are looking into the allegations and seeking legal advice."

Motorists ‘misled’ over parking fines

This is Lancashire
By Paul Keaveny

Bolton Council has been criticised by the Local Government Ombudsman over the wording on its parking tickets.
Government watchdogs found wording on information relating to the appeals procedure was misleading.
It means some people who might have otherwise lodged an appeal against a ticket were discouraged from doing so.
Now the council has issued new guidance in line with Government recommendations - but it could lead to some motorists launching retrospective appeals.
The controversy was revealed by Tory councillor John Higson who represents Westhoughton North and Chew Moor.
He said: "There are occasions when a motorist accepts that a contravention has occurred where no statutory ground of appeal applies, but they consider the imposition of a penalty inappropriate and wish to make a plea of mitigation as to why the charge should not be pursued."
Information which is issued with parking tickets sets out what rights motorists have to appeal.
But a report criticises local authorities, including Bolton, that appear to "positively to discourage representations" by including a list of "excuses" which will not be accepted.
The report gives the examples of what is contained on some councils Notice To Owner of excuses which will not be accepted.
They include: I could not find anywhere to park; I went to get change for the meter; I only stopped for a minute or two and I thought I was legally parked but I made a mistake.
Labour councillor John Byrne, executive member for environmental services, said: "We are re-printing the tickets to be in line with the Ombudsman's advice. I don't know if people have been misled."
Former Liberal Democrat executive member for environmental services, Cllr Roger Hayes, said: "I am sure the council never meant to mislead anyone and if it has happened than I am sure it was inadvertent."
A council spokesman said: "Slight amendments have been made to take into consideration the comments made by the Ombudsman's report but, like other councils, we will continue to follow the guidelines set down by the Secretary of State for Transport.
"The amendments will not result in any additional cost to the authority as they will be contained in a new batch of leaflets, featuring the new Bolton brand, and will be ordered shortly, as supplies of the existing forms are running out."
A spokesman for NCP said that the Department of Transport on laid down guidelines but added that it was recommended not to issues exclusions when issuing advice on mitigation.
He added that consultation was now being carried out which will result in new rules in 2007.
Parking bosses took £1.1 million in fines last year after handing out 44,000 tickets in Bolton.
Of those, 27,000 were for on-street offences and 16,300 went to drivers parked in council-run car parks.

Motorists ‘misled’ over parking fines

This is Lancashire
By Paul Keaveny

Bolton Council has been criticised by the Local Government Ombudsman over the wording on its parking tickets.
Government watchdogs found wording on information relating to the appeals procedure was misleading.
It means some people who might have otherwise lodged an appeal against a ticket were discouraged from doing so.
Now the council has issued new guidance in line with Government recommendations - but it could lead to some motorists launching retrospective appeals.
The controversy was revealed by Tory councillor John Higson who represents Westhoughton North and Chew Moor.
He said: "There are occasions when a motorist accepts that a contravention has occurred where no statutory ground of appeal applies, but they consider the imposition of a penalty inappropriate and wish to make a plea of mitigation as to why the charge should not be pursued."
Information which is issued with parking tickets sets out what rights motorists have to appeal.
But a report criticises local authorities, including Bolton, that appear to "positively to discourage representations" by including a list of "excuses" which will not be accepted.
The report gives the examples of what is contained on some councils Notice To Owner of excuses which will not be accepted.
They include: I could not find anywhere to park; I went to get change for the meter; I only stopped for a minute or two and I thought I was legally parked but I made a mistake.
Labour councillor John Byrne, executive member for environmental services, said: "We are re-printing the tickets to be in line with the Ombudsman's advice. I don't know if people have been misled."
Former Liberal Democrat executive member for environmental services, Cllr Roger Hayes, said: "I am sure the council never meant to mislead anyone and if it has happened than I am sure it was inadvertent."
A council spokesman said: "Slight amendments have been made to take into consideration the comments made by the Ombudsman's report but, like other councils, we will continue to follow the guidelines set down by the Secretary of State for Transport.
"The amendments will not result in any additional cost to the authority as they will be contained in a new batch of leaflets, featuring the new Bolton brand, and will be ordered shortly, as supplies of the existing forms are running out."
A spokesman for NCP said that the Department of Transport on laid down guidelines but added that it was recommended not to issues exclusions when issuing advice on mitigation.
He added that consultation was now being carried out which will result in new rules in 2007.
Parking bosses took £1.1 million in fines last year after handing out 44,000 tickets in Bolton.
Of those, 27,000 were for on-street offences and 16,300 went to drivers parked in council-run car parks.

NCP SCHEME 'UP THE SPOUT' WITHOUT RESIDENTS' PERMITS

Herald Express
21st August 2006

The link-up between Torbay Council and National Car Parks has been a public relations disaster for the Bay.

Our new army of parking wardens have been making local and national headlines for all the wrong reasons. It doesn't help the cause with revelations that the consultants employed to take the Bay down the path of decriminalised parking in the first place are owned by eventual contract winners NCP.

Now Torbay mayor Nick Bye has put the cat among the pigeons with question marks over the entire contract which still has almost four years to run.

He is not a happy chappy as the Town Hall is forced to find more than £300,000 from its reserves to keep parking services running this year.

Evidently, it was always anticipated that such a move would be necessary as the contract got up and running.

But, to use Mayor Nick's words, he fears we "have been sold a pup".

He believes the success of the deal with NCP was reliant on the eventual introduction of resident parking permits or charges for on-street parking.

But Mr Bye is having none of that. Again, to use his words, it would be "good night Vienna".

It now appears parking permits and on-street parking charges were never part of the actual and original deal with NCP in the first place.

That has come as a shock to Cllr Ian Doggett, chairman of the local transportation working party, who reckons that without parking permits the scheme is also "up the spout".

A Torbay Council official revealed: "In respect of parking zones and on-street parking charges, these were referred to within the NCP contract as future possible options which may be required of NCP but did not form part of the schedule and costs of the initial contract requirements.
"In the event that these are introduced in the future, further discussion between the council and the contractor would take place to agree the financial implications.
"However, existing schedules showing the rates for patrols would be referred to in these negotiations if they were to be progressed."

Cllr Doggett was a little "confused".

He said: "The mayor is entitled to his views.
"But residents on the edge of town in Paignton were phoning me saying they could not get out of their places in the morning and were clamouring for residents' parking.
"Residents' parking was also part of our election platform."

Referring to the NCP contract, he said: "We knew that in the first year or two you would have to pay for start-up costs, but in year two or three you would break even and in year four you would start to make a profit.
"This is where the money from residents' parking would have come in.
"Parking wardens would have to be placed first.
"I understood it was residents' parking that was being involved and not on-street parking charges."

He added: "If we do not introduce permits for residents' parking we aren't going to go anywhere.
"It does concern me why we are not making money and other places are.
"The scheme as it is up the spout and is not going to make money.
"It's going to make a loss and, if residents' parking was not included, I don't think a good deal was struck."

He admitted: "I am confused and I am going to investigate this."

To further cloud the issue, Cllr Colin Charlwood, in charge of environment matters at the time the deal was struck with NCP, also believed that parking permits and on-street charges were part of the plan.

Cllr Charlwood said: "That was part of the plan."

He is not happy that Mayor Bye appears to be ruling out such moves.

Cllr Charlwood said: "It is his choice if he wants to do this. Nothing can stop him.
"That has been the issue about having an elected mayor. He is disregarding a previous council's decision.
"It comes back to one person over-riding the decision-making of 36 councillors. Is this what Torbay elected him for?
"Now he is talking about disbanding the contract. If he is going to end the scheme what is he going to do? Is he going to put it back in the hands of the police?
"There is a contract to be taken into consideration for a start.
""If he is going to end this, why waste councillors' time and money on reviewing the behaviour of wardens if the mayor has decided that he is not going to allow this?"

Cllr Charlwood said it was always anticipated that the NCP deal would eventually pay its own way but "not make a fortune".

He said without parking permits and on-street charges "the contract will fail".

He added: "If it is costing us money we are going to have to reconsider the contract.
"We must have covered our backs from that point of view."

Liberal Democrat leader Gordon Jennings was also critical of the mayor.

He said: "The mayor's views on car parking in Torbay seem to flip-flop from one day to the next.
"First he goes on television to say that Torbay is a 'parking paradise'.
"Now he suggests that the NCP contract is flawed. Well, which is it?"

Cllr Jennings added: "Nick Bye also appears to be making decisions before the Overview and Scrutiny Board has completed its review.
"What is the point of councillors doing detailed work and research into issues if he is not going to bother waiting for their suggestions before making decisions?
"The mayor and his Conservative administration are making decisions on the hoof. Quite clearly they have no detailed vision for the Bay."

Robert Excell, chairman of Torquay Chamber of Trade, was quick to back the mayor.

He said: "I will take my hat off to Nick for saying we were sold a pup.
"Let's hope the council's legal department can do something about this.
"There should be a full investigation into this and the people who agreed to the contract should be publicly accountable.
"I think the contract does not make business sense and should never have been signed.
"There was not enough common sense put into the equation."

Norman Drew, chairman of Torbay's Federation of Small Businesses, was also a Bye backer.

He said: "Fiasco is the right word for this.
"I think Nick Bye is to be congratulated on what he has said. It shows he has courage and moral fibre. He is going to make a lot of enemies but the truth will out.
"So where do we do we go from here?

IF the overall financial success of the NCP deal is reliant on parking permits and on-street charges and IF the original deal with NCP doesn't officially include such a move and IF Mayor Bye poo poos the idea any way we could be in trouble.

There is a way of getting out of the contract.

The Torbay Council official revealed: "In the event that the contractor's performance fails to meet the requirements of the contract, default notices can be issued and the employer can terminate the contract.
"At the present time, it has not been necessary to issue formal default notices as NCP is generally performing in accordance with the conditions of the contract.
"There doesn't appear to be any mention of money anywhere...

Drivers' anger at parking spy cars

Hornsey and Crouch End Journal




THIS is one of the spy cars which are stepping up the war between parking attendants and motorists across the borough.
The Smart cars are fitted with reinforced windows and have the back screen blacked out to mask the CCTV camera designed to catch drivers out.
Two parking wardens travel around together looking to snap motorists, whether they are in a yellow box junction, badly parked, or even with a wheel on the pavement.
People are being clocked in a matter of seconds.
The tactic sees hundreds of parking fines generated - without the motorist even knowing they have been caught until a letter and fine drops through their letter box.
The cars, of which there are four, have been described as an underhand cash collecting tactic by those who have been caught out. They are marked as being council CCTV vehicles, but the stealthy way motorists are being fined has been criticised.
Andy Spanou, proprietor of Electrical Market, Crouch End Broadway, said: "Usually they come every night about 5.30pm, six o'clock and sit on the other side of the road. I got a ticket. The people next door got two or three.
"They're a bloody headache and they don't give us any chance, none at all.
"I've been here for 20 years. At the end of the day, I park outside for about two minutes just to lock up and now you get a bloody ticket.
"They should put signs and warn people so we know. Then if we do make the mistake we pay."
Another trader, who did not want to be named, said: "My dad's come to collect me and he has been zapped a couple of times even though he is literally there for a minute.
"A lot of members of the gym [Holmes Place] get very angry. It is a bit out of order. They should give you a warning to move your car not as soon as you park get your car towed."
Frederick Pettitt, 75, of Spencer Road, Tottenham, received a £40 parking fine after he was snapped mounting the pavement to make it easier for his disabled wife to get out the car and into her wheelchair.
The wheelchair is clearly visible in the CCTV image.
Mr Pettit said: "I reverse onto the pavement, get my wife's chair out of the boot and wheel it round to the passenger door so she can manoeuvre out of the car seat more easily.
"I am on the pavement only for a few minutes then the car is parked back in the normal place.
"I just don't think this is right. I wrote to Haringey to complain, but received no reply within 14 days. We couldn't risk it going up to £80, so we paid the fine."
Haringey was one of the first London boroughs to introduce the black and cream spy cars last October.
Last financial year the council collected £6,224,137 in parking fines having issued 162,023 tickets.
Councillor Brian Haley, executive member for environment, said: "It's not clear why Mr Pettitt needed to park on the footway but we are sympathetic where there are particular circumstances and would be happy to discuss this if he gets in contact.
"Parking on the footway is a ticketable offence and this is a priority for the council both because it damages the pavement, which the council must then repair, and because it causes problems for pedestrians and wheelchair users and mothers with young children in pushchairs particularly. "
The Smart cars are very visible and have been widely advertised in terms of their use, which is mostly enforcement of banned turns, no entry roads and so on as well as parking. "It is the responsibility of motorists to check they are parking legally, and they do run the risk of getting ticketed if they park illegally.

Mother in parking row

This is Hertfordshire
by Staff Reporter

A WOMAN is appealing after receiving a penalty fine last week in a free, nearly empty car park for parking over the white line in order to allow her children in and out of their car seats.
Anne Nawas, 41, of Gorhambury estate, St Albans, parked in the Batchwood car park, run by National Car Parks, on Tuesday, July 4, while picking up her son from tennis lessons but parked one foot over the white line because of the narrow spaces.
With a car already parked to one side Mrs Nawas had to position her vehicle over the line to allow the doors to fully open so she could help her young children out.

On her return one hour later, she was angered to find a parking ticket attached to her Saab with a fine of £60, but the car park attendant refused to enter a discussion with her about the issue.
She said: "I think it is very unfair being given a ticket because of not parking neatly in a free car park nearly three-quarters empty. This is the kind of action that gives parking policy a bad name and parking attendants a bad reputation."
Mrs Nawas wants to make the council aware of how parking policy is being unfairly carried out by the private company.
She believes the NCP has lowered itself in the level of its practice, questioning its actions as a ploy to make money.
A spokesperson for the NCP said: "We must stay fair and consistent in our duty. She was a foot over the line. It is as simple as that."
St Albans District Council has told Mrs Nawas it is looking into the issue and thanked her for bringing it to its attention.
12:06pm Tuesday 18th July 2006