'Periscope' parking fines quashed
BBC Report
Rachel Johnson argued that there were no warning signs to tell drivers they were being filmed
Motorists issued with parking fines after being caught out by so-called "spy cars" may now have grounds to appeal after a legal ruling.
Rachel Johnson, 32, challenged three £60 fines issued by Wirral Council using evidence gathered by Smart Cars fitted with periscope cameras.
A tribunal upheld her claim that the Penalty Charge Notices were invalid because there were no warning signs.
About 30 councils across England and Wales are believed to use the cameras.
'Privacy invaded'
Ms Johnson appealed to the local authority after receiving three tickets in the space of a week.
On each occasion, she had parked briefly on double yellow lines outside the off-licence she runs in New Brighton.
"I felt like my privacy had been invaded," she told the BBC.
"We were just going about our business, trying to run a business, and I knew we were allowed to park here."
The fines were overturned by the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, which rules on appeals against parking penalties issued by councils in England and Wales.
For just general enforcement local authorities shouldn't be using CCTV
Neil Herron, parking fine campaigner
It ruled the charges were invalid because there were no signs in the area saying motorists could be photographed.
The tribunal also said the area was unsuitable for the use of cameras.
A Wirral Borough Council spokesperson said they were reviewing the recommendations issued by the tribunal.
"Anyone who has received a parking ticket and feels that they have a valid reason to appeal is able to do so through the appeals process detailed.
"Each case is reviewed on its own merits."
The Local Government Association (LGA) said councils which used the periscope cameras for parking fines would also be studying the implications of the tribunal ruling.
Parking fine campaigner Neil Herron said the use of the periscope cameras was no substitute for experienced parking attendants.
"CCTV enforcement should only be where parking attendants can't go - where it's too dangerous or too restrictive.
"For just general enforcement local authorities shouldn't be using CCTV.
"A CCTV camera doesn't record whether loading or unloading is taking place, whether a blue badge has been displayed, whether there was any exemptions in the traffic order."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(115)
-
▼
August
(23)
- The battle lines are being drawn ...
- Class actions. Why are we waiting?
- Days are numbered for lawless, uncontrolled local ...
- What next ... viewers of 'Murder she wrote' and Ta...
- Another step closer to the Royal Pardon...
- Where will the money come from to refund motorists?
- Credit Cards - Motorists could recoup driving fine...
- Credit-card surcharges for parking tickets to be r...
- One rule for them ...
- Patients fine ... Doctor fined
- Loophole in parking fines: Thousands of pounds cou...
- Motorcyclists are still revolting
- More refunds for Britain's motorists ... have you ...
- Baywatch at Rochdale's Car Parks ... more refunds
- Another victory as Camden caves in ... but beware ...
- Flawed CPZ Consultation ...
- Camden still trying to fleece motorists ...
- £11,000 worth of Camden parking tickets are illegal
- Victory for Belfast Traffic Wardens
- Rachel Johnson ... a victory for common sense agai...
- CCTV Fine refunds the next step
- CCTV Refunds for motorists
- Big Bother for Big Brother ...
-
▼
August
(23)
2 comments:
you lost at high court then? shame!! lol
Post a Comment