Why bother paying parking fines?

TP 3000 said :

Another experience was out at Kippax shops. Now there were 2 utes & a car parked in the loading zone, no vechile had any special sticker on the dash, but the parking cop comes up books the car has a glance at the other loading zones, does a few laps of Kippax carpark & drives off.

Having just purchased my first ute, Ive learnt that utes are classified as ‘Goods Carrying Vehicles’, where cars are classified as ‘Passenger Carrying Vehicles’. One difference between the two categories is that Good Carrying Vehicles pay a significantly higher registration fee. A ‘Passenger Carrying Vehicle’ doesnt really have any business in a loading zone anyway, whereas a ute may or may not be loading, but at least has registration as a Goods Carrying Vehicle.

Pommy bastard said :

Just outside my office window are four parking spots,.. clearly labelled “Community Nurses No parking”.
..snip..
Yesterday we had the delight of a “four in a row” (four cars in these dedicated spots, all with yellow envelopes on the windscreens.) Watching the reactions of drivers when they return to find the fines, from utter despair, through resigned amusement, up to incandescent rage, is a treat.

This reminds me of when I was sitting in Emergency at the Canberra hospital, as two parking inspectors ticketed a vehicle moments before the owner came out the main entrance helping an elderly lady with a walking frame. I witnessed the ‘incandescent rage’ as you describe it. As the rent-a-cops entered the building, I told them off in no uncertain terms and neither of them could understand why I felt the way I did, even after pointing out the elderly lady being helped into the car they just ticketed.

Just outside my office window are four parking spots, clearly labelled “Community Nurses No parking”. A great number of people take this to read; “Community Nurse, No parking, except on weekends, after 5.00pm on weekdays, or any bloody time you think you may get away with it.”

Yesterday we had the delight of a “four in a row” (four cars in these dedicated spots, all with yellow envelopes on the windscreens.) Watching the reactions of drivers when they return to find the fines, from utter despair, through resigned amusement, up to incandescent rage, is a treat.

The parking spots are wanted, needed and used at all times, (when you don’t park in them,) by mental health nurses, you deserve all you get.

I don’t know why we bother with parking cops.

Yesterday out at Gungahlin there was this car parked at the back of the Gungahlin Marktplace bus stop (no parking zone). Now the car had a disabled sticker on the dash. But the half stoned driver (she stumbled to her car & sadly no cops around at the time) was 2 metres away having a coffee. I couldn’t see any reason why she needed to park there & if only I knew she was the driver at the time. I could of made up some bs story & took some photos.

Another experience was out at Kippax shops. Now there were 2 utes & a car parked in the loading zone, no vechile had any special sticker on the dash, but the parking cop comes up books the car has a glance at the other loading zones, does a few laps of Kippax carpark & drives off.

I am not having a go at ALL parking people, in fact I get into nice chats with the inspectors & coincidentally I’ve never been booked. But they should try to be fair (& book everyone but me).

“I am always trying to teach and educate people with the true laws in Australia”

That’s a real shame, as you have no idea what you are talking about. A council ‘tax’??

Australian Subject : Mmmm Hmmm . . . . . alfoil hat for you eh !!

How bout don’t be inconsiderate, park you car legally and voila ….. no parking fines. Pretty simple concept.

If you choose not to accept these “laws” don’t own a vehicle.

All fines are illegal under the letter of Australian Law. There is no debate.

At the end of this article is a link to a parking fine letter which you could try sending to the council in regards to all parking fine in Australia. It basically asks the council afew simple questions to verify that they have permission to collect a tax from you for using public roads.

Simply put, they do not have any authority to hand out parking tickets, and more than anything rely on your voluntary compliance, ignorance and consent to hand over your hard earned cash to these corrupt business. Now days prosecuting officers are trained to reply to such letters with false arguments because they have absolutely no clue of the real laws or hoping you don’t. They are masters at intimidating the public with lies.

Also note that time measuring devices (meters) are exempt from the provisions of the National Measurement Act 1960 (Cth), so we cannot use this argument in our letters. This has been confirmed by Dr Richard Brittain from the National Measurement Institute.

It can be quite frightening to be challenging such large corporations, but we must remember that only a chapter 3 Commonwealth court (see your Australian Constitution) has full jurisdiction to act judicially, so we must put our trust in the system that was designed to protect our rights. The most important aspect is expression of compassion towards these people. We must learn not to hate or argue with them, for this is what they want from us. Our notices should be an educational instrument asking honest questions and proof of claim, without any prejudice towards these everyday ordinary people who work for these corporations.

I am always trying to teach and educate people with the true laws in Australia. I tell everyone I speak to that it’s a very valuable learning experience challenging councils and even the police force (the proper way).

http://www.religiousword.com/2009/09/parking-fines-update/

Suspending a driver’s license or a vehicle’s registration is only effective if there is a reasonable likelihood of being caught when the suspension is ignored. What happened to the system that was being trialled months ago to easily detect these people?

bd84 said :

Most of the fines will be from the Diplomatic community who got their licences from the back of a corn flakes box and from those living interstate. The ACT Government doesn’t have arrangements with other jurisdictions to recover fines or susend licences like they do for ACT residents. I believe there was a report from our friend the auditor-general a while ago on this matter, not much has changed by the looks.

BD84. What a ridiculous comment. Do you know any Diplomats. Maybe you work for TAMS and know some stats that the rest of Canberra doesnt. I do know a large number of Diplomats. They do have to pay fines as a matter of fact (well actually the Embassy does)which is frowned upon by their respective Government when it becomes an ongoing issue. If Diplomats didnt have bright blue plates that said look at me, I wonder if your opinion, like many Canberrans, would be so discriminative. Maybe you want to find that Auditor generals report and posting it on Riotact before making such outlandish judgements.

some excellent enforcement ideas here, namely those at posts #21 (impounding car with multiple unpaid fines) and #23 (national register of unpaid fines which the ATO data-matches at tax-time) – hope some relevant pubes are reading this thread, quick bang these into a cab sub (whatever that is called at state/territory govt level) and send it up the line!

housebound at post #13 – parking fines are upwards from $60 – where is it that it costs $60/day to park?? surely not even in sydney?!

Can you get the fine waived if you argue that you were stoned and didn’t intend to park illegally?

To paraphase your argument… “Don’t park illegally if you cannot afford it”, or “don’t do the crime if you can’t afford the time”. This is the same as “park illegally if you can afford it”. By only expecting those who “need their $100” to park legally, you are implicitly permitting those who don’t need their $100 to do as they will, the law be damned. Q.E.D.

My manifesto (yes, thanks HC) is… “Dont park illegally, becuase we’ll make sure you can’t afford it”. There is NO deterrent factor to someone who can afford a $100 fine, so why bother doing the right thing. Hell, you probably won’t get caught anyway, and if you do, noone will chase you for it. (See, mods – I made it on topic!) Hell, I’m all for upping speeding fines, too, but the demerit system works no matter your financial status. Except for certain judges.

As for my final comment – I even quoted you saying “park legally”… Obviously the irony is lost on you.

Most of the fines will be from the Diplomatic community who got their licences from the back of a corn flakes box and from those living interstate. The ACT Government doesn’t have arrangements with other jurisdictions to recover fines or susend licences like they do for ACT residents. I believe there was a report from our friend the auditor-general a while ago on this matter, not much has changed by the looks.

harley said :

ahappychappy said :

Or maybe the people who need their $100 could park legally.

What about those who own an expensive car who don’t actually earn that much? Is that fair to them? Maybe they spent all of their savings on their car as they felt that a reliable/safer car is more important than a few other material goods.

Your logic is flawed.

And your logic isn’t? You’re saying if you can afford the fine, then go ahead and break the rules. I’m saying make the fine matter to those who can currently afford it.

If people have expensive cars but little disposable income, then they can well, lets see… oh, someone suggested PARKING LEGALLY….

Where did I say that if you can afford the fine it is okay break the rules?
I said your idea is ridiculous, I didn’t say that anyone should break the rules at all.

I was the one who said how about people just park legally. Everyone should cop the fine at the same amount… by using your logic we may aswell up speeding fines for those who can afford the spare cash and demerit points. Congrats on your flame though, it was perfect. If only you had thought it through.

Why not just have a National database & all unpaid Government monies is listed in this database, when you complete your tax return this database is checked & any owed monies come out of your tax return. Also a program could be devised so that an alert would come up if someone receiving Centrelink payments was entered into this database. Requests will be made for the culprit to voluntarily donate 10% of their payment. After 3 requests 25% of your pay would be deducted to repay the owned money.

Your information would stay on this database until your death is registered. So if you apply for the pension in 30 years Centrelink (or whatever it is called in the future) would be altered to your owned money from 2006 & will do what I said above.

caf said :

In Finland traffic fines are based on both the severity of the offence and the offender’s after-tax income.

The Finnish system is great.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1759791.stm

Special G said :

Turn them into warrants. $100/or 1 day in the bin. Then when people start getting arrested or pay the fine on the spot things might get done. Linking it to suspensions is simply not working.

Australian governments will do whatever they can to avoid jailing fine defaulters after the NSW case of Jamie Partlic, who was assaulted and left in a coma with permanent brain damage while serving a four-day sentence in Long Bay prison for unpaid fines in 1987. That one incident cost the taxpayers of NSW far more in damages than they were ever going to get from collecting some fines through the threat of imprisonment.

Cancelling registrations just means people end up driving unregistered (ie without insurance) so when they hit someone the taxpayer ends up picking up the medical and care costs. I would suggest the best solution is to seize the motor vehicle and sell it to pay the fines.

As a separate idea why are officers ticketing cars for illegal parking not able to check the vehicle’s current outstanding fine status immediately. Any car found to be illegally parked with outstanding tickets could then be immediately towed to an impound yard an sold at auction if the owner decides not to pay the fines and additional towing and impound fees. That should stop repeat offenders pretty quickly.

ahappychappy said :

Or maybe the people who need their $100 could park legally.

What about those who own an expensive car who don’t actually earn that much? Is that fair to them? Maybe they spent all of their savings on their car as they felt that a reliable/safer car is more important than a few other material goods.

Your logic is flawed.

And your logic isn’t? You’re saying if you can afford the fine, then go ahead and break the rules. I’m saying make the fine matter to those who can currently afford it.

If people have expensive cars but little disposable income, then they can well, lets see… oh, someone suggested PARKING LEGALLY….

Holden Caulfield said :

harley said :

My preference is to make the fine commensurate with the Redbook value of the vehicle. Say, 0.3%… A Falcodore would get a $90 fine, but a merc or audi might get a $270 fine. I see more tickets on high-value cars than on crap boxes.

Haha, is that your own work or did your mates at the Politburo help you with that one?

hah, no it’s from my manifesto.

When I am the evil overlord…

In Finland traffic fines are based on both the severity of the offence and the offender’s after-tax income.

I wonder of the people who don’t pay their parking fines are also the ones who who don’t bother registering their cars?

harley said :

My preference is to make the fine commensurate with the Redbook value of the vehicle. Say, 0.3%… A Falcodore would get a $90 fine, but a merc or audi might get a $270 fine. I see more tickets on high-value cars than on crap boxes.

Haha, is that your own work or did your mates at the Politburo help you with that one?

harvyk1 said :

harley said :

Course – the rego idea works too, but I still want the relative value of the fine changed to discourage parking illegally just because the well off can afford it.

Harley, there has been a suggestion (in some of the richer suburbs of Sydney) of making fines a percentage of the weekly income for just this reason. The richer amoungst us simply parked illegally because they wouldn’t miss a $100 if they where fined, whilst the lower paid that $100 could mean the difference between eating and not eating.

Or maybe the people who need their $100 could park legally.

What about those who own an expensive car who don’t actually earn that much? Is that fair to them? Maybe they spent all of their savings on their car as they felt that a reliable/safer car is more important than a few other material goods.

Your logic is flawed.

Turn them into warrants. $100/or 1 day in the bin. Then when people start getting arrested or pay the fine on the spot things might get done. Linking it to suspensions is simply not working.

I know of only one person who PLANS to park illegally, and includes the fine in their annual budget (they say it is cheaper than paying for all day parking every day).

Other than oddballs like that, most people don’t plan to get fined. It’s usually an accident.

harvyk1 said :

The richer amoungst us simply parked illegally because they wouldn’t miss a $100 if they were fined, whilst to the lower paid that $100 could mean the difference between eating and not eating.

Gosh, the lower paid could just park legally in the first place.

tortfeaser: Guess that’s about $100/year less rates that the rest of us have to pay, then. Sounds good to me.

Hmmm – This is interesting – in an era where Katie is wanting to move the pokies to increase revenue – they couldn’t be bothered collecting the parking fines…..

I winder if it is basically bacause the quality of staff in our DPP is soo wofal, that they would simply loose any court battle, with costs being awarded against them.. Mmmmm How to turn +$23 mil into -$mil….

So this is saying ~22,000 fines weren’t overdue, ie were within the 28 day payment period. So roughly 22,000 x 12 x $72 = $19 million pa in fines? A nice little earner.

Wonder what percentage of these belong to diplomat plated vehicles?

harley said :

Course – the rego idea works too, but I still want the relative value of the fine changed to discourage parking illegally just because the well off can afford it.

Harley, there has been a suggestion (in some of the richer suburbs of Sydney) of making fines a percentage of the weekly income for just this reason. The richer amoungst us simply parked illegally because they wouldn’t miss a $100 if they where fined, whilst the lower paid that $100 could mean the difference between eating and not eating.

Ceej1973: It’s just a guess, but it might be that the laws in the old days didn’t let them suspend your license or rego for non-payment of fines – so possibly they can’t apply those rules to old fines issued back then.

An amnesty would be in order for fines over five years old, as I suspect it would cost more than they are worth to pursue them.

A lot might belong to those who don’t live here any longer.

For example, a mate of mine had a dispute over a parking fine, and was told he’d have to prove he was in the right, not the other way around, but he had no real evidence. He told the operator that he didn’t even live here and they can go scew themselves. He was threatened with a “You’ll never drive in Canberra again!” – which he found hilarious….

How can this be? I was late paying my fine, but had an admin fee slapped on top, which I didnt pay, due to a misunderstanding of “the fine print”. Anyway, while OS I got a last notice reminder telling me to pay the admin fee by a date which was while I was still OS. If I chose not to pay the admin fee I would a) lose my licence or b) lose my right to drive in the ACT. So naturally I paid the admin fee. So what I am confused about, is, is there a glitch in the TAMS database’s or are there a hell of a lot of people driving around illegally, or, is TAMS more leaneant with non fine payers over non admin fee payers (who have already paid the fine)?

Anyway, I agree with JB, or if multi offenders, start taking points off their licence.

My preference is to make the fine commensurate with the Redbook value of the vehicle. Say, 0.3%… A Falcodore would get a $90 fine, but a merc or audi might get a $270 fine. I see more tickets on high-value cars than on crap boxes.

Once the accumulated fine value goes over 5% of the vehicle value, it gets towed. No ands, ifs or buts. Pay the fine, and the towing cost then you’re good to go.

Course – the rego idea works too, but I still want the relative value of the fine changed to discourage parking illegally just because the well off can afford it.

amen to that. or have a public register of shame like they do in tassie.