Stationary Vehicle Infringement Notice Has Wrong Details

Forums › Off topic › Stationary Vehicle Infringement Notice Has Wrong Details

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

8810 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5287

#838213 17-Jun-2013 17:05

Wheelbarrow01:

There's no fun in taking it on the chin! The fact is my car was not where they claim it was. So if it wasn't there it could have been anywhere, including my driveway. I would happily have already paid the ticket if it were correct. the legalities of what I did or didn't do are not the topic here, only whether the ticket having incorrect information on it is enough to get it waived.

how much is your time worth to you?

Yes you can write back to them and say the info is incorrect, and it might just come back with the correct details, - win for you

However they may decide that given the ticket is related to the state of the vehicle ( i.e expired rego) and not *where* it was parked that you are still liable.

If this is the case you will need to take a day off work to go an argue in front of a judge that the info is incorrect and thus the ticket is invalid, now people ( usually of the anorak persuasion) routinely do this and occasionally win, but these people usually don't have a life and enjoy debating with judges the location of grocer's apostrophes , whereas most of the rest of the population have a life to get on with....

SaltyNZ

8862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9539

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#838270 17-Jun-2013 18:20

I'd like to make a slightly different point. In this case, the exact location of the car is irrelevant to the offence - not displaying a valid warrant or rego. And sooner or later OP is probably going to end up paying.

There is an imbalance of power here. The traffic warden is legally authorised to forcibly take your money, and unless an alleged offender challenges the ticket, his or her word is considered to be the truth. In other words, the parking warden says you were parked illegally and therefore you were.

The location of the vehicle is BASIC STUFF. In this case it doesn't matter but in other cases the exact location of the car is literally the total difference between offence and no offence. OP just happens to know it was wrong in this instance. How many other tickets have been incorrectly issued by this warden? By the council overall? Judging by the way Auckland City Council has had to back down on things like bus lanes in the last couple of years, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest it might be quite high.

But there's no way for you to know, other than to challenge incorrect infringement notices.

Appeals are not just something you can try on if you think you can get off. They are the *only* protection you have against abuse of legally authorised force against you and your property. It's not just OP maybe getting off on a fine he really ought to pay. It's calling attention to the fact that 'hey, this warden is so utterly useless at his job he doesn't even know what street he's in, but we let him fine people anyway.'

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Wheelbarrow01

1784 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2638

Trusted

Chorus

#838302 17-Jun-2013 18:52

SaltyNZ: I'd like to make a slightly different point. In this case, the exact location of the car is irrelevant to the offence - not displaying a valid warrant or rego. And sooner or later OP is probably going to end up paying.

There is an imbalance of power here. The traffic warden is legally authorised to forcibly take your money, and unless an alleged offender challenges the ticket, his or her word is considered to be the truth. In other words, the parking warden says you were parked illegally and therefore you were.

The location of the vehicle is BASIC STUFF. In this case it doesn't matter but in other cases the exact location of the car is literally the total difference between offence and no offence. OP just happens to know it was wrong in this instance. How many other tickets have been incorrectly issued by this warden? By the council overall? Judging by the way Auckland City Council has had to back down on things like bus lanes in the last couple of years, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest it might be quite high.

But there's no way for you to know, other than to challenge incorrect infringement notices.

Appeals are not just something you can try on if you think you can get off. They are the *only* protection you have against abuse of legally authorised force against you and your property. It's not just OP maybe getting off on a fine he really ought to pay. It's calling attention to the fact that 'hey, this warden is so utterly useless at his job he doesn't even know what street he's in, but we let him fine people anyway.'

Yes, that was pretty much my point!!

In another example, a friend of mine got off a no seatbelt ticket because the stated location of the offence was an intersection of two roads that do not intersect. The offence was no doubt committed, but the ticket was waived due to the officer failing to enter the correct details.
I don't see the distiction between that case and mine. That is all I am saying.

Hiamie

355 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 102

#838318 17-Jun-2013 19:30

Maybe you should see if this guy can help - after all, he managed to get out of his ticket - then again, he did seem to have a valid excuse :)

scuwp

3927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2510

#838345 17-Jun-2013 20:30

The prosecuting agency is required to fairly inform you of the offence and the details as soon as practicable. You could write into them and advise that the car was not parked in the location and they would have no option but to void the ticket. HOWEVER they would be within their rights to re-issue another ticket with the correct details.

The offence ingredient only requires them to prove that it was a 'vehicle', that it was on a 'road' and that the vehicle wasn't currently licensed and/or registered. The courts would take such a small error as being inconsequential if you took it to court.

Like others, you did wrong, got caught, so I would just be paying up.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

Technofreak

6656 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3474

Trusted

#838379 17-Jun-2013 21:57

So far as the wrong details being written on the ticket. I've twice received parking tickets in the mail when my car wasn't within 100 km of the place where the ticket was written out.

The first time the details had my rego but a totally different vehicle description, the notice said Toyota ute, my car was a Holden sedan. I just ignored it........until I got s court summons. I politely pointed out in my letter of reply that if the issuer of the ticket actually bothered to check the registration records they would know they had made a mistake. I got a letter of apology.

The second time was from the Auckland City Council. This time the vehicle description and rego matched. The woman I dealt with there was nasty piece of work. When the ticket arrived I went online and used their online response system. That didn't work, though I didn't know that at the time until I got a follow up letter. I then emailed them with screen shots of my initial reply.

Then I discovered, that so far as the Auckland city council is concerned, you are guilty until you prove your innocence. They demanded payment unless I could prove it wasn't my car. I pointed out that in New Zealand you are innocent until proven guilty and the burden of proof was on them. I didn't see why at this stage I needed to bother my employer for a letter stating I was at work with my car parked in their car park. I told the ACC I knew they had no evidence that I had parked where they claimed I had, and requested a photo of the alleged offence.

Finally, they grudgingly waived the ticket but their letter intimated I was still guilty. There was never any indication they might have got it wrong.

So far as I'm concerned parking wardens have an important job to to, that's monitor wayward parking but that's where it should end they have no business checking on warrants of fitness or vehicle registrations. They make way too many mistakes.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

Batman

Mad Scientist
30012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#838402 17-Jun-2013 22:31

oh dear ... the legality of it technically you will get off but trying to prove that your unregistered vehicle was not parked in the street it was deemed ... oh dear!

Dratsab

3964 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1728

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#838584 18-Jun-2013 11:07

SaltyNZ: The traffic warden is legally authorised to forcibly take your money

What? When did this happen? Are we going to have wardens doing stand-overs now?

SaltyNZ: ...unless an alleged offender challenges the ticket, his or her word is considered to be the truth. In other words, the parking warden says you were parked illegally and therefore you were.

Correct. This is a basic tenet of strict liability. People are, however, perfectly entitled to challenge this.

SaltyNZ: The location of the vehicle is BASIC STUFF. In this case it doesn't matter but in other cases the exact location of the car is literally the total difference between offence and no offence. OP just happens to know it was wrong in this instance.

Here we have a yes and no. Yes - location is basic stuff. No - it does matter...location is fundamental, along with date and time, to this particular type of allegation. The warden has alleged an offence occurred AT location x. If the vehicle wasn't there, this offence has not occurred at this location therefore the ticket is invalid.

wellygary: However they may decide that given the ticket is related to the state of the vehicle ( i.e expired rego) and not *where* it was parked that you are still liable.

They can't "just decide", see above.

People can argue until they're blue in face about the rights and wrongs of whether or not the offence occurred, which it clearly has, but at the end of the day the ticket is still invalid and cannot be proceeded on on the basis of the information it contains. It needs to be cancelled and reissued with correct details.

wellygary: If this is the case you will need to take a day off work to go an argue in front of a judge that the info is incorrect and thus the ticket is invalid, now people routinely do this and occasionally win...

Possibly. The first port of call is writing to the council (a simple letter which would probably have taken less time than the original post) and pointing out their error then seeing what happens. Court proceedings are some way down the track.

SaltyNZ

8862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9539

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#838588 18-Jun-2013 11:16

Dratsab:
SaltyNZ: ...unless an alleged offender challenges the ticket, his or her word is considered to be the truth. In other words, the parking warden says you were parked illegally and therefore you were.

Correct. This is a basic tenet of strict liability. People are, however, perfectly entitled to challenge this.

You slightly misunderstand me, I think. I don't have a problem with strict liability. 'Strict liability' simply means that if you committed the offence, you must pay the penalty, regardless of extenuating circumstances. In the interests of keeping things simple for what is a very minor offence, it makes sense to have strict liability for stationary violations.

What I have a problem with is that in a case like this the burden of proof is, if not actually, then at least effectively reversed. If the warden says you were parked illegally it's up to you to prove you weren't, rather than it being up to the warden to prove you were.

That's not very fair, when there are wardens out there so useless/lazy/whatever that they don't know what street they're standing in when issuing $200 fines to people.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 218

Trusted

#838684 18-Jun-2013 13:26

So, the simple question which needs to be answered presuming the vehicle is still on the road; have you actually gone out and got your rego yet?

If not, don't blame your wife, don't blame the warden, DO blame yourself.

As said before, take some responsibility for your actions please.

In the UK it's a bit different - you either have to have a valid tax disc or you have to register it as not being on the road. If you fail to do either you get an infringement notice in the post irrespective of where the vehicle is kept! Sounds fair to me.

Procrastination eventually pays off.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80647 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41030

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#838701 18-Jun-2013 14:08

While some may not agree with the OP, name calling is not acceptable here.

I have removed a post and warned the user.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

Wheelbarrow01

1784 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2638

Trusted

Chorus

#838714 18-Jun-2013 14:12

Yes the rego has been paid and is now up to date so that is not the issue. I was speaking to my lawyer on an unrelated property matter today and mentioned the error on the ticket. She advised me to write the letter citing the incorrect details, request it be cancelled on those grounds, and see what happens.

Of course, from some of the responses I have read on here, I imagine if I do get let off the ticket I will still be damned to hell for my crime, along with Judas....and possibly Mark Lundy.

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#838729 18-Jun-2013 14:41

Wheelbarrow01:

Of course, from some of the responses I have read on here, I imagine if I do get let off the ticket I will still be damned to hell for my crime, along with Judas....and possibly Mark Lundy.

a bit of an exaggeration some of us just believe we should pay our dues and accept personal accountability not try and get out of something on a technicality.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#838734 18-Jun-2013 14:53

I am not a fan or parking wardens issuing tickets for anything that isn't parking related. I don't think they have the skills.. At one time I read they were checking peoples tyre condtions, and issuing tickets, if they thought tyres were unsafe. If police catch you for an out of date WOF they may only give you a warning, and tell you to get it done. But if a parking warden sees it, you get an instant fine which can be huge. Do parking wardens get a commission based on the value of tickets issued?

To out the wrong street on a ticket is sloppy, so I think you should contact them, at the very least to get the ticket corrected.
. But still be prepared to pay, if you were in the wrong.

Dratsab

3964 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1728

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#838749 18-Jun-2013 15:59

mattwnz: I am not a fan or parking wardens issuing tickets for anything that isn't parking related. I don't think they have the skills.. At one time I read they were checking peoples tyre condtions, and issuing tickets, if they thought tyres were unsafe. If police catch you for an out of date WOF they may only give you a warning, and tell you to get it done. But if a parking warden sees it, you get an instant fine which can be huge. Do parking wardens get a commission based on the value of tickets issued?

To out the wrong street on a ticket is sloppy, so I think you should contact them, at the very least to get the ticket corrected.
. But still be prepared to pay, if you were in the wrong.

No, wardens don't get commission but their performance (ie the number of tickets they are required to write per day) is monitored.

Going back at least 4 years when I used to run briefings involving a number of different branches of council, the way it worked was the council contracted ADT Security (who operate the Parkwise brand) for warden duties. ADT are paid an agreed contract amount for this and the wardens are in turn paid by ADT. Possibly it's changed a bit since then, I don't know. Regardless, I imagine this scenario will be similar over most, if not all the rest of, New Zealand.

When "caught out" by police for expired WOF/Licence label you may only get a warning, as you say, but that will depend on a number of factors. If you are ticketed and the expiry is only recent, say within a few weeks, you will generally be given a grace period (called compliance) in which to correct the problem and present evidence of its being corrected. Upon presentation of the required evidence within the required timeframe the fine will then be waived. You'll get no such joy from the council.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5