Parking Fine but No Photographic Evidence

devpress on 10/05/2018 - 09:14
Last edited 10/05/2018 - 09:32

Hi All

I wrongly received a fine for exceeding the time limit in a 20min parking spot. I say wrongly because after the first 20mins was up, I exited then returned to the carpark — which isn't prohibited based on the signage within the carpark.

I requested the SDRO for photographic evidence - which they are unable to locate / provide.

I then requested the SDRO to drop the fine, explaining that I had left then returned to the carpark, which means I had stayed within the 20mins with each park.

Their response was simply that the fine still stood. They did acknowledge again that they do not have access to the photographs, but that the issuing officer confirms I had exceeded the 20min timed limit.

To dispute this further I'd need it be decided in court.

What would be the best way to proceed? My first reaction was just to pay the fine to make it all go away - as I can't be certain of the outcome if it does go to court (if it goes against me, how much more I'd have to pay), and don't know how much hassle that'll be in terms of time etc. - but it does infuriate me because I know I stayed within the parking rules, and that they are unable to provide photographic evidence to backup their claim.

EDIT: I suppose another question I have is whether there is a general rule around returning to a timed parking zone in a public parking zone - is there an across-the-board rule that says this isn't permitted, or does this depend on the conditions of each individual car park ?

Automotive Fine Parking

Comments

        • chumlee on 10/05/2018 - 19:58

          @oscargamer: i provided the legislation. How a magistrate interprets the legislation I don't know but it's what OP needs to be aware of if wanting to go to court

        • oscargamer on 10/05/2018 - 20:01
          -2

          @chumlee:

          You provided a news story……big difference.

          If you read the article, there are glaring incongruities and errors in it….. but why would you actually read and try to understand it? It's in the news, so it must be right.

        • chumlee on 10/05/2018 - 20:16

          @oscargamer:

          Read under Parking Signs heading
          https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/road-r…

          Same rules apply in NSW just don't have time to research it for you

        • oscargamer on 10/05/2018 - 21:10
          -6

          @chumlee:

          Yes dear. Know all that. Read the article you posted. Nowhere in legislation is the term "sector" defined or mentioned.

        • pegaxs on 10/05/2018 - 21:19
          +4

          @chumlee:

          I'm with you on this, chumlee…

          For oscargamer… (Because you want actual legislation…)

          Road Rules 2014. NSW. Part 12, Division 7, Reg. 205 says…

          205 Parking for longer than indicated
          (1) A driver must not park continuously on a length of road, or in an area, to which a permissive parking sign applies for longer than the period indicated by information on or with the sign.

          (2) For subrule (1), a driver parks continuously on a length of road, or in an area, to which a permissive parking sign applies, from the time when the driver parks on the length of road, or in the area, until the driver, or another driver, moves the vehicle off the length of road, or out of the area, to which the permissive parking sign applies.

          So, driving out and back in is not moving the vehicle out of the area or off the length of road.

          It seems to me that the ranger has deemed that the vehicle had just moved spaces (I even doubt the ranger tracks that, most probably tracks just number plates or chalk marks.) and not moved "out of the area".

          As for the actual time limit that you can re-enter that same car park or area and be classed as fresh parking, that is not defined as a set amount. As a guess, I would say the length of time it takes for the ranger to do their rounds. If OP park there for 20 mins and got marked, then the ranger will come back in 20 mins and ticket cars still in the area. If OP's car was not there on the rangers return, it would be considered to have "left the area". If OP came back after that time, the parking time would reset when the ranger marked the car as parking there on their second round. So long as the car is not there again upon the rangers return, it would then again be deemed to have "left the area".

          So, in saying that, The minimum time I would imagine would be the minimum round trip the ranger would make to that area. So, if it is a 2 hour parking zone, then leave the area for 2 hours at a minimum.

        • devpress on 10/05/2018 - 22:29
          +1

          @pegaxs:

          Thanks (and @chumlee as well) - this is very useful.

          Though I'm not sure I agree with your point on "time limit" as per your last 2 paragraphs, as I don't think time is a relevant factor based on my reading of the regs.

          In terms of what is considered when determining recommencement of the time limit, the only factor mentioned in the reg. deals with geospatial - e.g. moving the car out of the length of road or area. It does not mention time as a factor.

          In other words, if I drove the car say 5 blocks away from the carpark, then returned immediately, even if this took 5 mins it would satisfy the requirement of moving the car out of the area. At least that's my interpretation.

          However, there is no way the ranger would know whether the car was moved out of the area (unless they followed my car around the 5 blocks and back). And I don't have any proof that I drove the car 5 blocks away then came back.

        • pegaxs on 10/05/2018 - 23:15

          @devpress:

          It is interesting, because like most laws, the interpretation is up to the magistrate on the day. They may have the same view as you, or they may side with the view of the council issuing the infringement.

          While there is no fixed limit or distance you must move the car, I still think my example of how a ranger would see it works within the framework of the law.

          ie; ranger marks you at 12:00 and checks on you again at 12:21. If your car is still “in the area”, you get a ticket. If it is not, you are taken off the list. You could leave at 12:01 and drive 5 suburbs away and around the city and come back at 12:19 and park 5 spaces over, you are viewed as being in the area by that ranger, even though you left and came back 18 mins later.

          All the ranger has to say is, “the car was there at 12:00 and still there at 12:21 upon my return. 21 minutes later…” so, returning after the ranger re-inspected the vehicles in the area would reset the time. So, I feel that the “left the area time limit” is quantifiable…

          What I don’t like about the law is the vagueness of it when implying the “area” part. Just how far away is considered “out of the area”? If you were to move the car to a different location and re-park it, how far is far enough? 1 car spot over? 1 row over? From the park to the street? 1 block? 1 suburb away? 1 council area away?

        • devpress on 10/05/2018 - 23:43

          @pegaxs:

          Yeah I agree. From the ranger's perspective, all they are using is time to determine whether you've exceeded the park limit.

          They don't consider whether the car has moved in/out of the area, because that would require them to track your car's movement - which they aren't really able to do.

        • oscargamer on 11/05/2018 - 08:57
          -4

          @devpress:

          Before you get all excited, you might want to look up the definition of a Parking Area, as defined in the Road Rules. It's not what you are describing and it's definitely not a 'sector'.

        • pegaxs on 11/05/2018 - 09:47

          @oscargamer:

          Direct from the Road Rules Dictionary:

          parking area means a length of road or area designed for parking vehicles.

          Or

          parking bay means an area for parking a single vehicle (other than a combination) that is indicated by:
          (a) road markings consisting of lines, studs or other similar devices, or
          (b) a different road surface.

        • macrocephalic on 11/05/2018 - 10:38
          +1

          @devpress: Do you have google location services enabled on your phone? Go to www.google.com/maps/timeline and it will show you everywhere you travelled and at what time.

        • chumlee on 11/05/2018 - 14:14
          +1

          @pegaxs: oscar thinks he/she is Mike Ross or Harvey Spector

        • oscargamer on 11/05/2018 - 16:47
          -2

          @chumlee:

          nope, just know a lot more about traffic law, than 99.9% of the keyboard experts on here

          what's sad, is that when i refer you to the RR or definitions therein, you come back clearly having read my post, but not understood a word of it or the point i was trying to make

          oh well, you can lead a horse to water i guess………..

        • chumlee on 11/05/2018 - 16:53

          @oscargamer: you might know a lot about traffic law but doesn't mean it's correct.

        • pegaxs on 11/05/2018 - 18:34
          +4

          @chumlee:

          I agree. You would think for someone who purports to know so much about traffic laws, that they would post their own sources for their comments.

          You quoted a newspaper article as a source, while not definitive, it was at least a better attempt at sourcing than quoting nothing or saying "yeah, well, prove it".

          Instead of just saying,"Well, have you read the RR??" It would have been wiser to quote the actual Road Rule legislation and say "Well, here in XYZ legislation, it says… So therefore…"

          For someone who knows more than 99.9% of "keyboard warriors" on here, they sure don’t cite a lot of legislation… :/

        • devpress on 12/05/2018 - 10:11

          @macrocephalic:

          Yeah I do. Certainly something I could bring along to the courts, though wondering its admissibility & whether a judge would give any credence to this

        • reactor-au on 12/05/2018 - 23:06

          @chumlee:
          The related texted:
          "Parking signs
          You cannot park for longer than the time shown on a parking sign.

          When moving your car to another parking spot, you must move it out of the area or length of road controlled by the parking sign.

          The parking time limits on the sign only apply during the times shown. Outside of those times, you can park with no restrictions, unless there are other signs saying you can't"

  • askme69 on 10/05/2018 - 21:32

    Check the signage, most council car parks have the limit per day. So can only park once per day. If it doesn't state per day and the officer chalked the car and If the marks are still clear it's deemed you have not driven enough of a distance to have left the area.

    Photographic is evidence is not required as proof of the offence. Thy can also valve stem instead of chalking.

    PS: ring council and ask if photos were taken, just because the sdro does not have them doesn't mean they were not taken.

  • EVA-01 on 10/05/2018 - 23:44
    +7

    Try your luck with Google Maps Timeline?

    • devpress on 10/05/2018 - 23:45

      that's an interesting solution - wonder though whether it'll be considered by the judge

    • kingmw on 12/05/2018 - 18:21

      This would only prove that the phone moved a particular distance, how you prove that phone was in the car is a different matter.

  • ozzpete on 11/05/2018 - 00:22

    Doesn't the council usually issue fines such as this . Therefore call your council and sort it out there .
    Explain what happened. Ask them nicely to explain what the rules are for such a scenario.
    If you were in the wrong, ask for leniency this one time, as you didn't understand that you were in violation of the parking rule by moving away, then returning.
    If you're polite and honest to the person on the phone, they will probably be happy to help you sort it out (at council level).
    The sdro shouldn't need to get involved if the council agrees to wave fine.

  • Geryatric on 11/05/2018 - 02:09
    +1

    One per day apples to public parking in Sydney. Car parks would have their own rules, but sound alike it is council car park seeing as your dealing with SDRO rather than a private company.

    Court you will get off as no photos - buy can you really be bothered. You will spend 20 hours of your life for $100 saving

    • pegaxs on 11/05/2018 - 07:18
      +2

      One per day apples to public parking in Sydney.

      Got the legislation to show this? A council regulation we can refer to?

      Court you will get off as no photos

      Incorrect. Photos are not required as the rangers witness statement will be sufficient. They did give out parking tickets before cameras were a mainstream source of evidence.

      You will spend 20 hours of your life for $100 saving

      Bit of an over exaggeration. My one and only parking fine I contested in court wasted a day off work at most (Took annual leave day, so still got paid). Was told to be at court by 9am and was out of there by 10:30am. They had no "photo" evidence in the case, just the rangers version of what happened. The magistrate threw it out because it was a single ticket and said that the council was wasting the courts time bringing what was a single ticket to court that could have been resolved without seeking court intervention.

      • kingmw on 12/05/2018 - 18:27

        But that may be true about your 1st ticket, but then what about your 2nd or 3rd one etc? The dispute would be recorded down and the council will then argue that it shows the defendant is a repeat offender.

        • pegaxs on 12/05/2018 - 21:45

          When I went to court, the two defendants who went before me, one had 18 tickets, the other was 22 tickets. Both were repeat offenders and not their first time in court. Their cases were as short as mine, but obviously different outcomes.

          If it’s a first offence and you only have one ticket to argue, chances are that the magistrate will either dismiss it for wasting the courts time, or give you a reduced amount to pay or simply put you on a good behaviour bond of sorts.

          I have been to court a few times, one for my own case and a few times with friends to help them out, and the worst any of them got was a greatly reduced fine + court costs.

          If OP is a recidivist parking offender, then yes, I agree, going to court will serve little to help.

  • trev likes bargains on 11/05/2018 - 07:10
    +4

    For how long did you leave the carvpark? Does it show up on your Google location history?

    • effgee on 11/05/2018 - 08:31

      was about to suggest the same

    • antonthenet on 11/05/2018 - 12:04

      I just went a looked at my Google location history. Scary that they store all that stuff. I hope no assassins are after me!

  • DarkOz on 11/05/2018 - 09:39

    "I say wrongly because after the first 20mins was up, I exited then returned to the carpark — which isn't prohibited based on the signage within the carpark."

    Can you show us the signage?

    • devpress on 12/05/2018 - 10:13

      I'll need to go back to the carpark to take a picture (photographic evidence!!)

  • Godric on 11/05/2018 - 09:55

    InsuranceTipsForBargains

    • follow on 11/05/2018 - 10:34

      Can you insure yourself against fines?

  • Atazoth616 on 11/05/2018 - 13:40
    +4

    Is it just me or is there a recent surge of driving threads on Ozbargain?

    • devpress on 12/05/2018 - 10:13

      I have noticed that also

  • sachz on 11/05/2018 - 16:33

    this is a good reason to have an in-car video camera so when u drive u can prove it. best insurance ever guys!

  • pixelhen on 11/05/2018 - 17:02

    This is rare. No photographic evidence.

    That's the only thing that will stand in court should - we, as the defendant decided to contest it in court.

    If you have time, go to court. If you dont, just pay off the $100.

  • DarwinBoy on 11/05/2018 - 18:14

    Would be interesting to know how they prove your vehicle did not move.
    If they use chalk for example then it should obviously have worn off once you moved your car. Takes about 10 revolutions and is completly gone.
    If their operating procedure state photos are taken then that would help as you could say they are not following their own internal processes. Magistrates want to see clear processes regarding enforcenent of parking regulations so their time is not wasted over silly disputes all the time.

    • devpress on 12/05/2018 - 10:14

      If the chalk mark was on the side of the tyre (e.g. not the thread that's rolling) then it may take some time before it comes off?

      • DarwinBoy on 12/05/2018 - 10:42

        Because it doesnt wear off on the side wall as quickly(days possibly)you could claim it was chalk from the previous day.
        When you chalk tyres its not just the mark you leave on the tread but the chalk particles that sit within the tread that show it hasnt moved.

  • follow on 11/05/2018 - 18:46

    For the legal minds, does photographic evidence need to include number plate?

    • DarwinBoy on 12/05/2018 - 10:48

      Best practice is to have as much proof as possible to dispute someone saying 'it wasnt my car' or 'i never parked there that day. Therefore who ever issues the infringement should have pictures of your vehicle and anything else they can get like location details and even signage. Also a picture of the infringement on the vehicles, Rangers issuing tickets are sure to make mistakes eventually. Pictures clarify the situation quickly and easily.

      • follow on 12/05/2018 - 11:04

        If they took a side shot of the car only, is that sufficient? Or can it be disputed?

        • DarwinBoy on 12/05/2018 - 18:58

          Without a plate you are raising doubt. If you raise enough doubt a magistrate is unlikely to uphold the infringement.

    • lysp on 22/05/2018 - 20:31

      When I've seen rangers issuing tickets, they normally take a number of photos:

      1) Wide shot of the car in the spot.
      2) Close up photo of number plate.
      3) Close up photo of the sign.

      This is to cover all bases.

      • follow on 22/05/2018 - 21:22

        im going to try contesting it as ive only been provided a wide shot

  • weightless on 11/05/2018 - 19:39

    Review the signage and local laws to make sure you have a case to dispute it.
    Then fill out a statutory declaration stating you left the area and returned.
    Include all of this in a new dispute to the council, make them fully aware that you will dispute this in court (even if you don't intend to).

    • devpress on 12/05/2018 - 10:15

      Given they've already said the next step is pay or fine or go to court, what would otherwise be achieved by me telling them that I will contest in court?

      • kingmw on 12/05/2018 - 18:29

        Agreed, the fine has been issued, just because you threaten to go to court doesn't mean the fine is automatically dropped. You will have to go to court, there is no other way. Also they probably get threats about court action every day.

  • TheMindsetTraveller on 11/05/2018 - 21:10

    Revenue Raising piece of scum Rangers. Definitely the worst job in the world.

    In another life I would throw my smelly socks at them but my life is Drunk On The Good Life.

    • devpress on 12/05/2018 - 10:24
      -2

      While no-one likes getting a fine (esp. when it isn't justified) I'm sure most of them are reasonable folk, working in an unfufilling job and doing as they're told (e.g. book as many people as they can within the rules)

    • kingmw on 12/05/2018 - 18:34
      +2

      While you say they are scum, you would have a different tune if you were the one that needed a park and everyone else was breaking the rules. Without rangers to enforce the parking rules, there will be parking anarchy (parking at no stopping/parking signs, double park, close to intersections etc). Sometimes you need the stick when the carrot doesn't work…..

  • justwii on 11/05/2018 - 21:16

    Quite nonsense if you ask me. If I park on the same spot two consecutive days does that automatically give a ranger a conclusion I parked for 24 hours?

    Just go to court OP, no proof no evidence means instant dismiss.

    • devpress on 12/05/2018 - 10:26
      +1

      Just go to court OP, no proof no evidence means instant dismiss.

      Thanks. While I'd like to think they'd dismiss it for lack of photographic proof, having never done this before I'm not sure whether this is guaranteed — unless someone here has had the same experienc?

  • OzBestDeal on 11/05/2018 - 22:35

    I really hate how they keep pushing people to go to court to settle this things.
    They know very well that most people will just pay the fine.

    It's an uphill battle. We fight in court with our own money at stake, while council just fight it for their extra income.
    Guess where the money will be taken from if they lost the fight and have to pay all legal fees… (hint: not their personal money)

    • justwii on 12/05/2018 - 00:08

      With your logic then people should never have their case at court no matter what.

  • ozlab on 12/05/2018 - 06:40

    Normally they put a mark on your tyre and they don't remember your car because there r too many cars. If they come back and see the mark even after you move your car they probably don't realise it. They would just give you fine.

    • [Deactivated] on 22/05/2018 - 21:35

      around melbourne there are magnetic sensors under the asphalt in car spaces that detect a vehicles presence,
      so would presumably know if a car enters and leaves a space.

      Not sure how sophisticated the setup is (if is capable of communicating to the meters)
      but entry without exit;
      would definitely allow one to identify a car overstaying a 2h limit space;
      even if the owner keeps feeding the meter all day.

  • anthonyqld on 12/05/2018 - 09:08

    In QLD the law is per day for council operated parking. 2P parking, means you can't park there for 2 hours in the morning, then come back late in the afternoon and park again

    • devpress on 12/05/2018 - 10:26

      I see. I'm in NSW though :o)

    • kingmw on 12/05/2018 - 18:46

      Is it even a true story? Can't believe a FOI officer can just cancel a fine like that…

  • Dont Care on 12/05/2018 - 20:09

    no matter what i say you're still gonna be mad. but i would just say you're screwed and try and move on.

  • chess on 12/05/2018 - 22:07

    Go to court. Been there, done that.
    It will cost you a day of time though, 2 days if the hearing gets adjourned.

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/198723

  • Oofy Doofy on 12/05/2018 - 22:49

    I tried to challenge a Brisbane City council parking fine in a particular location, their idea of the 'law' was making up their own and saying that they didn't need to provide photographic evidence of my vehicle. Looking back I should have challenged it, but decided my time was worth more and paid the $80 fine.

    • kingmw on 13/05/2018 - 11:47

      But they do make their own rules and "law"! i.e. they can write only parking allowed only once a day or after a period of 2 hours etc.

      • Oofy Doofy on 13/05/2018 - 20:08

        The parking spot I had was in a place where I was permitted, any reasonable person would have seen it that way. I even pre-planned it, as it was 20 minutes walk from the hospital, where I needed to go at the time. I had photographic evidence and everything, but they said too bad too sad, pay up.

  • AussieMark on 13/05/2018 - 00:37

    Actually the rule is even if you change to another park within the same parking area you are still at fault.

    Ie: you leave for an hour and come back you can still technically get a fine because the time limit counts for that area it's just rarely enforced and hard to prove sometimes

    • justwii on 13/05/2018 - 01:16
      +1

      With that logic, it is 2 hours per area per the lifetime of a car plate.

  • El Grande on 13/05/2018 - 01:23

    I know they chalk the car but can you just wipe the chalk rather than moving the car? I can never find this chalk mark on my tyres.

  • shreav on 13/05/2018 - 13:05

    The rule is that you need to vacate the car park is street within the time limit and return after a period of time. I would usually park at one street for an hour and then park at the adjacent street for another hour and keep doing that for a while. Not practical but I didn't mind doing it for a couple of weeks. I spoke to a parking officer about it and he thought it was a good idea.

    But if they don't have evidence then it doesn't matter. For court purposes they would be obliged to provide you evidence as well, me thinks.

    I might consider emailing them and saying that 'if you continue to enforce this fine then please submit your evidence to me so I can give it to my lawyer should I decide to pursue legal action'.

  • JimmyF on 13/05/2018 - 21:35
    +1

    My local 'free' carpark has this clause…. to stop people doing what you do

    3.6 Each time an Authorised Vehicle is used to enter and/or exit the Car Park or utilises additional services you authorise us to debit from your Nominated Credit Card the applicable Fees. When returning to the car park in the same day, an additional 3 hours free parking will be available if your time of car park entry is more than 1 hour after your previous car park exit.

    The 'free' meter is only reset after being out of the carpark for an hour.

    • DarkOz on 14/05/2018 - 07:41

      This is exactly why OP should show us the signage indicating she/he can or can not exit and re-enter the car park immediately.

      She/he probably got fined because:
      1. Dodgy parking ranger.
      2. Re-entered immediately and parked at the same parking spot.
      3. Re-entered immediately which is against the parking condition for an additional free parking period.

  • supersabroso on 14/05/2018 - 02:26

    No access and no photos are two completely different things. Ask them who does have access and you can ask for it that way. You don't want to go to court unless you're 100% sure you're going to win, otherwise you'll regret going to court, heavily (in the thousands of dollars in extra fines).

    Not being able to go back to a carpark/street parking area is a standard rule and doesn't need to be written down. It'll be too hard to track otherwise, everyone just claim that they left and came back. The council can't have thousands of cameras around to get every parking spot to prove that they were just lying.

    Defeats the purpose of timed parking if you can just move your car 5m and stay there again.

  • thord on 14/05/2018 - 09:41

    Continue writing to them, keep records. Even if they say they think "the matter is settled" it's not. Keep writing to them. Keep explaining your position. Attempt to take it higher up.

    The more evidence on your side, the better.

  • [Deactivated] on 17/05/2018 - 08:59

    @ devpress.

    In NSW the chalk mark is not allowed to be on the side of the tyre. It must be on the tread and no they don't write the time they just mark on the tread.

    • [Deactivated] on 22/05/2018 - 21:41

      personally if i was to do the marking, i would mark the tread in the points of a clock
      12 3 6 9 0 15 30 45
      i could then figure out if 2 hour has passed later

  • Eeples on 19/05/2018 - 23:23

    If it went to court sensible questions for them to ask you is “where did you go”, “who did you see”, “who might have seen you”

    Do you have sensible answers to those question?

    “oh, I wanted to renew my parking time” I’m not sure would be looked on favourably.

  • Baysew on 23/06/2018 - 12:41
    +1

    OP, is there any update on this thread?

  • grasstown on 23/06/2018 - 21:18

    "after the first 20mins was up, I exited then returned to the carpark"

    So you stayed more than 20 minutes?

    "the issuing officer confirms I had exceeded the 20min timed limit."

  • Baysew on 02/08/2018 - 10:17

    Hi OP, is there any update to your post?

    There is a person with a similar problem Officer Error in Parking Fine, Council Will Not Admit Mistake (VIC) and it would be really great if you could get back with the result you had.

  • askme69 on 05/08/2018 - 11:42

    THe officer would have either chalked the tyre or valve stemmed you.

    You will find that most council etc car parks, the restriction applies for the entire day. Do you have proof you left the area? bank statement/receit showing a pucahse made elsewhere etc.

    If the chalk mark/stem is clear, you will be called a liar. r if the restriction is for only one arking session per day.

    Make sure you know what eveidence they have and the restriction, before you attend court if you choose.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join