What Takes Precedent - State and Federal Law or Parking Area Terms and Conditions?

wallet72 on 24/07/2019 - 12:57
Last edited 24/07/2019 - 13:22 by 1 other user

So what takes precedent - state and federal law or parking area terms and conditions?

A certain uni in Canberra demands that disability permits are displayed with the permit holders' photo and details on display.
State and federal rules for the permit specifically say it should be displayed without any identifying information in display 'for security and privacy'.

I've received two tickets in the last 6 months for failing to display the permit properly. Each time I've asked for a review and the tickets have been withdrawn.

But this last time, the letter stated that because it was the second ticket there would be no further reviews.

After I got passed saying 'WTF?' a few times, I started to think how the hell I can get this sorted permanently.

Surely, state and federal rules take precedent here? Especially since the tickets are issued by the police. I shouldn't need to even be talking about this.
And on a lesser note, since when is there a limit on how many tickets can be questioned when they are issued incorrectly?

Automotive

Comments

jjjaar on 24/07/2019 - 13:03

+1

It might be worth contacting the issuer of your permit. Or perhaps a local disability advocate.

Who is actually issuing the fine? Generally it is the council, not the police. Whoever it is, it might be worth sending them (or even the uni) a letter, before the next fine, with the relevant state or federal legislation asking them to clarify.
- one man clan on 24/07/2019 - 13:29
  
  In addition to this, if what you're saying is correct, you may want to contact the Information/Privacy Commissioner (there's a state and federal version). The interaction between privacy and other laws is complex and there may be exceptions. I fyou feel there's been a breach, the privacy commissioner might be able to assist you.
HighAndDry on 24/07/2019 - 13:19

+2

There's no conflict:

State and federal rules for the permit specifically say it should be displayed without any identifying information in display 'for security and privacy'.

It doesn't say it MUST be only displayed without identifying information. You can display it with the identifying information.

And on a lesser note, since when is there a limit on how many tickets can be questioned when they are issued incorrectly?

The reviews are discretionary. Your actual legal entitlement is to challenge them in court (or ACAT?) not too sure about ACT's processes.
- wallet72 on 24/07/2019 - 13:47
  
  +2
  
  yeah the identify info thing - the uni states that it must be displayed with a photo of the permit holder. That's what I don't agree with and seems to be not the legal requirement.
  
  As for the reviews, ah I get what you are saying - that makes sense with what happens. Seems one sided though doesn't it? Ticket is not issued correctly but if you want to question it you have to take it to court.
  - mskeggs on 24/07/2019 - 14:00
    
    +1
    
    Terms and conditions are routinely in addition to the law.
    For example, it is legal for me to drink a beer, but the terms of my employment as a train driver says that is not acceptable.
    It is legal for you to display the license face down where there is no other requirement. The university is adding the term that they require it face up.
    - MrBear on 25/07/2019 - 09:38
      
      -1
      
      But do you get fined if you drink at work?
      - Euphemistic on 25/07/2019 - 12:27
        
        -3
        
        @MrBear: Fined, sacked, there’s not much difference.
        
        MrBear on 26/07/2019 - 08:58
        
        +2
        
        @Euphemistic: yeah, no difference at all. none whatsoever. completely the same. like almost identical. they could be twins.
  - HighAndDry on 24/07/2019 - 14:06
    
    +1
    
    Seems one sided though doesn't it?
    
    Completely one-sided, you won't hear an argument from me on that. In 99% (if not 100%) of cases, it never makes sense to actually challenge it because the time/effort to do so is more than the ticket itself. It's pretty ridiculous.
    
    not the legal requirement.
    
    No, but apparently it's a council car park requirement. You'd have to dig deeper into the ACT's equivalent of the Local Government Act to see if they're allowed to institute their own additional requirements, but my (complete guess of a) hunch is that yes, they can.
  - [Deactivated] on 25/07/2019 - 07:44
    
    +2
    
    I think that's discriminatory policy. Does this uni have a disability support department. I would contact then first
mskeggs on 24/07/2019 - 14:01

+2

To answer your question, laws always take precedent over T&Cs where there is a conflict. In the example you have raised, there is no conflict.
Stewardo on 24/07/2019 - 14:08

-3

ACT/Canberra-not a state
cookietime on 24/07/2019 - 14:32

Each time I've asked for a review and the tickets have been withdrawn.

Were the tickets withdrawn or was the fine waived? At a uni in Canberra, they usually waive the first fine. Subsequent tickets can still be challenged, however if they are valid, they won't waive the fine a second time. I'm wondering if this was what you meant. It doesn't sound right that they would review the first ticket only.
- wallet72 on 24/07/2019 - 15:30
  
  +1
  
  they withdrew the ticket because I could prove the permit was on display at the time. It's also common at the uni that people parking in the disabled spots get tickets even with the permits displayed correctly. It's just accepted and the students just lodge a review every time. It's like they drive past the cars and write tickets from the warmth of the patrol car - then a few days later a ticket arrives in the post.
trustnoone on 24/07/2019 - 15:01

Not sure about ACT law but did you get the disability parking permit from a government agency? (I think in NSW its RMS so may be similar for Canberra) from what I can tell they tell you where and how to place it, and you have to place that item, I don't think you're supposed to add or remove anything on it. Can you ask for detail of the fine of how you're 'failing to display the permit properly' and for their proof (usually they take a photo of the issue). As I feel further information is needed here.

I really don't think police fine for a 'terms and conditions' agreement typically, I assume its more for you to deal with your agreement with the university?
- wallet72 on 24/07/2019 - 15:38
  
  So got some info back today…
  
  the uni is doubling down on requiring a photo on display with the permit the ACT government do not require a photo on display, in fact Canberra issued disability permits don't have photos on them. the uni has said the tickets are issued by the police and must be disputed with them, and have nothing to do with the uni.
  - aoe111 on 24/07/2019 - 17:40
    
    The police should only enforce the law and not the rules of the university right? It should be fairly easy to dispute the fine in that case.
    - HighAndDry on 25/07/2019 - 10:41
      
      It's the ACT so it's weird. In NSW, some car parks are managed by council so enforcement officers (rangers) write fines for those car parks. In the ACT, maybe the police take the role of these rangers?
shaybisc on 24/07/2019 - 15:45

+3

Sounds like too many lazy students are borrowing grannies permit.
- kiitos on 25/07/2019 - 08:20
  
  -2
  
  Likely, though maybe there's just a lot of (very) mature age students?
  - MrBear on 25/07/2019 - 09:41
    
    +4
    
    You don't have to be old to be disabled. Jeebus!
shaybisc on 24/07/2019 - 15:47

O
[Deactivated] on 24/07/2019 - 17:21

-2

If I offered my driveway as a disability parking, I'm allowed to demand whatever level of proof I want if someone claims they fit my criteria of disability.

It's my driveway.

If the university owns the carpark, they're entitled to their own rules. Unless there's a law stipulating that they cannot impose some/any of their own rules, they can.
- orangetrain on 24/07/2019 - 17:32
  
  +4
  
  Are you allowed to fine people who park there?
  - HighAndDry on 25/07/2019 - 10:42
    
    No, but private property means you can get their car towed…
    - orangetrain on 25/07/2019 - 12:08
      
      +1
      
      That's legal according to which law? There's liability in doing that too.
      - HighAndDry on 25/07/2019 - 12:34
        
        -1
        
        @orangetrain: No, you call council. Any liability is the council's, and good luck to anyone trying to claim that against the council.
        
        orangetrain on 25/07/2019 - 13:02
        
        +2
        
        @HighAndDry: Which council advertises this service? I didn't know they tow on private property.
        
        Spanglish on 26/07/2019 - 10:37
        
        @HighAndDry: Ha! Good luck trying to get council to remove a vehicle from your private property…
        You will be introduced to the merry-go-round of police and council.
- aoe111 on 24/07/2019 - 17:33
  
  Yeh they're entitled to their own rules in that case, but at the same time, they should not be able to use legal means to FINE you just because you disobey their rules in the same manner that you cannot FINE anyone that disobeys your driveway rules.
  - [Deactivated] on 24/07/2019 - 17:35
    
    The ability to enforce the fine is a separate issue and I agree, it is a contestable issue but it doesn't change the fact that the university can have their rules and OP would be breaking those rules.
    - wallet72 on 24/07/2019 - 18:01
      
      100% agree. I guess it becomes cloudy when it's the police issuing the fines be the uni rules. If the police issue the fines then shouldn't it be for things that break the law? If the uni issued the fine then that's a whole different discussion.
      - [Deactivated] on 24/07/2019 - 18:13
        
        @wallet72: Didn't read the part about police. Are you sure it's not security? They often have vehicles and uniform that borders on impersonation.
        
        I don't recall police ever giving out parking fines unless a vehicle is blocking the road.
        
        wallet72 on 24/07/2019 - 19:41
        
        @[Deactivated]: yup was the police, if it was just security or a ranger this would be a different discussion. Is it normal for police to enforce rules and regulations of parking providers?
        
        [Deactivated] on 24/07/2019 - 20:03
        
        +1
        
        @wallet72: I don't really know what the function of the police is so I can't tell you.
        
        I'm always told that the police have too many important things to do than chase up on things like burglaries, snatch theft, etc. yet they're constantly on traffic duty and thuggish crime seem to go unchallenged.
- [Deactivated] on 25/07/2019 - 07:48
  
  +1
  
  But making disabled people forfeit their privacy is discriminatory surely.
  - [Deactivated] on 25/07/2019 - 08:49
    
    +2
    
    The purpose of the requirement isn't to expose disabled people but to ensure the permits are not abused.
    
    If the permits are abused, actually disabled people would not benefit from said parking in the first place.
    
    Besides, it's voluntary. There is no requirement for disabled people to park in a disabled spot hence the exposure is entirely voluntary.
    - [Deactivated] on 27/07/2019 - 10:44
      
      +1
      
      This is just like the punitary welfare compliance measures, it's to stop fraud, but actually hurts the people the service is meant for.
      
      And what is the point of having a disabled parking spot, but making it so disabled people won't use it?
      
      I think these arguments are a poor excuse for discriminatory rules.
      - [Deactivated] on 27/07/2019 - 11:30
        
        @[Deactivated]: Your argument is entirely based on the assumption that disabled people will not use it.
        
        People who receive welfare payments have to show up at welfare offices. Their requirement to be seen in these offices can be seen as damaging to their personal image. They still attend.
        
        Furthermore, disability concessions are positive discrimination. If the idea is to remove any potential for discrimination, these parking spots will not be marked and anyone should be able to use it.
        
        You can't enforce special concessions without discrimination. They're mutually dependant.
Baysew on 24/07/2019 - 17:45

And on a lesser note, since when is there a limit on how many tickets can be questioned when they are issued incorrectly?

It would be the "Three strikes and you are out" rule being applied.
- wallet72 on 24/07/2019 - 18:02
  
  +3
  
  but why does it count as a strike if the ticket was invalid? That's like saying 'you get three attempts to catch our mistake, after that we can do what we want'
  - Baysew on 25/07/2019 - 08:32
    
    It's just not cricket.
zambuck on 25/07/2019 - 08:31

Taking a slightly different view on this, are the uni implying that they'll be somehow cross-checking the name and photo displayed on a vehicle with another data source? Will you get a ticket because you had a haircut or grew a beard and they couldn't confirm on CCTV it was you who walked away from your car?
- [Deactivated] on 25/07/2019 - 09:05
  
  +2
  
  It's a minimum deterrant to ensure the disability permit matches the user.
  
  I seriously doubt there's any sinister intent. It's much easier to just milk cash from people not coming to a complete stop at the stop signs than this convoluted system that only applies to disability spots.
davidem on 25/07/2019 - 10:24

+3

NSW Government Ranger here.
Disability Parking permit holder specifically states how the card is to be displayed (photo/personal details face down). If not displayed correctly, it is not valid. I have seen a number of interstate holders, and they contain the same wording.
If you check here though [DSS] (https://www.dss.gov.au/our-responsibilities/disability-and-c…) both text and video states you must observe all local parking conditions.
What a balls up is my summary. Personally, I’d go to court and challenge the infringement.
- wallet72 on 25/07/2019 - 10:57
  
  +1
  
  thanks for the input. It seems the uni requirement is next to impossible to do - Canberra permits don't have photos - and in NSW, it states on the website that it should be displayed without identifying information. Hard to get to talk to anyone at the uni they just fob it off as a 'police issue'.
  i don't want to over think this, but if parking conditions are contrary to the law, I find it pretty hard to believe that would be a valid defence if it got to court - 'I know I broke the law, but the parking conditions told me I had to'.
  - kiitos on 26/07/2019 - 08:31
    
    Do you have an ACT permit or a NSW one? Have you had any similar problem elsewhere?
    - wallet72 on 26/07/2019 - 08:45
      
      +1
      
      no problem elsewhere, and the permit is issued in NSW. Saying that, the ACT ones don't have a photo on them either so there is no way we can conform to the university parking rules without adding a photo, but then that voids the permit because it can't be altered.
      
      If I was a suspicious person - which I am - I would say that the police drive through the car park at night and just fine every car in a disabled spot. They play the odds that few people will kick up a fuss. Hell, I'm about to take this further only because the last official response implied that 'two reviews is enough'.
Speckled Jim on 25/07/2019 - 13:00

This should really be an administrative responsibility of the University.
If they're genuinely concerned with abuse of limited parking spaces, they should request all permit holders allow them to copy the permit and vehicle registration details. Those not on the approved list may then be fined.

This is far preferable to displaying personal information for all to see. It should spare people with a legitimately issued entitlement the added stress of the current blanket fines policy.

If the parking area is publicly accessible? If someone parks there for the first time or just visiting, and they cop a penalty?
They should argue no such permit display conditions were signposted for them to follow. If there are signs, the Uni is trying to impose additional conditions on a State/Territory-issued permit.
May force them to rethink the situation.
- wallet72 on 25/07/2019 - 14:47
  
  +1
  
  publicly accessible parking, and the signs do not have the extra uni imposed condition displayed… actually, it is only on their website hmmmm
  - Speckled Jim on 25/07/2019 - 16:49
    
    Then it's merely a whim; a preference. I'd ignore it.
    - wallet72 on 26/07/2019 - 08:45
      
      +1
      
      can't ignore it - it's a government issued parking ticket, not just some random invoice from a parking company.
greater mimic on 26/07/2019 - 09:04

+4

You should enlist the legal students to fight for you
DialIN on 26/07/2019 - 09:16

+4

I would have thought Chapter 2 of the Australian Privacy Principles applies here.
https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/australian-privacy-principle…

Neither the university nor the police actually require direct identifiable information such as name or photo to carry out the duties of parking enforcement.
A valid parking permit is held and displayed according to state laws, and an entity cannot force disclosure of personally identifying information that is in addition to what is required to carry out their normal work.
I would argue this includes the police, as during their day to day operations, you are only required to provide identification to a police officer if they reasonably believe you have committed a crime.
FareEvader on 26/07/2019 - 09:40

+2

Are you a law student? Seems like the perfect opportunity for your thesis
Exyvia on 26/07/2019 - 12:00

In the simplest way, if you are parking in a private area, you are agreeing to their terms and condition in addition to the law.
- Kangal on 26/07/2019 - 12:58
  
  +1
  
  Not if they are issuing fines from the government, instead of a private bill.
- one man clan on 26/07/2019 - 13:18
  
  Not of those terms and conditions contravene other laws (including relating to privacy)
field1985 on 26/07/2019 - 13:28

If it is on private land (ie Uni property/shopping centres/etc) then they write and enforce (private security) their own rules.

If it is on Public Road (if Police issued the tickets, this is the case) then you must obey the Government rules (Council/State Gov).

The police/government have no authority to issue parking tickets on private land.
GregMonarch on 26/07/2019 - 14:40

I don't know why people park on Uni grounds. When I went to Uni, cars were broken into on a nearly daily basis. And you had to get there an hour before anything was open. If you turned up 15 minutes before class and you'd be driving around in circles for an hour hoping someone would leave - and that no-one else saw them leaving before you did. It was easier to park on the side streets outside.

What Takes Precedent - State and Federal Law or Parking Area Terms and Conditions?

Comments

New Forum Topics