Surely the shortest parking fine ever?

Surely the shortest parking fine ever?

Author
Discussion

DarrenO'D'

Original Poster:

111 posts

172 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
I get a few of these over the course of my work, but I think this one may be the most over zealous yet, check out the time stamps

Tye Green

791 posts

116 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
not sure what the post and pictures are saying?

Rufus Stone

8,189 posts

63 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
Tye Green said:
not sure what the post and pictures are saying?
Proof of being parked for 2 seconds. Pay up sucker.

Boleros

655 posts

13 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
Two seconds, legend!

Pica-Pica

14,450 posts

91 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
The photos are only two seconds apart. With no driver in the vehicle that is probably all that is needed to establish it was parked. The vehicle may have been actually parked for much longer. Nothing to see here.

havoc

30,870 posts

242 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
Pica-Pica said:
The photos are only two seconds apart. With no driver in the vehicle that is probably all that is needed to establish it was parked. The vehicle may have been actually parked for much longer. Nothing to see here.
Erm, did you LOOK at the photo? hehe

(Y'know, the fact that it's the rear of a van. Unless you or the warden are Superman, that's going to be a difficult argument to win...)

Pica-Pica

14,450 posts

91 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
havoc said:
Pica-Pica said:
The photos are only two seconds apart. With no driver in the vehicle that is probably all that is needed to establish it was parked. The vehicle may have been actually parked for much longer. Nothing to see here.
Erm, did you LOOK at the photo? hehe

(Y'know, the fact that it's the rear of a van. Unless you or the warden are Superman, that's going to be a difficult argument to win...)
Did I say the photos showed no driver in the van? Er, no. The photos were taken, and ascertaining of no driver in the van is an immediately preceding or immediately subsequent event.

DarrenO'D'

Original Poster:

111 posts

172 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
havoc said:
Pica-Pica said:
The photos are only two seconds apart. With no driver in the vehicle that is probably all that is needed to establish it was parked. The vehicle may have been actually parked for much longer. Nothing to see here.
Erm, did you LOOK at the photo? hehe

(Y'know, the fact that it's the rear of a van. Unless you or the warden are Superman, that's going to be a difficult argument to win...)
I was in the van, pulling into a parking space by the wholesaler, engine running indicator on. Apparently this estate is notorious for this type of thing, not a local one to me.

Pica-Pica

14,450 posts

91 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
DarrenO'D' said:
havoc said:
Pica-Pica said:
The photos are only two seconds apart. With no driver in the vehicle that is probably all that is needed to establish it was parked. The vehicle may have been actually parked for much longer. Nothing to see here.
Erm, did you LOOK at the photo? hehe

(Y'know, the fact that it's the rear of a van. Unless you or the warden are Superman, that's going to be a difficult argument to win...)
I was in the van, pulling into a parking space by the wholesaler, engine running indicator on. Apparently this estate is notorious for this type of thing, not a local one to me.
Here is an example of a list of photographs needed to back up an enforcement.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/parking_enf...

eldar

22,735 posts

203 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
Pica-Pica said:
Here is an example of a list of photographs needed to back up an enforcement.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/parking_enf...
A requirement to photograph the tax disk? Islington is really up to speed there smile or was, in 2008....

Boleros

655 posts

13 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
Moderately amusing thread turns into a pissing contest shock. Pica man wins.

havoc

30,870 posts

242 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
Pica-Pica said:
Did I say the photos showed no driver in the van? Er, no. The photos were taken, and ascertaining of no driver in the van is an immediately preceding or immediately subsequent event.
You clearly implied it. Don't try to get clever after the event, it doesn't work...

Pica-Pica

14,450 posts

91 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
havoc said:
Pica-Pica said:
Did I say the photos showed no driver in the van? Er, no. The photos were taken, and ascertaining of no driver in the van is an immediately preceding or immediately subsequent event.
You clearly implied it. Don't try to get clever after the event, it doesn't work...
Your assumption, not my inference.
It could always be challenged. Two favourable outcomes:
Winning or learning.
OP. Out of interest, was it a no stopping or no parking location?
Anyway I have no personal interest/business in this.

Super Sonic

7,224 posts

61 months

Sunday 21st July
quotequote all
Pica-Pica said:
havoc said:
Pica-Pica said:
Did I say the photos showed no driver in the van? Er, no. The photos were taken, and ascertaining of no driver in the van is an immediately preceding or immediately subsequent event.
You clearly implied it. Don't try to get clever after the event, it doesn't work...
Your assumption, not my inference.
It could always be challenged. Two favourable outcomes:
Winning or learning.
OP. Out of interest, was it a no stopping or no parking location?
Anyway I have no personal interest/business in this.
No, you definitely implied it,
Pica-Pica said:
The photos are only two seconds apart. With no driver in the vehicle THAT IS PROBABLY ALL THAT IS NEEDED
Which excludes any 'preceding or immediately subsequent event'