Surely the shortest parking fine ever?

[DarrenO'D']

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]

not sure what the post and pictures are saying?

[anonymous-user]

Tye Green said:

not sure what the post and pictures are saying?

Proof of being parked for 2 seconds. Pay up sucker.

[Boleros]

Two seconds, legend!

[Pica-Pica]

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]

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?

(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]

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?

(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']

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?

(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]

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?

(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]

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 or was, in 2008....

[Boleros]

Moderately amusing thread turns into a pissing contest shock. Pica man wins.

[havoc]

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]

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]

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'