PDA

View Full Version : Ticketing of Bikes - Footpath and Wof/Rego tickets



motorbyclist
2nd October 2007, 16:37
today i got a $200 ticket for not having a having a WOF which i do infact have diplayed (and no sign of them moving/checking it), and $40 for parking out of the way - i don't see those bins getting a ticket

you bet i'm angry

apparently i have to write to them disputing the tickets, and then if they disagree i have to appear in court at 10am during the week to state my case

all this at my cost, and i'll be missing important lectures.:argue:


on the upside, i went to the testing station to get another WOF sticker to stick in the front, claiming the old one to be stolen. my current wof expires in december 2007, the new one expires december 2008:woohoo: - saves me getting two warrants / $50 but i will have to anyway for insurance

motorbyclist
2nd October 2007, 16:42
oh fuck me, i mustnt have put my current wof in the holder.... not that he checked the year it expires or anything (not a mark on it, and the ticket says i failed to display the wof)

owell, i'm still not paying either fine

Squiggles
2nd October 2007, 16:57
ring up the city council, get put thru to the parking people, get their fax number (if it aint on their website)

A while back they were ticketing bikes on symonds for not displaying wof's (well, more of a case that the guy wasnt looking, i pointed out them on 5 bikes, 2 of which he'd ticketed), rang the council and was told that when they receive the ticket, if they fax in their wof sticker then they'll drop the fine...



as for the parking ticket... we're aiming to attend the next transport committee meeting to oppose this sort've ticketing, dont know what you can do for now but you're a good example of whats happening if nothing else :)

avgas
2nd October 2007, 16:59
That sucks man, i dont really see how they can get you for it.
I have shot into AUT many moons ago on a GB with no rego, no wof, no plate and no exhaust and not got a ticket

Macstar
2nd October 2007, 17:00
Didn't know the council could ticket you for not displaying a WOF, just say it fell off and post them a photocopy of your current one to prove you were up to-date at the time of the ticket. As for the other ticket, that could be a hard one to argue cause you can't park on a footpath.

Phurrball
2nd October 2007, 17:00
Farkers!

What was the parking officer number? I have a big problem with officer 88 personally, he's a nasty little man!

Will dig out my parking policy guidelines I got from the council... We'll check tickets properly issued.

My feeling is that you should get off the no WOF ticket - provided you produce evidence of current WOF.

PM me if you want a hand - I'm a veteran at this bollocks...

UberRhys
2nd October 2007, 17:00
today i got a $200 ticket for not having a having a WOF which i do infact have diplayed (and no sign of them moving/checking it), and $40 for parking out of the way - i don't see those bins getting a ticket

you bet i'm angry

apparently i have to write to them disputing the tickets, and then if they disagree i have to appear in court at 10am during the week to state my case

all this at my cost, and i'll be missing important lectures.:argue:


on the upside, i went to the testing station to get another WOF sticker to stick in the front, claiming the old one to be stolen. my current wof expires in december 2007, the new one expires december 2008:woohoo: - saves me getting two warrants / $50

Man that blows, I had a chat to one of those parking nazi's not so long ago and he said so long as it doesn't cause an obstruction then you should be okay. In this case it seems the parking warden must have not got his morning coffee and fag as to me you look nothing like causing an obstruction.

With regard to writing in to get the ticket cancelled, I have had good success. Just ensure to state your case, read the bylaw he has done you with and go about picking it apart. Use the photos as evidence. Say the wof was behind the plate. If you have to follow the law, we should all have screens on our bikes and scoots so we can legally display the rego - but that ain't never gonna happen now ehh... lol

Also nice work on scoring the wof for another year.

twinkle
2nd October 2007, 17:02
the sign says reserved parking :laugh:

scracha
2nd October 2007, 17:35
Do the UK trick of putting a sock over your numberplate if you park it on the pavement. Only a copper is allowed to touch your motorcycle and therefore they can't issue a ticket unless they can see the numberplate.

Finn
2nd October 2007, 17:51
Okay, the ticket for the warrant sucks but you are parking on the footpath on a busy road where there are plenty of wardens. You're lucky it doesn't get stolen with all the scum hanging around the High Court.

motorbyclist
2nd October 2007, 17:57
the sign says reserved parking :laugh:

that's for the parking lot down the driveway


That sucks man, i dont really see how they can get you for it.
I have shot into AUT many moons ago on a GB with no rego, no wof, no plate and no exhaust and not got a ticket

i've been parking in that exact same spot from 10am-11am every tuesday all semester


Didn't know the council could ticket you for not displaying a WOF, just say it fell off and post them a photocopy of your current one to prove you were up to-date at the time of the ticket. As for the other ticket, that could be a hard one to argue cause you can't park on a footpath.

send them my 2008 one? doesn't seem like a good idea to me.... maybe get them to check their records

twinkle
2nd October 2007, 18:45
that's for the parking lot down the driveway

I know, it's just funny you got a ticket when you were parked next to it.

bomma
2nd October 2007, 19:35
umm i got done for parkin on alfred st footpath before it was closed off, was fuming coz id parked there for almost a whole year, even in the presence of parking wardens and had never been told i cudnt...wrote my case and took it into the place up the road from imax.....they just said sweet and wrote it off....

just try going there and see what happens....i think its a city council building?? correct me if im wrong but its the massive building up the road from imax and aotea square....

Squiggles
2nd October 2007, 21:01
on the upside, i went to the testing station to get another WOF sticker to stick in the front, claiming the old one to be stolen. my current wof expires in december 2007, the new one expires december 2008:woohoo: - saves me getting two warrants / $50

sadly unless they entered it in the system as a year long warrant (if they can even do this... doubt it) then ya wont get away with it if its checked :( wont be able to reg ya bike as their system will tell them that its not warrented

motorbyclist
2nd October 2007, 21:41
bugger....


oh and bomma, that building i believe is the aucklnad city town hall

klyong82
2nd October 2007, 22:14
I think it is the Auckland City council it is a big tall building behind the town hall.

bomma
2nd October 2007, 23:12
I think it is the Auckland City council it is a big tall building behind the town hall.

thats the one....yea go along there and haf a chat with the ladies that work there....very nice and very understandin :2thumbsup

HungusMaximist
2nd October 2007, 23:22
When you get into situations like these I always say ''just whip out your cock and plant it on the reception desk and everybody will start running scared shitless, and everything will work itself out from there'', but that was some of the juvenile crap we talked about back in junior high where everything seemed so carefree...

Don't think it's such a good idea anymore though.... haha...


But yes, do challenge the fine!

Winter
3rd October 2007, 00:04
I think it is the Auckland City council it is a big tall building behind the town hall.

Thats the civic building. houses the ACC yeap.

Ground floor on the left as you go in is the parking ticket place. Its on Grays ave if your riding in.

howdamnhard
3rd October 2007, 00:29
Just photo copy your current WOF and send it to them along with a nice polite letter explaining to them that your a nice law abidding citizen who is all paid up.I got a fine for$240 a while back for not displaying a current license,I had forgotten to immediately put in my windscreen after renewing it.They dropped it.:rolleyes:

klyong82
3rd October 2007, 09:08
thats the one....yea go along there and haf a chat with the ladies that work there....very nice and very understandin :2thumbsup

Yeah I go there every year telling the ladies I am in financial hardship:crybaby: to pay my rates and they give me a rabate haha. :woohoo:


When you get into situations like these I always say ''just whip out your cock and plant it on the reception desk and everybody will start running scared shitless, and everything will work itself out from there'', but that was some of the juvenile crap we talked about


:laugh: Back in my hometown a couple of my "brothers" did this...before taking their car licence they would take out a "parang" and place it on the dashboard. They passed :shifty:


Thats the civic building. houses the ACC yeap.

Ground floor on the left as you go in is the parking ticket place. Its on Grays ave if your riding in.


Yup thats the one. Address is 1 Greys Avenue. I also included a picture of the building haha

Macstar
3rd October 2007, 09:38
Or better still, ride your bike through the front doors of the building, giving it full peppers up to the front desk and then slam on the rear brake, sliding sideways to the counter and then say, "look bitch, do you see that WOF!?". Then rev it to redline, drop the clutch and jump through the glass window out on to the footpath.

Right, I seriously need to start doing some uni work.... No more KB for me till after 6pm tonight.

ehab2weelr
3rd October 2007, 16:07
its now starting to sound like xxx3 or diehard 6 or something just for a parking tiket.hahahah
perantly we cant even ride on foot paths!!!! wtf.... that was the only fun i had ...hahah:innocent:

just find the parking fag and do a burnout on his balls and tell "do u c the wof now?"
that could do the job. or just buy some time sleeping in a 6 by 4. hahah

UberRhys
3rd October 2007, 16:17
just find the parking fag and do a burnout on his balls and tell "do u c the wof now?"

That is fantastic - kinda reminds me of Lock, Stock and 2 Loaded Barrels when they find a parking warden in then van full of buds and they all give him a kicking so he doesn't nark. :jerry:

motorbyclist
3rd October 2007, 17:53
well i've put the "2008" warrant on the front now, held on by a wing mirror bolt. the old one was covered in grime and chain lube and crap, so had the warden bothered he wouldn't have been able to read it lol

i'm thinking of putting the rego up the front somewhere too

motorbyclist
8th October 2007, 15:26
so guess what happened today

a $12 ticket! the cheek!

klyong82
8th October 2007, 15:32
so guess what happened today

a $12 ticket! the cheek!

Man .....the wardens are been hard ... but seriously that bike was not obstructing the footpath. What is the fault? Parking at non designated vehicle parking ?

motorbyclist
8th October 2007, 15:45
fucked if i know what's wrong, i've been using that spot since the start of this year

Squiggles
8th October 2007, 20:42
the tickets dont state the offense do they? if they dont, ring and find out what exactly they did it for.. would like to know

Macstar
8th October 2007, 20:45
Was it the same parking warden?

Squiggles
8th October 2007, 21:11
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/libraries/contents/om_isapi.dll?clientID=2169160633&infobase=pal_regs.nfo&jump=r2004-427%2Fpt.6&softpage=DOC

6.14Parking on footpaths or cycle paths



(1)A driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle on a footpath or on a cycle path.




(2)Subclause (1) does not apply to cycles if a road controlling authority indicates otherwise by means of signs or markings or if it installs facilities for the parking, standing, or storage of cycles on a footpath or cycle path.




(3)Nothing in subclause (1) prevents a person from stopping, standing, or parking a cycle, mobility device, or wheeled recreational device on a footpath if doing so does not unreasonably obstruct any other user of the footpath.


Compare: SR 1976/227 r 35(2)(k)

So if i put a 38cc bicycle engine on my pushbike wont i be allowed to lean it up against the tree next to motorbyclists bike without being ticketed?
lol @ wheeled recreational device... does the tl count as that? :D

that $12 one is an interesting one... you aren't parked on the footpath, or in a place a car could park...

hmm, why cant the traffic wardens show up outside my place @ 8am???? i barely manage to leave the driveway somedays with all the crazy dio parents parking (and often leaving their cars parked) on double yellows over the blind hill and coming tearing into my driveway, despite several calls last term all my olds got was a piece of paper to write down the traffic offenses on... but thats a winge, although i shall ask the next parking guy i see :D

Disco Dan
8th October 2007, 21:19
ive parked in that exact same spot many a time before.. never had a problem.

PirateJafa
8th October 2007, 21:59
(3)Nothing in subclause (1) prevents a person from stopping, standing, or parking a cycle, mobility device, or wheeled recreational device on a footpath if doing so does not unreasonably obstruct any other user of the footpath.

Doesn't specify bicycle... anyone want to argue that a motorcycle could legally park there?

motorbyclist
8th October 2007, 23:07
the tickets dont state the offense do they? if they dont, ring and find out what exactly they did it for.. would like to know

it says i parked for not more than 30 minutes in excess of maximum authorised time, which is interesting, cause i was there atleast 40 minutes and i was right next to the pole saying 5 minutes one way and 90 (pay and display) minutes the other

point being the whole point in ticketing is to enforce parking restrictions, which are in turn meant to aid traffic flow and ensure fair turnover of parking spots. by bringing my bike i allow someone else to park in a car space, yet if i brought my car and paid and kept paying every hour i could occupy a space for the whole day without incident. so really the whole system is pointless and only serves to fill auckland city's coffers.


Was it the same parking warden?

nope, unless they change numbers...

motorbyclist
8th October 2007, 23:19
as for the law, even if it isn't the exact word of the law i still adhere to the spirit of the law, fucking wardens just seem out to gather revenue off poor bloody students

xwhatsit
8th October 2007, 23:55
the tickets dont state the offense do they? if they dont, ring and find out what exactly they did it for.. would like to know

Yep, they do say the offence. Check out my ticket (with the cocked up number plate, saved me some money that did :D).

motorbyclist
9th October 2007, 00:15
it'd help if they used plain english though


for my wof, "NO EVIDENCE OF INSPECTION - NOT BEING A HEAVY MOTOR VEHICLE USED IN A TRANSPORT SERVICE"

i called them up, and yes, that basically means i either didn't have a current wof displayed, or it was expired

it seems auckland city now calls a warrant of fitness an "evidence of vehicle inspection"

motorbyclist
9th October 2007, 00:17
Yep, they do say the offence. Check out my ticket (with the cocked up number plate, saved me some money that did :D).

lol, every friday i park on the footpath (or on the grass) by the clocktower for a lecture in LLT

no trouble, yet<_<

motorbyclist
9th October 2007, 00:45
it's not just bikes they're picking on!

just got an email from a cager mate who drove to uni today cause the bus/train is so shit lately.

got a $40 ticket for parking on a footpath despite being in a paid car park

bomma
9th October 2007, 14:37
6.14Parking on footpaths or cycle paths

(3)Nothing in subclause (1) prevents a person from stopping, standing, or parking a cycle, mobility device, or wheeled recreational device on a footpath if doing so does not unreasonably obstruct any other user of the footpath.


Compare: SR 1976/227 r 35(2)(k)

my bike is a mobility device, i use it to get from point A to point B....and by parking it against a wall near the lockers it does not "unreasonably obstruct any other users of the footpath"....does this mean that they are fulla shit when they say that we cant park by the lockers??

motorbyclist
9th October 2007, 20:43
uni property and public footpaths are two different things

bomma
9th October 2007, 23:25
uni property and public footpaths are two different things

on the warning slips they issued, it clearly stated the offence as parking on the footpath

and the clause does not distinguish between private and public property

motorbyclist
9th October 2007, 23:33
auckland city cannot ticket you for parking on uni property, nor does auckland city give warnings - they have rules that govern the public spaces they provide

the uni, however, is decent enough to give you a warning, but it's their property so we really can't rely on the law to help us here. i know i got a warning last semester for parking on the grass outside the engineering building, warning said i was on a footpath, auckland city had nothing to do with it - it's their land, their rules, but they need to realise we're the ones paying for most of it so we should have a fair say, which i believe is the whole point behind AUSA

bomma
9th October 2007, 23:43
auckland city cannot ticket you for parking on uni property, nor does auckland city give warnings - they have rules that govern the public spaces they provide

the uni, however, is decent enough to give you a warning, but it's their property so we really can't rely on the law to help us here. i know i got a warning last semester for parking on the grass outside the engineering building, warning said i was on a footpath, auckland city had nothing to do with it - it's their land, their rules, but they need to realise we're the ones paying for most of it so we should have a fair say, which i believe is the whole point behind AUSA

yea i guess you're right......you make two good points

1) their land their rules - they are cunts so we cant rely on auck city legislation to help in the other parking issues we're having. This is helpful for your dilemma though

2) AUSA - they have a meeting every wed at 1 right?? we could just put forth a motion and get the randoms that sit around to vote on it and hope we get enough people to raise their hands

good stuff andrew, you're a thinker aye :niceone:

motorbyclist
11th October 2007, 14:11
so today i parked where nish parked yesterday by the bank at uni, and he parked outside the bank sign. both of us out of the way, and in the dry.

sure enough when i went to leave today (right after talking to isaac cause i couldn't decide what i wanted for lunch) there was a note from the uni notifying me that i shouldn't be parked there, and nish had one too - then as soon as i went to leave the rain started too:argh:

i
hate
wardens

are they stupid, or just dickheads? the whole point of their job it to ensure no-one parks in the way of anyone or where they will become a hazard, yet they insist on ticketing everyone and everything they bloody see that could be considered ticketable in any way.:angry2:

atleast they didn't fine me, just threatened to tow, so in that sense i'm not too worried, unlike the bloody auckland city tickets. speaking of which, i only had 40c stamps to post with, so i stuck two on the envelope with my disputes of the tickets. sure enough today, i found that one of said stamps was in the bottom of my bag, so either my job application for scooter riding or those tickets' disputes will not get where they're going, and either way i'm screwed.
teach me for not putting a sender address on them:doh:

Macstar
11th October 2007, 14:27
Give in to the system man. Just park on Symonds st in the designated spots like 99% of the other bikers do.

motorbyclist
11th October 2007, 15:24
but that means hunting out a space, then not getting hit by a bus, and then hoping my bike is still there when i return. i know it's been stolen once already (probably by the guy we bought it off), and don't feel like buying another key/ignition thing for $500 (and for those theifs who brought a philips instead of flathead screwdriver, it definetly isn't hard to hotwire:shutup:)

maybe if i park in the bicycle cage the wardens won't be able to get in to ticket my bike:lol:

xwhatsit
11th October 2007, 23:19
Those uni warnings aren't from wardens, they're from the Unisafe university security chaps. Higher orders from uni folks, not the fags-with-ticket-printers, cunts-in-blue-caps Auckland Council arseclowns.

motorbyclist
11th October 2007, 23:49
yes i realise that

Tickler
12th October 2007, 18:11
In the end of the day people are trying to turn things to their advantage, even though most people dont mind (however somebody obviously does). If everybody went around doing things that pleased them, then we would have carnage.

Auckland uni can do what they like on their property, and auckland city can enforce their laws in their jurisdiction. If they get it wrong, write in and tell them, they will have to correct their mistakes.

Most bikers dont seem to have this problem when they park properly on symonds street...i wonder why that is.
I understand some people worry about bikes getting stolen or getting hit by a bus. But i havent seen or heard (havent been listening for) of anyone getting hit on symonds street trying to get into parks. And you really cant stop bike theft of they want it THAT badly.
Rant over.

xwhatsit
12th October 2007, 23:33
We've been through the Symonds St issues before. I'll restate it again.

First of all, theft is out of the equation. You're quite right. Public parking has no responsibility to protect your bike from theft, I'm sorry.

However Symonds St is bad. It's dangerous -- you may not have heard of anybody being hit, but I tell you now, it is only a matter of time before some guy gets squashed backing into a park, or turning right up towards Newton. Compared to Alfred St or Princes St it is stupid.

But most importantly there's the problem of capacity. Since Alfred St was closed, we have substantially less parking. Extra parks on Symonds St were opened, but they have not even come close to covering what was lost, and as summer rolls out and people get back onto their bikes, there's going to be a massive crisis in terms of parking availability. Already in winter we had many times where Symonds St was at capacity.

motorbyclist
12th October 2007, 23:36
just cause no-one has been hit yet doesn't mean it wont happen

and having to write in for tickets i shouldn't have is time consuming and frustrating

Squiggles
13th October 2007, 00:22
In the end of the day people are trying to turn things to their advantage, even though most people dont mind (however somebody obviously does). If everybody went around doing things that pleased them, then we would have carnage.

Auckland uni can do what they like on their property, and auckland city can enforce their laws in their jurisdiction. If they get it wrong, write in and tell them, they will have to correct their mistakes.

Most bikers dont seem to have this problem when they park properly on symonds street...i wonder why that is.
I understand some people worry about bikes getting stolen or getting hit by a bus. But i havent seen or heard (havent been listening for) of anyone getting hit on symonds street trying to get into parks. And you really cant stop bike theft of they want it THAT badly.
Rant over.

For a rant very little was stated asides from the obvious, with the first part a comment on human nature? :eek5: But here is a little on most of the things said (most of which relate to parking inside the campus)


Yes it is a luxury to be able to park off the road, and we would like to ensure that this luxury is available for not just ourselves but those to come.
If it is a resolvable conflict then why not try to do just that?


I must say though, to counter your second point, that as the students which provide the backbone on which the university functions, one might step as far as to say that the university is in fact, student's property, and that, with reference to parking undercover, as long as no other students/staff are inconvenienced by us parking there we be left to do so. This is as opposed to being "kicked out" of otherwise usable but unused space just "because they can" which is seemingly the case on many of these "warning notices".


With regards to point three, I find parking on symonds st to be fine, and will do so if i am approaching from the harbour side or along symonds st, not on my tl as i prefer not to ride it to uni. In doing so I have in the last year had several close encounters with cars and buses, particularly at the harbour end of the bike parking where sudden lane changes are made, cutting very close to the parking, in order to avoid those stopped for the right hand turn, with capacity at full bikes with larger turning radius' are forced into the lanes of these drivers, in an attempt to squeeze into what is on a sunny day, insufficient parking to meet the demands placed on it. The only possible way i can see of avoiding such difficulty (if you own one of these bikes) involves riding the length of the parks on the busy footpath.
You have not seen anyone being knocked off just as you probably havent seen anyone stealing bikes, but both do happen. :(

The lack of security on symonds has become more apparent with the thefts this year and the the targets of the theft being larger sports bikes.
So i agree again that while if they want it bad enough they will probably get it, if they do not know it exists then how will they take it? Is this not why we gargre our bikes? park out of sight or easy access?

The footpath parking debate is one that is being taken to the council (see other thread) via bronz, the change in attitude of parking officials is something that, i for one, want to know the basis for (especially for such offenses as the $12 one) :yes:

Squiggles
13th October 2007, 00:27
In the time it took me to write that post both of you posted :eek:

The warrants thing is getting silly, I've had 3 stolen because the warrant station writes on them in pen which fades after 2 days, leaving just a hole punched sticker to be taken. I showed one of the parking guys where they are commonly hidden in the hope of less of these tickets, but i've seen them going up and down the street writing them out since then :(

motorbyclist
13th October 2007, 00:55
First of all, theft is out of the equation. You're quite right. Public parking has no responsibility to protect your bike from theft, I'm sorry.

says the guy with the bike least likely to be nicked.


no you're right though, that's why i said earlier in the other thread that bikes should have priority over scooters when parking under the commons. also why i'm insured, also why i like to park off street

the problem is the police dont give a shit

motorbyclist
13th October 2007, 01:02
The footpath parking debate is one that is being taken to the council (see other thread) via bronz, the change in attitude of parking officials is something that, i for one, want to know the basis for (especially for such offenses as the $12 one) :yes:

yeah! i had a new student looking for the enrolment office come up to me on his 250 hyosung asking where he could park. we were on princes st and i was parked on the grass between parking and footpath. i said he could park anywhere but then he said a warden was giving him shit for it. i said the grass never saw me a ticket, but then warned him of my recent tickets.

you'd think that provided you're parked out of the way it wouldn't be a problem, but some people, like that dean and it would seem a few wardens or whoever is running them, are just dickheads

luckily today i figured out how to get into the commons parking via princes st without bottoming out on the curb, so i can park there now without going in via the pedestrian bit

Squiggles
13th October 2007, 01:05
no you're right though, that's why i said earlier in the other thread that bikes should have priority over scooters when parking under the commons

No0o0o0ooo! People spend their whole lives fighting for equality, we're not going to have any of this "its a scooter, it doesnt deserve to be there" shit going on down there
If a scooter rider wants to park there, they may also, but by the same notion, they should follow the etiquette of parking there. i.e. parking as tightly in as possible and out of the way, and saying ello to the rest of us :hug:

motorbyclist
13th October 2007, 01:07
In the time it took me to write that post both of you posted :eek:

The warrants thing is getting silly, I've had 3 stolen because the warrant station writes on them in pen which fades after 2 days, leaving just a hole punched sticker to be taken. I showed one of the parking guys where they are commonly hidden in the hope of less of these tickets, but i've seen them going up and down the street writing them out since then :(

ever tried following them, pointing out warrants? they get rather awkward and possibly scared and stop ticketing until you go away:clap:

motorbyclist
13th October 2007, 01:13
No0o0o0ooo! People spend their whole lives fighting for equality, we're not going to have any of this "its a scooter, it doesnt deserve to be there" shit going on down there
If a scooter rider wants to park there, they may also, but by the same notion, they should follow the etiquette of parking there. i.e. parking as tightly in as possible and out of the way, and saying ello to the rest of us :hug:

i'm not saying they're less important, but that it is easier for them to get into a spot on symonds than it is for me, and the chance of the scooter being stolen before mine is about a million to one. if my bike was guaranteed to not be stolen, and i could get into symonds safely without having to stalk out a wide space and a large gap in the traffic, i wouldn't mind scooter down there. if the parking situation/risk was equal, then we could have equality.

i'd like to give an analogy, but i can't think of a good one...

edit; and by scooter i include all fxr and gn bikes. basically, anything likely to be stolen. i think we can all agree that the r1 (who parks WAY to close to that door to the lockers) has top priority, along with the ducati998, then maybe nish's bike, the cbr600f that parks under the commons, my vfr, the tl if it's there, that asian guy's nice as black cbr250, then chris's bike which has no stand so can't park normally anymore, and the list keeps going down untill the theifs wont bother and move onto other parts of auckland

Squiggles
13th October 2007, 01:21
Its all good as long as we dont head down the path of "bikes only", while a sports bike shares more risk in being parked on symonds than a scooter (in regards to theft), we cant be saying that a sports bike is therefore entitled to a space over a scooter, lest my tl be kicking your bike outta the back there and a busa kicking me out ;)

The ease at which they can park on symonds is why they mostly do, and i suspect that the couple that do park in the back there come from the city side of campus (which is hardest to approach from to get onto symonds st for parking)

motorbyclist
13th October 2007, 01:26
maybe if we electrify our bikes they'll think twice before ticketing/stealing them:lol:

just run an electric tape, powered by a few car batteries down the whole length of symonds and hook your bike up to it with cable/padlock. gloves should insulate us, and sparks/arcing should deter all them:rofl: (just watch it doesn't cause a fire or damage to electrics though)


edit: omg genius! just hook everyone's batteries together! like organise it and shit so you have to have a working alternator/battery and when you leave you don't break the high voltage chain

Squiggles
13th October 2007, 01:29
i think we can all agree that the r1 (who parks WAY to close to that door to the lockers) has top priority, along with the ducati998, then maybe nish's bike, the cbr600f that parks under the commons, my vfr, the tl if it's there, that asian guy's nice as black cbr250, then chris's bike which has no stand so can't park normally anymore, and the list keeps going down untill the theifs wont bother and move onto other parts of auckland

*sigh*

Chris' bike is the only one that actually needs to be there, i dont think the scooter riders would fancy it being propped up against one of them! :lol:

I think it should be a first come first served arrangement, just like normal parking, we all make as much room as possible for others, and if theres no more room left then you're outta luck and have to go find another place (Note: NOT along the wall/walkway). There'll be a perfect balance sooner or later :)

motorbyclist
13th October 2007, 01:30
Its all good as long as we dont head down the path of "bikes only", while a sports bike shares more risk in being parked on symonds than a scooter (in regards to theft), we cant be saying that a sports bike is therefore entitled to a space over a scooter, lest my tl be kicking your bike outta the back there and a busa kicking me out ;)

The ease at which they can park on symonds is why they mostly do, and i suspect that the couple that do park in the back there come from the city side of campus (which is hardest to approach from to get onto symonds st for parking)

yeah i'm not saying bikes only, just priority. i would move over for the r1.

hell i deliberatley never parked by that steel bar so those with bike locks could use them rather than me wasting precious space. then i saw a scooter had taken up the last spot but never tied up! i don't think they realise why people were parking there. similarily i had no prob moving elsewhere when chris took my spot cause his stand was broken and he needed that pillar to lean on - even if the stand IS entirely his fault:P

motorbyclist
13th October 2007, 01:37
*sigh*

Chris' bike is the only one that actually needs to be there, i dont think the scooter riders would fancy it being propped up against one of them! :lol:

haha it'd be scooter dominoes all down symonds st:laugh:



I think it should be a first come first served arrangement, just like normal parking, we all make as much room as possible for others, and if theres no more room left then you're outta luck and have to go find another place (Note: NOT along the wall/walkway). There'll be a perfect balance sooner or later :)

well that IS more or less what we have now... cept when i tried today to get in the spot under the commons over by the cages i found the vfr is damn heavy to be dragging sideways between two bikes (ehab's and a blue vtr) cause my turning circle is so poor.

how long till we start filling up the courtyard there and get kicked out again you reckon?

Tickler
13th October 2007, 10:25
Squiggles, your not preparing for a 2000 word essay are you?:chase:

Some interesting things, but alot of the issues here are very grey areas,

The problems with where we are allowed to park mainly rise out of the fact that the uni etc have there own agenda and things they want to do.
Being able to say that it is student owned has some merit, i mean after all you own you 1/10000 share of the student % of income plus your 1/4000000 share of the government funding.
I pay taxes so by the same argument i should own the police and force them to find stolen bikes? I would rather live another day with them stopping murderers than have my bike found. Although they could stop paying that bloody Riccard's salary while hes at uni. that should improve the police budget!
I mean, if every body sat down and worked this out together we wouldnt have problems, but alas this isnt a perfect world. Bakini bike wash friday never happens:weep: (although i think it should).
Why shouldnt we be allowed to utlise wasted space in a visually unpleasent part of uni, nobody really sees? obviously the system is flawed


While no-one has been hit on symonds st yet (touch wood), and it seems blind to wait until it happens. I dont think many council dept's wouldn't take note until it did happen (unfortunately):weep:

Overall, its not the best situation for us all. but life is all about comprimise.
P.s surely midnight on a friday is TL wheelie practice :banana:

motorbyclist
13th October 2007, 11:04
i'm not asking police stop murder investigations to find a bike, but they seem quite happy to set up speed traps and just drive around looking to ticket people rather than find stolen goods. i mean, people make a good living stealing things off us working people/students. perhaps if this was to change our insurance premiums might go down a bit too.

and it's a democracy - the government works for us, not the other way round, so we should able to demand that the police make a shift from minor speeding offenses (which the real offenders with unsafe vehicles/dangerous driving/no licence never actually pay for) to "real" crime.

same for the uni, and alfred st parking - we pay for it, we should have some say! especially as us parking on uni property/alfred st is of no inconvienience to anyone else.

Jabez
13th October 2007, 11:38
Doesn't specify bicycle... anyone want to argue that a motorcycle could legally park there?

Since the cycle & motorcycle are defined.. Good luck with that one.

Cycle and motorcycle are defined in 1.6 interpretation, "Preliminary provisions" of Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004:
cycle—

(a)means a vehicle that has at least 2 wheels and that is designed primarily to be propelled by the muscular energy of the rider; and

(b)includes a power-assisted cycle


motorcycle—

(a)means a motor vehicle running on 2 wheels, or not more than 3 wheels when fitted with a sidecar; and

(b)includes a vehicle with motorcycle controls that is approved as a motorcycle by the Director; but

(c)does not include a moped

moT
13th October 2007, 12:45
nice vfr man

motorbyclist
13th October 2007, 12:51
thanx

damn white rims may look good but they're a nightmare to keep clean

twinkle
13th October 2007, 13:34
edit; and by scooter i include all fxr and gn bikes.

bugger off :bash:

Hanne
13th October 2007, 13:43
^^ lol it took me ages to write that, i felt like writing something REALLY REALLY LONG. :jerry:

edit: DOH, IM NOT LOGGED IN.

EJK
13th October 2007, 15:19
bugger off :bash:

Hehe he didn't say Scorpio :p

motorbyclist
13th October 2007, 16:50
well i cant say scooters and not include the fxr and gn, as awesome as they are

Squiggles
17th October 2007, 14:58
I need the Parking Warden's ID number (should be on the ticket) and the "offense", pm me with it :yes:

Anyone else who recieves a ticket, if i could get the same (or even better would be a scan of the ticket), please pass it on to me...

xwhatsit
17th October 2007, 15:03
Hey man, I posted up my ticket earlier in the thread. Here's the link again: http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=72756&d=1191840912

motorbyclist
17th October 2007, 16:06
I need the Parking Warden's ID number (should be on the ticket) and the "offense", pm me with it :yes:

Anyone else who recieves a ticket, if i could get the same (or even better would be a scan of the ticket), please pass it on to me...

what's the plan? i've got 3 tickets i can lend you, with photos ;)

EDIT: ok, just read your post in the other thread

Squiggles
6th November 2007, 00:24
*revive*

officer number 71 shall be getting a spanking tomorrow

Hanne has her second set of $400 worth of tickets to show, this set is from number 71 (as was yours mb) :spanking: Not only that, but he's just chucking them on the bikes, her first set was found by someone else who knew her and tonight it was only just hanging on when we got to it an hour after issued

Im going in tomorrow to sort it out :Playnice:

motorbyclist
6th November 2007, 01:27
did you take in the pic of mine i PMed you?

i've not heard anything from the council at all, not even a notice to chase up the bill...

Hanne
6th November 2007, 10:08
Stephen is going down there today with my bike and the pic you took, I think.

Well, if my wallet arrives! >< Left it in Whitianga but Grandad is couriering it (Has the other tickets in it)

Phurrball
6th November 2007, 17:02
Hi all,

Just received a 'reminder' for a $200 ticket on Ingrid's FXR for failing to display current WOF. Dated early October - never received the ticket that was allegedly served by affixing to bike...

Surprise, surprise - officer 71

Will provide ticket details to Stephen ASAP.

I am so f*cked off right now!

Hanne
6th November 2007, 22:56
Yes please, asap, i have a letter here which i am sending in, and ill add yours to the list of examples on it... can you also chuck me a picture of the warrant on the bike (im assuming it is on it :P ), even if it isnt though the issue of them just chucking the tickets on the bike is in the letter, the response to it is what i want though, gets me a name to talk to :D
-Stephen

Macstar
7th November 2007, 12:16
Officer 71 eh? At least parking wardens can read (unlike the recently accepted NZ Police cadets who struggled with the alphabet). Actually, scrub that, maybe officer 71 can't read?!

motorbyclist
7th November 2007, 12:21
i heard yet another ad on the radio to be a cop; apparently you get a 5 week holiday and 50k a year, and need only 6 months training (they don't mention the fitness requirement)

so why would anyone want to be a nurse or teacher?

klyong82
7th November 2007, 12:28
i heard yet another ad on the radio to be a cop; apparently you get a 5 week holiday and 50k a year, and need only 6 months training (they don't mention the fitness requirement)

so why would anyone want to be a nurse or teacher?

I did the online test and I got 26 out of 29 so I think I am fit to be a cop. Well probably only a forensic investiGATOR...

Macstar
7th November 2007, 12:31
I wanted to be one once, but my loss of license 3x ruled me out. However, they've since laxed the whole 'criminal convictions thing', so maybe I could get in?

Why don't you become one Andrew and then try to catch us motorcyclists on your standard issue Honda Goldwing (Police version) motorbike?

motorbyclist
7th November 2007, 13:22
lol, i can't run far enough nor fast enough to be a cop

Bloody Mad Woman (BMW)
7th November 2007, 14:40
Write in - I got off one of those = had a warrant and rego - they hadn't checked - I was parked on a footpath - explained I had been doing this solidly for 3 months - watched others park there when I didn't use it.

DougieNZ
7th November 2007, 15:58
Ummmm I might be missing the point here. This seems a lot like the speeding ticket debate.

1. The photo shows you parked on the footpath.
2. The photo shows your WOF hidden behind your number plate.

So the problems is???

To be fair the WOF situation is probably a common one. But before the various abusive comments about wardens/police, was the law correctly applied?

"Everone else does it"
"I've been doing it for months"

Valid defences?

Jantar
7th November 2007, 16:46
Ummmm I might be missing the point here. This seems a lot like the speeding ticket debate.

1. The photo shows you parked on the footpath.
2. The photo shows your WOF hidden behind your number plate.

So the problems is???

To be fair the WOF situation is probably a common one. But before the various abusive comments about wardens/police, was the law correctly applied?

"Everone else does it"
"I've been doing it for months"

Valid defences?

Yes, I believe they are valid defenses. The law is specfic about placement of the wof on a car, but less so on a bike. The main point as I understand it is that the wof must be displayed at the rear of the bike. It does not say facing the rear.

As for parking. It is illegal to park in such a manner that the vehicle obstructs a foot path, not that the vehicle may not be on the foot path.

Subtle differences perhaps, but still valid ones.

motorbyclist
7th November 2007, 19:22
i call it common sense. and for that reason speeding and parking are in different leagues.


and the fact is i have a warrant. why/how ticket me for $200 for not putting it in an obvious enough place? biggest issue is how the wardens (and i've seen them) don't even bother to look. you'd think they would atleast check behind a common place such as the number plate, but no, they just walk along ticketing:mad:

motorbyclist
7th November 2007, 21:55
in the post today i got a letter following me up on the $40 footpath ticket, but not the $200 WOF and $12 "for the sake of ticketing" tickets, and i'm yet to get any correspondence at to which tickets they've dropped....

apparently "this is an offense against Transport Act 1962, section 41A(2) & Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, clause 6.14 & Land Transport (Offenses and Penalties) Regs 1999, Reg. 4(1) & Sch1."

i think it refers to this:
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/libraries/contents/om_isapi.dll?clientID=2176516968&infobase=pal_regs.nfo&jump=r2004-427%2fpt.6&softpage=DOC


6.14Parking on footpaths or cycle paths

(1)A driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle on a footpath or on a cycle path.

(2)Subclause (1) does not apply to cycles if a road controlling authority indicates otherwise by means of signs or markings or if it installs facilities for the parking, standing, or storage of cycles on a footpath or cycle path.

(3)Nothing in subclause (1) prevents a person from stopping, standing, or parking a cycle, mobility device, or wheeled recreational device on a footpath if doing so does not unreasonably obstruct any other user of the footpath.

my bike fits all three of those classes doesn't it? and it sure wasn't obstructing anyone.



so, wtf is happening? no notice of what they've dropped, or what still stands, and this letter today (sent on 1st november).

DougieNZ
7th November 2007, 22:47
No... maybe none...

From the same act....

cycle—
(a)means a vehicle that has at least 2 wheels and that is designed primarily to be propelled by the muscular energy of the rider; and
(b)includes a power-assisted cycle

mobility device means—
(a)a vehicle that—
(i)is designed and constructed (not merely adapted) for use by persons who require mobility assistance due to a physical or neurological impairment; and
(ii)is powered solely by a motor that has a maximum power output not exceeding 1 500 W; or
(b)a vehicle that the Director has declared under section 168A(1) of the Land Transport Act 1998 to be a mobility device]

wheeled recreational device —
(a)means a vehicle that is a wheeled conveyance (other than a cycle that has a wheel diameter exceeding 355 mm) and that is propelled by human power or gravity; and
(b)includes a conveyance to which are attached 1 or more auxiliary propulsion motors that have a combined maximum power output not exceeding [300 W]

As opposed to:

motorcycle—
(a)means a motor vehicle running on 2 wheels, or not more than 3 wheels when fitted with a sidecar; and
(b)includes a vehicle with motorcycle controls that is approved as a motorcycle by the Director; but
(c)does not include a moped

motorbyclist
7th November 2007, 22:50
dammit.... any other loopholes that appeal to common sense here?

Squiggles
7th November 2007, 23:16
As for parking. It is illegal to park in such a manner that the vehicle obstructs a foot path, not that the vehicle may not be on the foot path.

Subtle differences perhaps, but still valid ones.

Researched it and it only goes as far as to say in the windscreen of the motorvehicle, or near the plate or right side for motorcycles & trailers

On the plate would be near it, but on the front would block the number plate :clap:

motorbyclist
7th November 2007, 23:39
On the plate would be near it, but on the front would block the number plate :clap:

i used to do that:bleh:

sure stuffs up speed cameras

Ixion
14th November 2007, 14:34
BRONZ (and AUMC) have a slot booked to address the Transport Committee of the Auckland City Council at its next meeting. Don't know when the enxt meeting is yet because the Council is still inventing itself .

The previous committee under the old council held its meetings at 1:30 on Wednesday afternoons (once a month). Don't know if the new committee will stick to that time or not

It would be good to get some bikers roll up in support. One person with a grievance is a crank, two are an interest group, twenty is the voice of the people.

Hanne
14th November 2007, 21:21
BRONZ (and AUMC) have a slot booked to address the Transport Committee of the Auckland City Council at its next meeting. Don't know when the enxt meeting is yet because the Council is still inventing itself .

The previous committee under the old council held its meetings at 1:30 on Wednesday afternoons (once a month). Don't know if the new committee will stick to that time or not

It would be good to get some bikers roll up in support. One person with a grievance is a crank, two are an interest group, twenty is the voice of the people.

Just let us know when it is once things are organised and I will be there :niceone:

Phurrball
21st November 2007, 13:28
Got round to popping a letter off to 'The Manager' regarding my present from orificer 71...

Blah, blah, not practical or sensible to attach WOF holder on FXR in any other way etc, with pictures showing WOF holder extended...

Added this for good measure:


I am aware through my membership of the University of Auckland Scooter and Motorcycle club that officer 71 ticketed a number of motorcycles for the same offence, where the motorcycle had a WOF label attached in a similar manner. There should be correspondence on record relating to these matters. It should be noted that this situation has only arisen relating to this particular officer, and I am concerned that officer 71 has been unusually punctilious relating to this offence, taking up my valuable time, and that of other motorcyclists in what appears prima facie to a revenue fishing expedition. Please restore some faith in your officers by assuring me that tickets of this ilk will no longer be issued where a warning to reposition the label would be more appropriate should any action be necessary.

Should work I hope...

UberRhys
22nd November 2007, 09:39
Have you guys seen this post? http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1307127&postcount=133

Blue Thunder
22nd November 2007, 09:49
bugger....


oh and bomma, that building i believe is the aucklnad city town hall

It is the large building on the K road end of Aotea Sqare, usually hidden behind a large cloud of beurocratic fog:shit:

motorbyclist
22nd November 2007, 12:55
Have you guys seen this post? http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1307127&postcount=133

uni doesn't start again till march, so wait till then and we'll have more than enough pics. in the meantime symonds st is pretty calm

Ixion
10th December 2007, 10:50
BRONZ (and AUMC) have a slot booked to address the Transport Committee of the Auckland City Council at its next meeting. Don't know when the enxt meeting is yet because the Council is still inventing itself .

The previous committee under the old council held its meetings at 1:30 on Wednesday afternoons (once a month). Don't know if the new committee will stick to that time or not

It would be good to get some bikers roll up in support. One person with a grievance is a crank, two are an interest group, twenty is the voice of the people.

Supportive as ever of democracy (NOT !) the ACC have left it till the last minute to advise a dtae and time. But they have.

This Thursday , 13th Dec at Meeting Room, Level 15, Civic Building, 1 Greys Avenue, Auckland on Thursday, 13 December 2007 at 12.30pm.

Anyone who can come along, please do. Free parking in the Aotea car park building.

Les

xwhatsit
10th December 2007, 12:50
I'll be there. C'mon, SMC! Stop crashing and we'll do something useful instead :D

motorbyclist
10th December 2007, 12:52
lol, yeah i intend to attend

Squiggles
10th December 2007, 16:29
email is on its way out this evening

crashe
10th December 2007, 16:36
Supportive as ever of democracy (NOT !) the ACC have left it till the last minute to advise a dtae and time. But they have.

This Thursday , 13th Dec at Meeting Room, Level 15, Civic Building, 1 Greys Avenue, Auckland on Thursday, 13 December 2007 at 12.30pm.

Anyone who can come along, please do. Free parking in the Aotea car park building.

Les


cool.......

Hope they wont mind us all trooping throu on their nice carpet, all dripping wet from the rain..... :scooter: :scooter:

ElCoyote
10th December 2007, 19:03
Man .....the wardens are been hard ... but seriously that bike was not obstructing the footpath. What is the fault? Parking at non designated vehicle parking ?

Get real.......how can Jeanette Fitzsimmons hug the tree with a stinking bike there.

:eek5:

rainman
10th December 2007, 19:14
...
This Thursday , 13th Dec at Meeting Room, Level 15, Civic Building, 1 Greys Avenue, Auckland on Thursday, 13 December 2007 at 12.30pm.
...


Bugger. I'll be in Sydney. Give em heaps!

Toaster
10th December 2007, 19:18
I can't be there but you can pass on my raised middle finger though.

motorbyclist
30th January 2008, 15:56
ok, so a few weeks ago i got a letter dated 11th january telling me they will cancel all those tickets, but i should consider them warnings....

note this is after several other letters telling me how i've got (or had) 28 days to pay or they'll take me to court.

nice to see they don't put a hold on debt collection while the ticket is under review, and they are so speedy in their review that it only took a few months to get back to me, with no indication whatsoever they had even recieved my letter(s) while they got round to sending their pre-prepared "insert name here" letter

either they only have one guy looking at these things in his spare time, or they think by waiting a few months before replying they might get the "offender" to pay

gotta love beurocracy

Phurrball
31st January 2008, 13:46
My little gem from orificer 71 got sent to court (+ add $30 to the $200), after NO reply to my letter.

Lucky I know what to do, and fired it straight back to Auck parking services via a statutory declatation to correct an irregularity in procedings:

ie that the bastiges didn't even have the decency to reply to my carefully worded and polite letter which included photos showing the WOF attached to the bike.

If they dick me around any more I shall be charging them for my time.:angry2:

Ixion
12th February 2008, 18:09
Latest update
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=1423486#post1423486

Phurrball
13th February 2008, 11:44
Righto, as above - the statutory declaration made its way through the system, and the council (stationary vehicle prosecutions officer or some such...) actually READ my letter, and *shock, horror!* REPLIED.

I got off the ticket with the usual stern intonations about WOFs being readily visible, the piffle about it being standard policy to issue tickets in such circumstances, and 'I have spoken to the officer and their supervisor'. Tui ad?

Sounds like arse covering for officer 71 to me.

Very disturbed that they didn't bother to reply until the alleged infringer showed they knew what they were doing as opposed to being intimidated by a court letter into paying. Smacks of procedural unfairness/denial of natural justice to me = breach of s27(1) of NZ Bill of RIghts Act 1990. When I have time I may point this out in writing to the appropriate authorities and to the council transport subcommittee.

Steam
13th February 2008, 12:13
... and fired it straight back to Auck parking services via a statutory declatation to correct an irregularity in procedings:

ie that the bastiges didn't even have the decency to reply to my carefully worded and polite letter which included photos showing the WOF attached to the bike.

What's a statutory declatation to correct an irregularity in procedings, and when can I use it? Do you have to put it on a form or use legal language or something? Interesting.

Phurrball
13th February 2008, 12:42
What's a statutory declatation to correct an irregularity in procedings, and when can I use it? Do you have to put it on a form or use legal language or something? Interesting.

You need to have certain grounds to make the declaration - they are listed on the form. The form is available at district courts. Not at home now, so can't look at my copy - I think I relied on procedural irregularity. Needs to be on official form - essentially tick the boxes, fill out your reasons for making the application.

(Note - if the orificer gets your name, address, DOB etc slightly wrong, it won't get you off any ticket - there is power to ammend informations in teh Summary Procedings act)

Ixion
13th February 2008, 12:57
Is this Section 78B of the Summary Proceedings Act, 1957:
Power to Correct Irregularities in Proceedings for Infringement Offences: ?




(1) This section applies if a defendant is deemed to have been ordered, or is ordered, to pay a fine or costs or both under section 21 and--

(a) a District Court Judge or Registrar, on the application of the defendant, is satisfied, whether on the basis of a statutory declaration or evidence given before the Judge, that--

(i) the defendant is not a person to whom the infringement notice was issued or on whom the notice is deemed to have been served; or
(ii) the defendant did not in fact receive the reminder notice, or a copy of the notice of hearing, required to have been served on the defendant under section 21; or
(iii) some other irregularity occurred in the procedures leading up to the order for the fine or costs, or both; or
(iv) the defendant believed on reasonable grounds that he or she had requested a hearing under section 21, but this request was not acted on by the informant; or


lots more stuff

Ixion
13th February 2008, 13:03
It's Form 57, apparently. Supposed to be available online, but isn't. So you'd need to go to the District Court to get a copy. Probably not a biggie since you'd need to go there anyway to make the declaration, unless you have a tame JP living behind your kitchen skirting board.

Phurrball
6th March 2008, 13:22
Hi all -

Following my partner mentioning some of my concerns to AUSA pres, David Do, I received the following email:


Hi Ross,

I was approached by Ingrid about some parking issues you were
experiencing around the University - specifically parking officer 88,
the level of fines, and the timing issues as related to lectures.

I'm writing to learn more in depth about what sort of issues you two
have encountered. I will be writing about what she outlined to me in
my column in Craccum next week, seeking more student feedback on this
issue. I also have a meeting with mayor John Banks in about two weeks
so I can raise some of your concerns in outline to him too. I also
understand you were keen to write something into Craccum about your
experiences as well?

--
Yours Sincerely,
David Do

Anyone keen to have anything mentioned?

PM me.

David seems genuinely concerned about parking on campus, and willing to front up to those in Positions of Power.

The last bit is very dependant on time availability - I ain't promising the earth, but I am in a good position to do research into the matter since I'm nearly at the end of my LLB. Was thinking about putting a request in Craccum for parking horror stories by way of research. I don't think my experiences are isolated, and I'm officially Rather Aggravated now after my latest incident with officer 88.

Nothing like a bit of negative publicity to scare the bureaucrats into action eh?

Ross

DougieNZ
6th March 2008, 14:20
unless you have a tame JP living behind your kitchen skirting board.

You never know where you might find one of those...

Delerium
6th March 2008, 15:23
I have one should you need to borrow.

motorbyclist
6th March 2008, 23:39
Anyone keen to have anything mentioned?


just be sure to mention officers not even looking for WOF stickers, and that bike parking in out of the way places isn't an issue, whereas bike parking in car spaces is.

and how long it takes them to respond to your letters. i sent my letters at the start of november(?) the response was dated 11th january

Hanne
7th March 2008, 17:43
I still haven't received a reply from MY letter! And that was sent the same time as your one. Same with Stephen's one that was about the parking and tickets issues....

motorbyclist
10th March 2008, 00:33
i thought this sums things up pretty nicely

Phurrball
10th March 2008, 18:09
As in my last post -

David Do has indeed 'fingered' the parking issue in this week's Critic. Parking in general around university is a poor joke, and bike parking has become difficult (too full) and unsafe (trying to reverse into a Symonds Street park).

I'd better get my arse into gear with some sort of research.

Anyone please PM me with your most egregious parking abuses in central Auckland. Ammo is good. :shifty:

PirateJafa
10th March 2008, 18:31
David Do has indeed 'fingered' the parking issue in this week's Critic. Parking in general around university is a poor joke, and bike parking has become difficult (too full) and unsafe (trying to reverse into a Symonds Street park).

Linky? Or can you or someone scan it and post it up?

Phurrball
11th March 2008, 18:44
no linky yet on craccum.co.nz So will go for a scan or transcription when I have a moment...

motorbyclist
12th March 2008, 00:53
i just received an email which either means we can't park on symonds street on the 25th while they remove the car parks to build a bus lane, or that they are removing the majority of symonds street motorcycle parking

as it stands we are about to lose all parking on the engineering side up by the architecture school


SEE THE THREAD (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=1470108#post1470108)

Phurrball
12th March 2008, 09:34
When's the next council transport subcommittee meeting that was much vaunted when we last attended?

The deputy chairt of that committee seemed interested - maybe we should contact her? Toni someone I recall - probably back in this thread somewhere...

University admin would have a vested interest in keeping pedestrian space bike-free - the idiocy of this should be pointed out to them - with pictures showing that the parks are already over capacity!:Oi:

YellowDog
12th March 2008, 09:41
I guess I have been lucky. I didn't display my WOF for 8 months without a problem.

Squiggles
25th March 2008, 22:27
I got a reply today, although its only a slightly more personalised version of the one hanne got (it asks i remind members of the rules :rolleyes: and is signed by the person themself)


Will post it up later, but the gist of it is "The rules are this and this and that" (all of which were followed) and "...please remind all members to follow the rules..." (and we'll ticket them anyway :pinch:)

Writing my reply will be fun (she didnt address any of the other points i raised)

Timati
3rd April 2008, 16:52
What are the regulations of displaying the WOF on a bike? Mine has always been behind the plate.

Squiggles
3rd April 2008, 17:39
What are the regulations of displaying the WOF on a bike? Mine has always been behind the plate.


I've attached the response i recieved from the council, perhaps i should resend my letter with the same pictures (they showed that the bike met all of their regulations to the letter) Nevermind answering any of the other questions asked eh?

Steve

klyong82
3rd April 2008, 19:07
I've attached the response i recieved from the council, perhaps i should resend my letter with the same pictures (they showed that the bike met all of their regulations to the letter) Nevermind answering any of the other questions asked eh?

Steve

Haha I know where you live Stevo!!!!!!! Hanna 4 infringement tickets in 4 days.... not a bad record :lol:.....and Stevo how the hell did manage to score a ticket on 2 Oct. 2008? Dynamic duels.... :lol:

PirateJafa
3rd April 2008, 19:34
I love how they can change the spelling of your surname within the same letter.

Timati
3rd April 2008, 20:42
Guess I'll have to place it somewhere "they" can see. Maybe you ought to have a chat with someone else. It always seems that there is always something contradictory. One person says fine and the other it's not fine...

ehab2weelr
3rd April 2008, 21:38
on the topic of contradictory, whats the low about lane splitting? not too sure? a cope told me that its fine as long as you dont exceed 40kph during a standstill, someone else told me that its fine if you lane splitting with care??

PirateJafa
3rd April 2008, 21:50
on the topic of contradictory, whats the low about lane splitting? not too sure? a cope told me that its fine as long as you dont exceed 40kph during a standstill, someone else told me that its fine if you lane splitting with care??
Depends entirely on the cop.

Timati
3rd April 2008, 22:32
Depends entirely on the cop. This one had me laughing...

Enter Scene
"Hmmm, goes the cop on duty"
"How can I make this day interesting"
...the plot thickens..

Squiggles
3rd April 2008, 23:05
and Stevo how the hell did manage to score a ticket on 2 Oct. 2008? Dynamic duels.... :lol:

That's andrews, i dunno how he did it, they even gave him a year long wof for a nearly 20yo bike :lol:

motorbyclist
4th April 2008, 03:57
hehe, i got that sticker in october after those tickets and it doesn't expire till december - that's a 14 month wof sticker for a 6month wof that only had 1 month left on it:D

that letter is pretty much the same as mine. they say they're letting you off but won't admit they're wrong.

klyong82
4th April 2008, 09:12
That's andrews, i dunno how he did it, they even gave him a year long wof for a nearly 20yo bike :lol:


hehe, i got that sticker in october after those tickets and it doesn't expire till december - that's a 14 month wof sticker for a 6month wof that only had 1 month left on it:D

that letter is pretty much the same as mine. they say they're letting you off but won't admit they're wrong.

I thought those dates in the letter are the time the infringement notices were issued and not the wof expiry dates. Anyway good on Stevo in fighting for your rights. Bling bling awarded.....:headbang:

Phurrball
4th April 2008, 10:43
on the topic of contradictory, whats the low about lane splitting? not too sure? a cope told me that its fine as long as you dont exceed 40kph during a standstill, someone else told me that its fine if you lane splitting with care??

It's entirely discretionary mate - up to the particular cop on the particular day - take anything anyone tells you with a grain of salt - apply the precautionary principle.

To cover your arse: 'Keep your head down' - don't go scaring cagers with speed or unpredictable unindicated moves.

Think about what you'd like if you were a non-riding cager. And please watch teh f*ck out for people changing lanes or letting cars in at junctions - expect it and cover your brakes, as if the shit hits the fan, legal fault will likely lie with both parties, and it's a shitstorm anyone could do without.

*Go relatively slowly = more time to react.

*Use your right-hand indicator to show you are passing on the right (and to warn cars with its blinkyness),

*Merge back in when cars get up to a reasonable speed ~40-50 km/hr.

*Check your mirrors often.

*If anyone looks likely to change lanes on top of you, use the horn.

During the day I use high beam so driver's wing-mirrors alert to my presence more forcefully. As it's getting darker in the mornings/evenings/dull days, I'm back in the Hi-Vis again.

If in doubt for any reason at all, merge in. I you have a 'bad feeling' or if there's a "maybe too small gap" - merge in. Discretion beats bravado here any day.

Should you see our brightly coloured friends common sense says to merge back in until well clear as lane splitting is a legal grey area.

If you pass the police and don't merge in and you're behaving - you should be OK - but there's no way of telling what mood an officer is in (or if they're ginger!) so you're risking a $150 ticket.

Sorry if I'm telling you to suck eggs, but the safe splitting/not alienating cagers message needs repeating from time-to-time.

---------------------------------

On another note - the parking services letter is very much like mine -

The bold paragraph is correct - the offence is failing to display rather than not having a WOF or rego.

At least they didn'y send yours to court!! (I think i'm on their "target and cause maximum vexation by any means" list!)

ROFL re the 'can't touch it' (parking warden MC Hammer anyone??)

How then do car tyres get chalked and windscreen wipers get lifted to apply tickets?

Self-justifying BS - clearly, they only apply the de minimis principle when it suits (ie the law is not concerned with trifling or technical breaches - like chalking tyres, or checking a WOF by sliding it out from behind a plate)

See y'all at Strata.

Finn
4th April 2008, 10:51
I once got a $2000 parking fine. $2000!!!

For parking on a person

Squiggles
28th July 2008, 22:03
Sadly im going to revive this thread, they're at it again, officer out there last week doing the same old... to be fair, he was feeling under the plates to see if he felt something sticking out, which he would (as there seems to be some odd shaped mount back there on all bikes), but didnt look... he then appeared to notice that some people put them in the windscreen, and proceeded to walk back down the street to check if there was one in that position on the last bike he ticketed.

As far as i know the "chuck it on the bike" form of ticketing has not changed, although i didnt have time to look on all the bikes for one. And yet again, one of our members has $400 worth of fines...



Attached is the letter i sent to the council (the response is on the last page), im posting it so i dont loose it.

Edit: Should i attempt to split this thread?

motorbyclist
28th July 2008, 22:11
sent that yet? you might wish to add how annoying it is that there is no notice sent when an appeal is recieved by the council. it took over 2 months for them to reply to my appeals, and in that time they sent me several warning notices threatening to take me to court.

burn them!

Squiggles
28th July 2008, 22:23
sent that yet? you might wish to add how annoying it is that there is no notice sent when an appeal is recieved by the council. it took over 2 months for them to reply to my appeals, and in that time they sent me several warning notices threatening to take me to court.

burn them!

yer, i sent it, response is on the last page
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1503588&postcount=132

p.s. you should expect a ticket in another couple of months... lol
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1503716&postcount=133

motorbyclist
28th July 2008, 23:33
couldn't see response in the .doc, so forgot about it (no good saying response is on last page of another unspecified thread lol)

yeah splitting thread would be a good idea

motorbyclist
28th July 2008, 23:35
p.s. you should expect a ticket in another couple of months... lol
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1503716&postcount=133

wait, what? how?

(obviously i'm not parking on symonds till i've got a new wof sticker)

Squiggles
29th July 2008, 07:20
wait, what? how?

(obviously i'm not parking on symonds till i've got a new wof sticker)

arent you **UGU? According to the letter i recieved, your ticket was issued on october 2008 lol

Phurrball
29th July 2008, 14:15
sent that yet? you might wish to add how annoying it is that there is no notice sent when an appeal is recieved by the council. it took over 2 months for them to reply to my appeals, and in that time they sent me several warning notices threatening to take me to court.

burn them!

Can I burn them with you?

Screw a career in the law - burning certain parking wardens would be much more satisfying!:shifty:

lemining
29th July 2008, 15:44
wait, what? how?

(obviously i'm not parking on symonds till i've got a new wof sticker)

umm it is not just symonds street, it is all around CBD, i got ticket on symonds and on mount street. <_< so i would park it somewhere where they dont go.

motorbyclist
29th July 2008, 17:01
arent you **UGU? According to the letter i recieved, your ticket was issued on october 2008 lol

yeah, the response was dated 11th january

of course they wouldn't admit they were wrong, but let me off anyway:laugh:

HungusMaximist
29th July 2008, 20:48
Can I burn them with you?

Screw a career in the law - burning certain parking wardens would be much more satisfying!:shifty:

After all those long hard nights studying for law, I think it'd be good practice to starting putting your law degree to use... :msn-wink:

Let's burn those baboons... :devil2: