CPA Ticket

[northcrunk]

CPA is terrible. Maybe if they weren't so lazy they could actually get out of their cars and check to see if anyone is actually sitting in the vehicle. I can't stand the camera car, so lazy, and such a cash grab.

[rich204]

Originally Posted by HalifaxDrunk

I was able to clean the photo a little better. I think the ticket should be nullified, dogs shouldn't have to pay tickets!

Haha, nice one man. LOL. HalifaxDrunk....you made my day.

[rich204]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

CPA is terrible. Maybe if they weren't so lazy they could actually get out of their cars and check to see if anyone is actually sitting in the vehicle. I can't stand the camera car, so lazy, and such a cash grab.

I agree

[BigNumbers]

Does the reflection in the first picture make the OP look like kim-jong-un to anyone else?

And if you can afford an Audi, you can afford not to waste time with a $40 parking ticket and whining on CP....

[strombad]

If that window isn't tinted, why does it make the lights coming from the window on the other side of it so much darker?

[DuffMan]

what if you are in the back seat with a live hooker? does that count as occupied.

[lazypucker]

So nobody ever noticed that the OP only signed up on Mar 2014?

Where did the Wannamaker "Do Not Help" mantra go now?

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by BigNumbers

Does the reflection in the first picture make the OP look like kim-jong-un to anyone else?

And if you can afford an Audi, you can afford not to waste time with a $40 parking ticket and whining on CP....

I concur, we all should just pay bogus tickets and charges. I mean it's only $40!

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

So nobody ever noticed that the OP only signed up on Mar 2014?

Where did the Wannamaker "Do Not Help" mantra go now?

Son-of-a....He's only posted in this thread too!

Let's get him!

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

I concur, we all should just pay bogus tickets and charges. I mean it's only $40!

Is it really bogus though? There seems to be some contradictory information here. It sounds like they often let people get away with it, but not that they are always obligated to. Maybe too many people were taking advantage of the courtesy and so they have to clamp down a little. I agree that inconsistent application of rules is annoying though.

I once had a ticket for going through a yellow light when I know for sure that I was past the point of no return (the roads were really icy). I met a few people that told me they fought similar tickets and didn't have to pay. When I went to court and told the judge that I was past the point that I could stop safely, the only question the judge had was if the light was yellow (which I had just admitted). I had to pay based on that alone. It didn't matter that most people who get that ticket seem to be able to get it cancelled.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by rich204

Thanks.

CPA is saying, "If our officers see a person in a vehicle it is considered occupied and a ticket will not be issued."

Did they tell you that in writing or give you a bylaw reference? Otherwise it sounds like you got lucky/gave you a break when they threw out your first ticket.

[rich204]

Originally Posted by BigNumbers

Does the reflection in the first picture make the OP look like kim-jong-un to anyone else?

And if you can afford an Audi, you can afford not to waste time with a $40 parking ticket and whining on CP....

It's about the principal and it ain't an Audi, lol.

[rich204]

Originally Posted by strombad

If that window isn't tinted, why does it make the lights coming from the window on the other side of it so much darker?

I don't know what to say, windows aren't tinted. Isn't it illegal?

[rich204]

Originally Posted by Burninator

Did they tell you that in writing or give you a bylaw reference? Otherwise it sounds like you got lucky/gave you a break when they threw out your first ticket.

It's an email from customer service. They will stick with the photo they provided, decision has been made.

[NuclearPizzaMan]

Originally Posted by rich204

I don't know what to say, windows aren't tinted. Isn't it illegal?

Pretty sure that stock tint is fine. After market tinting is illegal on front windows.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

CPA is terrible. Maybe if they weren't so lazy they could actually get out of their cars and check to see if anyone is actually sitting in the vehicle. I can't stand the camera car, so lazy, and such a cash grab.

How is it a cash grab to enforce parking?
Like it or not, parking is a limited commodity downtown.
If they didn't issue tickets, it would be impossible to park or even get arond anywhere in the core.

It's not a cash grab, it's a deterrant to discourage behaviour that most people would agree would cause a problem.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Is it really bogus though? There seems to be some contradictory information here. It sounds like they often let people get away with it, but not that they are always obligated to. Maybe too many people were taking advantage of the courtesy and so they have to clamp down a little. I agree that inconsistent application of rules is annoying though.

I once had a ticket for going through a yellow light when I know for sure that I was past the point of no return (the roads were really icy). I met a few people that told me they fought similar tickets and didn't have to pay. When I went to court and told the judge that I was past the point that I could stop safely, the only question the judge had was if the light was yellow (which I had just admitted). I had to pay based on that alone. It didn't matter that most people who get that ticket seem to be able to get it cancelled.

I don't know if it truly is or not. However, isn't the point of the thread and possible court case to determine clarification?

The contradictory information out there makes it unclear to me.

Ambiguity is to be construed in favour of the accused. So I'm ok with the thread and fighting the ticket.

There is a sentiment that if the ticket is less than X you should just pay it. I disagree.

It sounds to me the OP asked the CPA for clarification on the law. He was told one thing then ticketed for following it. Then when he requested full disclosure he was repeatedly told "no".

Whether a court finds him guilty or not, there are some serious issues there, the amount if the fine is really a non-issue.

Lastly, I quoted FlamesAddiction only for progression of discussion. I don't mean to straw man his arguement or put words in his mouth.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by rich204

It's about the principal and it ain't an Audi, lol.

I'm starting to think this is just a gear grinder.

[Nage Waza]

I have no clue just gueses as to what the ticket was for and the OP is intentially avoiding details.

If the ticket was for parking in a paid spot while not paying due to having someone sit in the car, that is a ticket. Why else is it a paid spot? Parking is expensive here, if you could leave people in cars to avoid paying and avoid tickets, people will start paying people a cheaper rate to sit in the car.

On the other hand, if your complaint to the parking authority was as coherent as your post, I don't doubt they ignored you.

New York and other cities with very expensive parking have 'valets' rotate cars around to avoid tickets in short term parking zones. All these people are doing is abusing the system.

[mrkajz44]

No offense, but this story sort of sounds like the OP comes downtown daily and parks in a spot that is illegal. The only saving grace is he is in the car and therefore the CPA sometimes lets it go. Personally, I don't understand the whole "in the car thing". If you are parked illegally, sitting in the car doesn't make it any better; you are still illegally parked.

Semantics or not, if this is done every day I feel the ticket is likely deserved.