£100,000 profit made by council camera car (From Thisisdorset)
When news happens send us your pictures, video and views. Text BE to 80360 or contact us by email
£100,000 profit made by council camera car
8:41am Tuesday 18th December 2012 in News
£100,000 profit made by council camera car
THE controversial Bournemouth council camera car made more than £100,000 profit last year, new figures have revealed.
From March 2011 until March this year CCTV camera enforcement across the borough cost the local authority £38,305 in operating costs, equipment maintenance, fuel and Southcote Road depot charges.
But income generated during the same period totalled £138,399, the Daily Echo has discovered.
The camera car was launched in July 2009. From March 2010 until March 2011, when the car was only targeting drivers who park on school zigzags and bus stops, it generated an income of £80,199 with £38,385 expenditure costs.
But in October 2010 – halfway through the financial year – the car was also used to enforce no loading and no waiting restrictions and annual income soared by nearly £60,000.
Figures for 2011/12 are not available yet but are due to be even higher, as they will be for a full year of enforcing school zig-zags, bus stops, no loading and no waiting areas.
The revenue raised is used to offset the cost of enforcement and the provision of car parking within Bournemouth.
Cllr Michael Filer, cabinet member for transport and parking, said: “I support the camera car wholeheartedly. We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools.
“As far as the surplus is concerned, all this money goes back into our roads and into our safety operations. It’s helping to install new cycle arrangements, generally it’s for the good of the town. Without it, these improvements would not happen at all.”
And Bournemouth Council’s parking and traffic manager Gary Powell said: “The increase in income during the second year is due to our decision to start enforcing no loading and no waiting restrictions to help improve road safety and reduce congestion.
“No loading and no waiting restrictions were introduced to prevent vehicles from parking and causing a road safety issue or affecting the free flow of traffic.
“CCTV camera enforcement is not a means of taxing the motorist but an effective way to improve road safety through improved compliance with the restrictions in place."
A DISABLED Southbourne man who was one of the first motorists to be filmed on the council car camera said: “This is an awful lot of money and I’d like to know where it is going.”
Retired businessman Roger Ryder, 68, was fined after being caught parking on a bus stop outside the Co-op in Tuckton.
He said: “I paid up because it is against the law so you can’t argue with that but I’d like to see the money being used to improve the local roads – such as filling in potholes. The last thing I would like the money being used for is putting in more speed humps – we’ve enough of those already in Bournemouth.
“I have a disabled badge and thought about appealing against my fine because I’d just popped in to buy a newspaper and there wasn’t anywhere else to park – but I was told I had no chance so I paid up.”
Winton-based taxi driver Tony Walker, who claimed earlier this year that the camera car was issuing fines “like confetti”, said plans to blockade Bournemouth town centre in protest over parking tickets had been called off.
He said: “At long last common sense seems to be prevailing. We were getting ticketed when we went into shops to get 80 and 90-year-olds who needed a taxi but couldn’t stand out on the pavement waiting for us, in all weathers.”
Comments(76)
funkyferret
says...
8:50am Tue 18 Dec 12
Sad to see it needs to exist.
Don't like the fines?
Don't park there. Simples.
rayc
says...
8:59am Tue 18 Dec 12
Why not as that was the purpose for which the car was provided in the first place? How many deaths and serious injuries were there around schools before the car was introduced compared with now? How can he possibly justify the remark that the car has saved lives and serious injuries?
By all means justify the operation of the car by the income it generates for the Council but don't attempt to justify it's use to enforce loading restrictions on safety grounds.
bourne free
says...
8:59am Tue 18 Dec 12
Watch Out !
Kernow2008
says...
9:00am Tue 18 Dec 12
Surveillance cameras today echo the truths of the film 1984, this country is slowly turning into a totalitarian society whereby controlling all aspects of our daily lives.
fantasanta
says...
9:05am Tue 18 Dec 12
EdBmth wrote:very valid point actually and they exceed the rank designated spaces all over the town , it does need better control . dont believe either the 80 - 90 year old passenger bit thats just a load of flannel ,whats the percentage of customers in this age range and how did they get to the shop in the first place , £5 each way for a pint of milk and a packet of biscuits you dont have to chew is a bit expensive on a pension
Perhaps the car should do a few passes of station approach in the afternoons. There seem to be a small minority of taxi drivers who wait on the slip road approach to Asda. It causes and obstruction and is dangerous.
It is this minorit that should be dealt with rather than the Taxi drivers trying to collect the 80-90 year old from the shops.
live-and-let-live
says...
9:11am Tue 18 Dec 12
rayc wrote:my words exactly. this car is there to generate money. if i stop my car to drop my mother off near the library it will cost me money. but it wont ever cost a life because i wouldnt stop where there was any risk to anyone else. i hope the council wont find it necessary to increase council tax this year as it has the moneymaking car instead.
Cllr Michael Filer said "We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools." Why not as that was the purpose for which the car was provided in the first place? How many deaths and serious injuries were there around schools before the car was introduced compared with now? How can he possibly justify the remark that the car has saved lives and serious injuries? By all means justify the operation of the car by the income it generates for the Council but don't attempt to justify it's use to enforce loading restrictions on safety grounds.
sea poole
says...
9:13am Tue 18 Dec 12
mysticalshoelace
says...
9:14am Tue 18 Dec 12
Cllr Michael Filer, cabinet member for transport and parking, said: “I support the camera car wholeheartedly. We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools.What a load of spin! The only reason the camera car exists is to generate income for the council!
dirtyboy
says...
9:47am Tue 18 Dec 12
speedy231278
says...
9:48am Tue 18 Dec 12
Probably because it hasn't, and they're only interested in counting the money.
Tom 'Boscombe' Jones
says...
9:49am Tue 18 Dec 12
ashleycross
says...
9:53am Tue 18 Dec 12
Please, all local councils in the echo area, buy loads more of these and ignore this ridiculous reporting by someone who shows no sign of caring for the needs of pedestrians or other drivers' need to park or pull out safely without twits parking dangerously so you can't see where you are going.
Old Colonial
says...
9:53am Tue 18 Dec 12
The only quantifiable way of judging success is to see whether parking on school zig-zags, bus stops, no loading and no waiting areas has been significantly reduced. Has it? If not, then this is just a nice little cash generator.
uvox44
says...
10:04am Tue 18 Dec 12
HRH of Boscombe
says...
10:15am Tue 18 Dec 12
dirtyboy wrote:Do you? So you would rather it more widely distributed than spent on local issues?
I hope they paid the appropriate taxes for the moneys they collected?
Lord Spring
says...
10:17am Tue 18 Dec 12
Photo cars parked on pavements also those parked to close to junctions.
The Liberal
says...
10:18am Tue 18 Dec 12
rayc
says...
10:26am Tue 18 Dec 12
uvox44 wrote:"would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules?"
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
I would rather that the two things were not related at all. Enforcing traffic regulations and providing parking etc. should not be provided with the intention of making a profit so that Council Tax is reduced.
The reason given for the providing the car was to save the lives and risk of serious injuries to schoolchildren in the vicinity of their schools. Now the reason appears to be to to install new cycle arrangements etc. Without offenders there would presumably not be any new cycle arrangements?
The Renegade Master
says...
10:58am Tue 18 Dec 12
The simple fact remains that the Council are using OUR money to devise more ways of extorting more and more cash from US. I find that principle distasteful.
Perhaps there should be a bad cycling car too, just to upset Mike Chalkey!
mysticalshoelace
says...
11:07am Tue 18 Dec 12
uvox44 wrote:The main reason for council tax increases are council's being extremely bad at financial management and wasting money on useless things that aren't needed or simply don't work - surf reef/imax/beach pods being a prime examples.
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
tricky1007
says...
11:16am Tue 18 Dec 12
The Renegade Master wrote:I did not get a ticket from it this year! I park where i should as do most people, and it is right, dont park illegally and you wont get a ticket. Its people with the mentality of 'i am not hurting anyone and i am not parked in a dangerous place' that deserve to get a ticket. The amount of times i have seen people in wheelchairs, or prams, or young children been made to walk out into the road to get round these cars, yes i see that as dangerous!
Yeah yeah yeah.... we know, don't park illegally and you won't get a ticket blah blah blah. Shut up!
The simple fact remains that the Council are using OUR money to devise more ways of extorting more and more cash from US. I find that principle distasteful.
Perhaps there should be a bad cycling car too, just to upset Mike Chalkey!
Gary Sherborne
says...
11:17am Tue 18 Dec 12
Hessenford
says...
11:17am Tue 18 Dec 12
I successfully defended my self only a few months ago when I was photographed picking up my wife and two young children, a photo was taken of me, as the driver standing at the passenger side of my vehicle when in fact I was making sure my children were firmly in their seat belts, they said I had parked and was waiting, I quoted the law concerning seat belts for children and the ticket was quashed, more people need to appeal these revenue raising tickets, if doing something illegal then suffer the fine if not then appeal.
lizcait
says...
11:23am Tue 18 Dec 12
Many elderly / vulnerable people would pay up not knowing or even having the courage to fight against the bullies who go on a power trip to gain their £35 - which to those people, is a lot of money with today's financial troubles!
Morrigan
says...
11:38am Tue 18 Dec 12
He said: “I paid up because it is against the law so you can’t argue with that.
“I have a disabled badge and thought about appealing against my fine because I’d just popped in to buy a newspaper and there wasn’t anywhere else to park – but I was told I had no chance so I paid up.”
An appeal because you have a Blue Badge would not have been successful - having a blue badge does NOT give you carte blanche to park anywhere you please - and parking in a bus stop is not permitted under the blue badge user rules or the Highway Code - he is lucky he didn't get his badge taken away for misuse, which seems to be happening more and more these days because BB holders think they are immune to the road rules of using one.
Whatever people say about the camera car, it is obviously seen as necessary by the council - but if no one parked where they shouldn't then the car would run at a loss.
The fact that it is a devious, underhand and cowardly way to go about things is irrelevant to the council - they are devious through and through in many of their dealings, so this car is no different in that aspect.
Just don't give them reasons to use it/make money from it - it's no good moaning about it, while parking illegally, thus still giving the council what they consider justifiable reasons to use it in the first place :o/
timwel
says...
11:53am Tue 18 Dec 12
rayc
says...
11:55am Tue 18 Dec 12
Morrigan wrote:"Just don't give them reasons to use it/make money from it - it's no good moaning about it, while parking illegally, thus still giving the council what they consider justifiable reasons to use it in the first place"
""Retired businessman Roger Ryder, 68, was fined after being caught parking on a bus stop outside the Co-op in Tuckton.
He said: “I paid up because it is against the law so you can’t argue with that.
“I have a disabled badge and thought about appealing against my fine because I’d just popped in to buy a newspaper and there wasn’t anywhere else to park – but I was told I had no chance so I paid up.”
An appeal because you have a Blue Badge would not have been successful - having a blue badge does NOT give you carte blanche to park anywhere you please - and parking in a bus stop is not permitted under the blue badge user rules or the Highway Code - he is lucky he didn't get his badge taken away for misuse, which seems to be happening more and more these days because BB holders think they are immune to the road rules of using one.
Whatever people say about the camera car, it is obviously seen as necessary by the council - but if no one parked where they shouldn't then the car would run at a loss.
The fact that it is a devious, underhand and cowardly way to go about things is irrelevant to the council - they are devious through and through in many of their dealings, so this car is no different in that aspect.
Just don't give them reasons to use it/make money from it - it's no good moaning about it, while parking illegally, thus still giving the council what they consider justifiable reasons to use it in the first place :o/
Good advise. At least make them work for their money.
Same with Dorset Roadsafe and the No Excuse campaign, keep to the speed limit, wear a seat belt and never touch a mobile phone unless safely parked with the engine off.
timwel
says...
11:56am Tue 18 Dec 12
Oh and then the cost of an employee to drive the car (plus their pension) and the administration to process the fines,...... funny that how local authorities have no labour costs like in the real world. This exercise probably made a loss for us tax payers.
Mudefordman
says...
12:01pm Tue 18 Dec 12
that's a laugh, even the money created by the road fund licence doesn't always go on the roads. I believe it goes in one big pot and the government do with it what they will
rayc
says...
12:12pm Tue 18 Dec 12
HRH of Boscombe
says...
12:19pm Tue 18 Dec 12
Mudefordman wrote:Do a freedom of info request to find out what proportion was allocated to the Highways Agency.
someone suggested that the money taken might be invested on the roads, that's a laugh, even the money created by the road fund licence doesn't always go on the roads. I believe it goes in one big pot and the government do with it what they will
bosco1
says...
12:25pm Tue 18 Dec 12
Justin666
says...
12:29pm Tue 18 Dec 12
BIGTONE
says...
12:31pm Tue 18 Dec 12
I was under the impression that under current legislation local authorities are supposed to be a non profit organisation.Has all that now changed?
Imaximus
says...
1:24pm Tue 18 Dec 12
static kill
says...
2:05pm Tue 18 Dec 12
muscliffman
says...
3:02pm Tue 18 Dec 12
In fact this can be achieved perfectly legally, by not parking or driving where the law says you should not.
Works for me!
Imaximus
says...
3:10pm Tue 18 Dec 12
muscliffman wrote:Exactly....well said.
If readers believe this to be an inappropriate or underhand means of generating the Counciul £100,000 then do not pay it.
In fact this can be achieved perfectly legally, by not parking or driving where the law says you should not.
Works for me!
djd
says...
4:14pm Tue 18 Dec 12
A lot of posts mention pavement parking, probably the biggest menace in Bournemouth. The council hasn't adopted the regulations to make it illegal. Please adopt the regulations, please ticket all those who do park on the pavement. 'pavements are for people, not for cars.' How do motorists react to pedestrians walking on the carriageway???
sivvy
says...
5:18pm Tue 18 Dec 12
PokesdownMark
says...
5:41pm Tue 18 Dec 12
Hollers
says...
5:48pm Tue 18 Dec 12
uvox44 wrote:This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
Old Colonial
says...
6:12pm Tue 18 Dec 12
Hollers wrote:Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.
uvox44 wrote:This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
tbpoole
says...
6:35pm Tue 18 Dec 12
Old Colonial wrote:Logic dictates that as the penalty for serious crimes is a spell in prison no one will ever commit an offence, but real life isn't like that. That doesn't mean they shouldn't try to enforce though.
Hollers wrote:Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.
uvox44 wrote:This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
Desperado
says...
7:09pm Tue 18 Dec 12
daily reporter
says...
8:17pm Tue 18 Dec 12
s-pb2
says...
8:18pm Tue 18 Dec 12
s-pb2
says...
8:21pm Tue 18 Dec 12
Old Colonial wrote:You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again
Hollers wrote:Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.
uvox44 wrote:This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
theoakman
says...
8:35pm Tue 18 Dec 12
Wageslave
says...
8:38pm Tue 18 Dec 12
djd
says...
8:46pm Tue 18 Dec 12
Wageslave wrote:This car is operated by the Local Authority and is used to detect parking offences which the Council deal with.
Is this the same as the number plate recognition car, because that also picks up untaxed vehicles.I pay my car tax so should everyone else. Those without usually have no MOT or insurance, which means unroady worthy cars that can't brake ,for example, and no compensation when they hit you.Fine them and lock them up.
The ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) cars are operated by the police and are used to detect vehicles being used without tax, MoT or insurance, also vehicles on the police stolen vehicle database and vehicles in which police have an interest.
rayc
says...
9:32pm Tue 18 Dec 12
s-pb2 wrote:"You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again"
Old Colonial wrote:You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again
Hollers wrote:Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.
uvox44 wrote:This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
Or that Council's flood the roads with ever increasing unnecessary restrictions so as to to force drivers to use their car parks and meters.
Jetwasher
says...
9:44pm Tue 18 Dec 12
EGHH
says...
10:07pm Tue 18 Dec 12
WitchfinderGeneral58
says...
10:46pm Tue 18 Dec 12
spooki
says...
10:48pm Tue 18 Dec 12
EGHH wrote:I could use the disabled parking in the bit of road near Tesco (used to be Borders) in Bmth Square as an example there: the amount of times I've gone to park there and can't because some lazy whatsit in a BMW/Merc is waiting or a delivery/builders van is parked there is just amazing. It's 'disabled parking'. Not 'fully capable-bodied park where you like'. I've never seen this camera car but if it cuts down on dodgy driving behaviour I'm all for it.
How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!!
Oh and if you're the woman who told me to shut up because I told her to try putting her phone down whilst driving, I hope you get caught.
cynicist
says...
10:56pm Tue 18 Dec 12
If they were truly serious about people parking dangerously, they would tow their cars.
But in all honesty, I hope it does not come to that.
The real winners are the ones who convinced the council to purchase the equipment in the first place.
ashleycross
says...
11:24pm Tue 18 Dec 12
Old Colonial wrote:it has see my comment must have been simultaneous to yours
Of course lives and serious injuries saved cannot be quantified. That would require 'blind trials'.
The only quantifiable way of judging success is to see whether parking on school zig-zags, bus stops, no loading and no waiting areas has been significantly reduced. Has it? If not, then this is just a nice little cash generator.
ashleycross
says...
11:31pm Tue 18 Dec 12
timwel wrote:good point. personally i always make a point of calling 101 and reporting tailgaters on the A338 or at least calling their employer. It doesn't take long and could save a life, just think of it as being like donating blood
Great when does it start saving lives on the A338 catching tail-gaters and loons rather than raising revenue for dastardly crimes like parking?
ashleycross
says...
11:40pm Tue 18 Dec 12
djd wrote:very interesting djd-can you post which regulations these are? I think I can see another campaign in the making for the advertiser
Great idea this camera car, so people park where they don't think they are causing a danger to other road users. It's only their opinion that they are not causing a danger, why do you think the restrictions are there in the first place.
A lot of posts mention pavement parking, probably the biggest menace in Bournemouth. The council hasn't adopted the regulations to make it illegal. Please adopt the regulations, please ticket all those who do park on the pavement. 'pavements are for people, not for cars.' How do motorists react to pedestrians walking on the carriageway???
s-pb2
says...
12:14am Wed 19 Dec 12
rayc wrote:I manage to deal with these 'unnecessary restrictions' with absolutely no problem at all, so why cant you?
s-pb2 wrote:"You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again"
Old Colonial wrote:You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again
Hollers wrote:Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.
uvox44 wrote:This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
Or that Council's flood the roads with ever increasing unnecessary restrictions so as to to force drivers to use their car parks and meters.
Phixer
says...
5:35am Wed 19 Dec 12
daily reporter wrote:Service roads already exist - and you still get the arrogant drivers who block the way.
why cant the council use some of the money to build drop off points that work like a single road with barriers down each side and when you get to a gap in the barrier your passangers can get out/in but you cant wait or stay because cars behind will make you move on, this way it is self regulating, traffic runs freely along the road which runs parallel to the drop off road.
justdreaming
says...
5:53am Wed 19 Dec 12
If motorists were not so bloody selfish and inconsiderate and obeyed the laws which were made for the benefit of all. Then they would not get fined, i say serve them right.
Keep up the good work Council.
sar72
says...
8:16am Wed 19 Dec 12
Maybe they should take a closer look at their council employees work vehicles...as they are often spotted outside blockbusters in Westbourne parked on the pavement??!!!!
devilstail
says...
9:04am Wed 19 Dec 12
So let me explain something to those in denial out there, it does not matter how big your car is, how expensive it is, how fast it is, whether you drive for a living or how important you think you are, unless you are in the emergency response vehicle responding to an emergency, you have no more rights on the road to any other road users.
If people got this through their thick skulls and started obeying the LAW, there would be less accidents and less congestion and no need for such measures as this car and speed cameras.
It is time that there was a zero tolerance on anti social road use and would welcome more of these cars on the road.
Before the usual troll's start trying to flame me no I do not park illegally and never have because I have 2 legs and know how to use them.
ashleycross
says...
9:12am Wed 19 Dec 12
EGHH wrote:When I was a child delivery drivers kept a little trolley in the van called I think a dolly, which they used to move what they were delivering from their vehicle to the place they delivering to. It would be interesting to know why we never see these any more.Could it be that they will make a comeback with better enforcement against bad parking?
How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!!
devilstail
says...
9:16am Wed 19 Dec 12
http://www.roadswere
notbuiltforcars.com/
1835highwayact/
Scotland is making moves towards this anti social behaviour
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-scotland-sc
otland-politics-2069
1167
devilstail
says...
9:20am Wed 19 Dec 12
ashleycross wrote:In Blandford there are a couple of companies that abuse this and it is not uncommon to see 2 or 3 of their vans illegally parked, for long periods of time in a dangerous spot.
EGHH wrote:When I was a child delivery drivers kept a little trolley in the van called I think a dolly, which they used to move what they were delivering from their vehicle to the place they delivering to. It would be interesting to know why we never see these any more.Could it be that they will make a comeback with better enforcement against bad parking?
How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!!
outlawselfinterest
says...
10:36am Wed 19 Dec 12
An unqualified GOOD NEWS story.
Well done Bournemouth Council!
Anti-social (or very lazy) motorists penalised and the income put into other road safety schemes.
Perfect!
And if it reduces the Council Tax bill by even a few pounds, well, that's even better.
It's just a shame that many other towns in the area don't have the expertise that was in Bournemouth when this scheme was introduced.
The Renegade Master
says...
11:11am Wed 19 Dec 12
Anyone who can't see that is an idiot.
The Renegade Master
says...
11:22am Wed 19 Dec 12
tricky1007 wrote:So you like the idea of the Council using OUR money to find new ways of extorting more money out of US? Can you not see what's wrong with that principle? It wouldn't be so bad if the money made from this scam was spent on improving services but it clearly isn't.
The Renegade Master wrote:I did not get a ticket from it this year! I park where i should as do most people, and it is right, dont park illegally and you wont get a ticket. Its people with the mentality of 'i am not hurting anyone and i am not parked in a dangerous place' that deserve to get a ticket. The amount of times i have seen people in wheelchairs, or prams, or young children been made to walk out into the road to get round these cars, yes i see that as dangerous!
Yeah yeah yeah.... we know, don't park illegally and you won't get a ticket blah blah blah. Shut up!
The simple fact remains that the Council are using OUR money to devise more ways of extorting more and more cash from US. I find that principle distasteful.
Perhaps there should be a bad cycling car too, just to upset Mike Chalkey!
live-and-let-live
says...
11:58am Wed 19 Dec 12
Molecatcher
says...
12:23pm Wed 19 Dec 12
Probably because you have absolutely no evidence to support a claim that it has saved lives at all... Get a grip Councillor...
aerolover
says...
5:12pm Thu 20 Dec 12
rayc wrote:Will the car catch cyclists who run red lights, ride with no lights or weave in and out of slow moving traffic? Answer no because they don't have to register or pay road tax so no one can find out who was riding.
uvox44 wrote:"would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules?"
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
I would rather that the two things were not related at all. Enforcing traffic regulations and providing parking etc. should not be provided with the intention of making a profit so that Council Tax is reduced.
The reason given for the providing the car was to save the lives and risk of serious injuries to schoolchildren in the vicinity of their schools. Now the reason appears to be to to install new cycle arrangements etc. Without offenders there would presumably not be any new cycle arrangements?
To make the road fair everyone should have to pay some road tax, car driver or cyclist and display a registration number.
You can have it all ways, every one has to obey the laws of the road.
s-pb2
says...
11:11pm Thu 20 Dec 12
aerolover wrote:What about skateboarders? mobility scooters? longboarders? rollerbladers? pedestrians even? Would you tax an 8 year old? Daft suggestion and completely unworkable
rayc wrote:Will the car catch cyclists who run red lights, ride with no lights or weave in and out of slow moving traffic? Answer no because they don't have to register or pay road tax so no one can find out who was riding.
uvox44 wrote:"would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules?"
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
I would rather that the two things were not related at all. Enforcing traffic regulations and providing parking etc. should not be provided with the intention of making a profit so that Council Tax is reduced.
The reason given for the providing the car was to save the lives and risk of serious injuries to schoolchildren in the vicinity of their schools. Now the reason appears to be to to install new cycle arrangements etc. Without offenders there would presumably not be any new cycle arrangements?
To make the road fair everyone should have to pay some road tax, car driver or cyclist and display a registration number.
You can have it all ways, every one has to obey the laws of the road.
EdBmth says...
8:50am Tue 18 Dec 12
It is this minorit that should be dealt with rather than the Taxi drivers trying to collect the 80-90 year old from the shops.