I write to you re Mr Wilson’s quashed parking fine (Advertiser February 13). The incident raises several interesting issues, not least of which is the council’s decision on the matter.
In the context of a council-run public car park, I have always assumed that a blue badge permit entitles the holder to park in the bays designated for disabled parking, which are usually clearly marked.
However, should the permit holder decide, for any reason, to park in a normal pay and display bay, then surely the blue badge is not valid and does not therefore exempt the holder from paying the appropriate tariff.
It is hard to imagine that Mr Wilson is not perfectly well aware of this.
Perhaps, on reflection, he would agree that payment of the parking fee would have been the best option, rather than risking the blue badge stunt and incurring a fine, and the subsequent complaining about it - what a palaver for the sake of 60p between three people.
The council’s curious decision has now set the precedent. On your next visit to Pimlico car park, you will probably find that all of the bays are occupied by blue badge holders who now believe they may park in any bay they choose and it’s free. This would of course cost the council in terms of revenue but there would be no further need for designated disabled parking bays, and so they would save in terms of paint. The decision is also a slight on the people who are prepared to pay the required tariff for a service rendered.
I think that the council have shot themselves in the foot with this one and the decision should be reversed. Mr Wilson should be asked to pay the outstanding parking fee and, also, the fine which was imposed for non-payment of the said fee. Perhaps he should also be advised to take more care when using his blue badge.
In view of the many parking fine appeals which are turned down, I am curious to know why Mr Wilson’s appeal was upheld? The warden who issued the original fine should be commeneded on his/her vigilance.