Call Sign March 2011 - Page 8 - Dave now risks a £60 fine every time he needs to spend a penny -

Back in the January issue, Call Sign reported on Dave Raymond (F56) who had attracted several PCNs issued by Westminster City Council while using toilet facilities within the borough. Dave is a Diabetic on medication to control his condition and as a result, needs to use the toilet frequently - sometimes with very little warning. He has to make for the nearest facility and while making every effort to park his cab on a rank or meter bay, the urgency of the call of nature cannot be ignored. After an appeal to WCC for them to reconsider a PCN issued at Warwick Avenue - including medical evidence to support his protestation - the Council did eventually withdraw the Charge. But that still left two outstanding PCNs to contest, which Dave did through the Parking Adjudicator. "I was confident that with the precedent set by the Council when they withdrew the Warwick	Dave’s Diabetic PCN appeals fail
	Dave now risks a £60 fine every time he needs to spend a penny Avenue ticket, I would be in a strong position together with my medical records and copies of emails between Westminster CC officials and myself, to present a robust case to the Adjudicator," Dave told Call Sign. However, when we made a follow-up call for the result, it was a less than jubilant Dave who answered the phone. "The Adjudicator took the view that I had broken	the law by parking on a yellow line, even though I produced evidence of my medication and emails from Martin Low and others at Westminster CC with regard to the mitigating circumstances," Dave said. "But she wouldn’t have any of it, saying that those at Westminster CC have the discretion to withdraw PCNs and that she did not as I had clearly broken the law." Sounding very dejected, Dave continued: "I had to fork out £240 for those two outstanding PCNs at £120 each. I do a lot of TaxiCard trips within Westminster, willingly taking their residents to hospitals, doctor’s appointments and other vital destinations, yet stopping when I need to for my own welfare within Westminster’s patch, clearly seems to be less of a priority…" © Call Sign Magazine MMX1

Flashed? 50% chance you wont get nicked!
A Which study has cheered up thousands of motorists – no doubt including a few taxi drivers on Dial-a-Cab – by passing on the consumer watchdog’s claim that over half of fixed speed cameras in England and Wales do not work at any one time! The study also found that the chances of getting caught speeding vary dramatically from county to county. As an example, it quoted all 60 Sussex cameras as being in operation, whereas Lancashire had just 10% of its 287 sites working and that overall, fewer than 47% of all fixed cameras are operational at any one time. Using the Freedom of Information Act, the watchdog asked all 43 police authorities in England and Wales how many fixed speed camera housings they had and how many were in operation? Dorset, Hertfordshire, Merseyside, Norfolk and Suffolk refused to answer, but the available results showed counties had between 10% and 100% of their cameras in operation. Durham said it	used a single mobile camera because there was no need for fixed cameras anywhere in the county, while Cleveland, North Yorkshire and Wiltshire also did not operate any fixed sites. Cumbria Police had just 12 fixed cameras, but said that all were operational. Staffordshire had 263 speed camera housings, but just 11% were working. Avon and Somerset had 54 sites of which 94% were operational. According to a Which survey of 1,920 members, 47% of people questioned thought speed cameras made roads safer whilst 45% thought they didn’t. 83% believed the cameras just slowed drivers down where the cameras were. Editor Martyn Hocking said: "Speed cameras in some areas are always operational, whereas in others there could be a one in 10 chance the camera you've passed isn't working. It really is a tale of two counties." Institute of Advanced Motorists chief examiner, Peter Rodger, added: "Cameras cost a lot of money	It may not work, but does it create a psychological impression? to install and maintain and for that reason there have always been more yellow boxes than cameras. A yellow camera box that has no camera is totally effective if it achieves casualty reduction with no prosecution. One that catches large numbers of people, but doesn't reduce casualties is doing nothing useful. A yellow box has a huge psychological impression on drivers, whether or not it is live, and it is the effect of this that is important rather than whether the camera is recording."

Call Sign Home Page

Page 10