Yes and no to Lendal experiment

Yes and no to Lendal experiment

Yes and no to Lendal experiment

First published in Letters by

HIP HIP hurray and three cheers for City of York Council for standing by their decision to keep Lendal Bridge closed. Surely this is a great piece of forward-thinking for an already successful pedestrianised city, an example to many, and we should be proud.

If anyone has made the mistake of driving in restricted zones they should have consequences to pay. Lendal Bridge’s closure has massive benefits. It is safer, calmer, cleaner and generally a more pleasant space without the old congestion.

Let’s keep moving forward, not backwards on such changes.

Karin Wild, (car driver, cyclist and pedestrian), Hempland Lane, Heworth, York.

 

• THE Institute of Transport Studies in Leeds will imminently be providing an independent report to City of York Council on its evaluation of the Lendal Bridge trial.

While the implementation of the trial can be criticised for its failure to provide adequate signage, not implementing a randomised camera enforcement process and poor communication in not advocating sufficiently strongly the rationale behind the trial (clearly any coherent growth strategy cannot operate without management of congestion), none of these issues should be used to deflect away from the evaluation of the trial.

Policy must be evaluated through evidence and we should wait to see what the report says.

On an anecdotal basis, increased pedestrian and cyclist activity in the surrounding areas combined with an improvement in the air quality and environment certainly seems evident.

Other issues such as traffic flows and bus timings are clearly more complex – for example, increased economic activity can distort comparisons.

Whatever the report says, I hope members, and more specifically the cabinet, will be brave in following the evidence and therefore the broader interests of York itself and not be swayed instead through selective interpretations (my own included!) that often reflect aspects of self-interest.

Richard Bridge, Holgate Road, York.

 

• SO THE Lendal Bridge trial, which we were informed originally would end in February, has now been extended until May.

No surprises there then. Did we honestly think the council would stick to its plans?

As usual the council does not take into consideration the loss of revenue to traders and the obvious congestion for drivers.

The council must have acquired vast amounts from the fines collected from visitors (where is this money going?).

I am sure those tourists who have been fined for crossing the bridge will avoid visiting York again and no doubt will pass the word around to other tourists about being penalised for using the city’s main bridge.

Why doesn’t the council come clean and be honest with us?

Does it ever intend reopening the bridge? Where is the money going? Do the opinions of residents matter?

S McClaren, Boroughbridge Road, York.

 

• THE PRESS (March 29) reports that City of York Council’s cabinet has deferred a decision on whether to reopen Lendal Bridge.

Notwithstanding the fact of eight months experience and with the views of of people from all walks of life, including visitors unwittingly trapped into heavy fines, amounting to many thousands, the cabinet member for transport stated that a decision would be made in May when “all evidence” was available.

Surely after nearly eight months, sufficient evidence is already available.

It appears that the delayed decision to wait 10 months is a flagrant effort to seek public acceptance that the closure is already permanent.

J Beisly, Osprey Close, York.

 

• IT WAS scandalous that Liberal Democrat attempts to debate the Lendal Bridge closure were blocked by the ruling Labour group last Thursday (The Press, March 29).

Our motion called for a full debate and vote on Lendal Bridge. What we got instead was Labour shutting down the debate and putting off the decision for another six weeks.

This means that the six-month closure Labour promised residents will turn into a nine-month closure by default. It means six more weeks of fines, lost business and increased traffic congestion.

This is not the first time Labour has used underhand tactics to try to stop public discussion of their policies, but it is one of the most blatant.

So, after ducking the issue last night I repeat my challenge to Coun James Alexander. We think the trial was botched, has failed to achieve its aims, and therefore Lendal Bridge should reopen immediately.

Coun Keith Aspden, Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, City of York Council.

 

• A BRIDGE too closed. Open!

Keith Massey, Mill Lane, York

Comments (18)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:08pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter!
In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter! Pinza-C55
  • Score: 3

2:50pm Tue 1 Apr 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter!
Second that.
[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter![/p][/quote]Second that. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: 2

4:01pm Tue 1 Apr 14

wildthing666 says...

After todays report I will be applying for the fine my son got off COYC back but should I ask for interest on the amount at personal loan rates, I don't know
After todays report I will be applying for the fine my son got off COYC back but should I ask for interest on the amount at personal loan rates, I don't know wildthing666
  • Score: 10

7:11pm Tue 1 Apr 14

CaroleBaines says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter!
I am laughing at S McClaren's letter. Tourists banding together and whispering the news to potential visitors never to visit York because they might get a motoring fine! Haha - as if

Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc).

We deserve better - even S McClaren might be able to realise that!
[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter![/p][/quote]I am laughing at S McClaren's letter. Tourists banding together and whispering the news to potential visitors never to visit York because they might get a motoring fine! Haha - as if Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc). We deserve better - even S McClaren might be able to realise that! CaroleBaines
  • Score: -77

8:23pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Pinza-C55 wrote:
In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter!
I am laughing at S McClaren's letter. Tourists banding together and whispering the news to potential visitors never to visit York because they might get a motoring fine! Haha - as if

Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc).

We deserve better - even S McClaren might be able to realise that!
"Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc)."
Because, like all politicians, they are motivated by political dogma rather than common sense. It would be no different if the Tories were in power in York and substantially worse if something like the Green party were.
A council has certain basic duties - empty the bins, sweep the streets etc - but it isn't enough for them and they get bored so they want new ideas and grandiose schemes. That's when the excrement hits the revolving air conditioner. If I had been in a position of influence on the council when the Lendal Bridge scheme was devised, I would have said "this is electoral suicide and I want nothing to do with it". But, as the saying goes, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely".
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter![/p][/quote]I am laughing at S McClaren's letter. Tourists banding together and whispering the news to potential visitors never to visit York because they might get a motoring fine! Haha - as if Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc). We deserve better - even S McClaren might be able to realise that![/p][/quote]"Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc)." Because, like all politicians, they are motivated by political dogma rather than common sense. It would be no different if the Tories were in power in York and substantially worse if something like the Green party were. A council has certain basic duties - empty the bins, sweep the streets etc - but it isn't enough for them and they get bored so they want new ideas and grandiose schemes. That's when the excrement hits the revolving air conditioner. If I had been in a position of influence on the council when the Lendal Bridge scheme was devised, I would have said "this is electoral suicide and I want nothing to do with it". But, as the saying goes, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely". Pinza-C55
  • Score: 2

8:40pm Tue 1 Apr 14

courier46 says...

Oh dear,egg on face time.Lol
Oh dear,egg on face time.Lol courier46
  • Score: 9

8:46pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Sage9 says...

wildthing666 wrote:
After todays report I will be applying for the fine my son got off COYC back but should I ask for interest on the amount at personal loan rates, I don't know
Recorded delivery letter asking for a refund plus (say) £20 compensation paid by the end of the month. Tell them if no response you will go straight to the Small Calims Court.
[quote][p][bold]wildthing666[/bold] wrote: After todays report I will be applying for the fine my son got off COYC back but should I ask for interest on the amount at personal loan rates, I don't know[/p][/quote]Recorded delivery letter asking for a refund plus (say) £20 compensation paid by the end of the month. Tell them if no response you will go straight to the Small Calims Court. Sage9
  • Score: 9

10:28pm Tue 1 Apr 14

jay, york says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Pinza-C55 wrote: In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter!
I am laughing at S McClaren's letter. Tourists banding together and whispering the news to potential visitors never to visit York because they might get a motoring fine! Haha - as if Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc). We deserve better - even S McClaren might be able to realise that!
"Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc)." Because, like all politicians, they are motivated by political dogma rather than common sense. It would be no different if the Tories were in power in York and substantially worse if something like the Green party were. A council has certain basic duties - empty the bins, sweep the streets etc - but it isn't enough for them and they get bored so they want new ideas and grandiose schemes. That's when the excrement hits the revolving air conditioner. If I had been in a position of influence on the council when the Lendal Bridge scheme was devised, I would have said "this is electoral suicide and I want nothing to do with it". But, as the saying goes, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely".
All so true Pinza! This CYC is a control freak - what they want will have to be done no matter what, Nobody will be allowed to question or query anything they do - you will do as we say.
But the most amazing thing is that even when when the Government Traffic Adjudicator (a really senior positon) tells them that they do not have the power to issue PCNs and it is ILLEGAL, they will ignore him/ her and continue to issue PCNs by use of cameras.
[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter![/p][/quote]I am laughing at S McClaren's letter. Tourists banding together and whispering the news to potential visitors never to visit York because they might get a motoring fine! Haha - as if Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc). We deserve better - even S McClaren might be able to realise that![/p][/quote]"Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc)." Because, like all politicians, they are motivated by political dogma rather than common sense. It would be no different if the Tories were in power in York and substantially worse if something like the Green party were. A council has certain basic duties - empty the bins, sweep the streets etc - but it isn't enough for them and they get bored so they want new ideas and grandiose schemes. That's when the excrement hits the revolving air conditioner. If I had been in a position of influence on the council when the Lendal Bridge scheme was devised, I would have said "this is electoral suicide and I want nothing to do with it". But, as the saying goes, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely".[/p][/quote]All so true Pinza! This CYC is a control freak - what they want will have to be done no matter what, Nobody will be allowed to question or query anything they do - you will do as we say. But the most amazing thing is that even when when the Government Traffic Adjudicator (a really senior positon) tells them that they do not have the power to issue PCNs and it is ILLEGAL, they will ignore him/ her and continue to issue PCNs by use of cameras. jay, york
  • Score: 7

11:04pm Tue 1 Apr 14

akaroa says...

On the national news tonight, it was reported that, recently Yorkshire has dangerously high atmospheric pollution levels. A great percentage of this pollution is caused by filth emitting engines, ie. motor vehicles. For many years York has had abnormally high levels of atmospheric filth, amongst the highest in the whole country. Something has to be done to regulate these lethal levels. To lower these levels, it is logical that traffic numbers have to be controlled. The closing of Lendal bridge, has helped to eliviate this filth
On the national news tonight, it was reported that, recently Yorkshire has dangerously high atmospheric pollution levels. A great percentage of this pollution is caused by filth emitting engines, ie. motor vehicles. For many years York has had abnormally high levels of atmospheric filth, amongst the highest in the whole country. Something has to be done to regulate these lethal levels. To lower these levels, it is logical that traffic numbers have to be controlled. The closing of Lendal bridge, has helped to eliviate this filth akaroa
  • Score: -8

11:09pm Tue 1 Apr 14

courier46 says...

akaroa wrote:
On the national news tonight, it was reported that, recently Yorkshire has dangerously high atmospheric pollution levels. A great percentage of this pollution is caused by filth emitting engines, ie. motor vehicles. For many years York has had abnormally high levels of atmospheric filth, amongst the highest in the whole country. Something has to be done to regulate these lethal levels. To lower these levels, it is logical that traffic numbers have to be controlled. The closing of Lendal bridge, has helped to eliviate this filth
Rubbish! it`s just made it go elsewhere.
[quote][p][bold]akaroa[/bold] wrote: On the national news tonight, it was reported that, recently Yorkshire has dangerously high atmospheric pollution levels. A great percentage of this pollution is caused by filth emitting engines, ie. motor vehicles. For many years York has had abnormally high levels of atmospheric filth, amongst the highest in the whole country. Something has to be done to regulate these lethal levels. To lower these levels, it is logical that traffic numbers have to be controlled. The closing of Lendal bridge, has helped to eliviate this filth[/p][/quote]Rubbish! it`s just made it go elsewhere. courier46
  • Score: 7

11:13pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

jay, york wrote:
Pinza-C55 wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Pinza-C55 wrote: In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter!
I am laughing at S McClaren's letter. Tourists banding together and whispering the news to potential visitors never to visit York because they might get a motoring fine! Haha - as if Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc). We deserve better - even S McClaren might be able to realise that!
"Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc)." Because, like all politicians, they are motivated by political dogma rather than common sense. It would be no different if the Tories were in power in York and substantially worse if something like the Green party were. A council has certain basic duties - empty the bins, sweep the streets etc - but it isn't enough for them and they get bored so they want new ideas and grandiose schemes. That's when the excrement hits the revolving air conditioner. If I had been in a position of influence on the council when the Lendal Bridge scheme was devised, I would have said "this is electoral suicide and I want nothing to do with it". But, as the saying goes, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely".
All so true Pinza! This CYC is a control freak - what they want will have to be done no matter what, Nobody will be allowed to question or query anything they do - you will do as we say.
But the most amazing thing is that even when when the Government Traffic Adjudicator (a really senior positon) tells them that they do not have the power to issue PCNs and it is ILLEGAL, they will ignore him/ her and continue to issue PCNs by use of cameras.
Yes, it is like a burglar being stopped by a policeman and saying "clear off while I phone my lawyer!".
[quote][p][bold]jay, york[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: In the light of today's news I have to say that - as a pedestrian only - I am still laughing my head off at Karin Wild's letter![/p][/quote]I am laughing at S McClaren's letter. Tourists banding together and whispering the news to potential visitors never to visit York because they might get a motoring fine! Haha - as if Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc). We deserve better - even S McClaren might be able to realise that![/p][/quote]"Not good news re fines of course and not unexpected. Bridge closure was worth a try imho, but why does it always have to be a pantomime with the Council in this city? Was the same with LibDems as I am sure people can recall (Barbican, not telling anyone where bonfire night celebrations were going to be etc etc)." Because, like all politicians, they are motivated by political dogma rather than common sense. It would be no different if the Tories were in power in York and substantially worse if something like the Green party were. A council has certain basic duties - empty the bins, sweep the streets etc - but it isn't enough for them and they get bored so they want new ideas and grandiose schemes. That's when the excrement hits the revolving air conditioner. If I had been in a position of influence on the council when the Lendal Bridge scheme was devised, I would have said "this is electoral suicide and I want nothing to do with it". But, as the saying goes, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely".[/p][/quote]All so true Pinza! This CYC is a control freak - what they want will have to be done no matter what, Nobody will be allowed to question or query anything they do - you will do as we say. But the most amazing thing is that even when when the Government Traffic Adjudicator (a really senior positon) tells them that they do not have the power to issue PCNs and it is ILLEGAL, they will ignore him/ her and continue to issue PCNs by use of cameras.[/p][/quote]Yes, it is like a burglar being stopped by a policeman and saying "clear off while I phone my lawyer!". Pinza-C55
  • Score: 4

11:34pm Tue 1 Apr 14

strangebuttrue? says...

akaroa wrote:
On the national news tonight, it was reported that, recently Yorkshire has dangerously high atmospheric pollution levels. A great percentage of this pollution is caused by filth emitting engines, ie. motor vehicles. For many years York has had abnormally high levels of atmospheric filth, amongst the highest in the whole country. Something has to be done to regulate these lethal levels. To lower these levels, it is logical that traffic numbers have to be controlled. The closing of Lendal bridge, has helped to eliviate this filth
You are sadly mistaken. The councils own reports tell us that with no increase in the volume of traffic since 2005 there has been and increase in pollution in York of as much as 48%. This period happens to coincide with a certain councillors involvement in planning and transport in York which has resulted in many of the anti car measures being put in place. These measures have largely involved creating congestion through the use of various schemes such as closing roads to corral vehicles into an ever decreasing space and then to hold them up at traffic lights. Now I am no expert but does that not mean these vehicles will be producing more pollution running for longer and stopping and starting? Would that not then lead to increases in pollution without increasing vehicle volume as the council say has happened?
[quote][p][bold]akaroa[/bold] wrote: On the national news tonight, it was reported that, recently Yorkshire has dangerously high atmospheric pollution levels. A great percentage of this pollution is caused by filth emitting engines, ie. motor vehicles. For many years York has had abnormally high levels of atmospheric filth, amongst the highest in the whole country. Something has to be done to regulate these lethal levels. To lower these levels, it is logical that traffic numbers have to be controlled. The closing of Lendal bridge, has helped to eliviate this filth[/p][/quote]You are sadly mistaken. The councils own reports tell us that with no increase in the volume of traffic since 2005 there has been and increase in pollution in York of as much as 48%. This period happens to coincide with a certain councillors involvement in planning and transport in York which has resulted in many of the anti car measures being put in place. These measures have largely involved creating congestion through the use of various schemes such as closing roads to corral vehicles into an ever decreasing space and then to hold them up at traffic lights. Now I am no expert but does that not mean these vehicles will be producing more pollution running for longer and stopping and starting? Would that not then lead to increases in pollution without increasing vehicle volume as the council say has happened? strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 6

12:24pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Stevie D says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
Yes, it is like a burglar being stopped by a policeman and saying "clear off while I phone my lawyer!".

Hardly. The sheer fact that Nick Freeman has become involved is an admission of guilt from the people bringing the case. He only ever represents people who are morally and in most respects legally as guilty as hell, but is able to find loopholes that make no difference to the man in the street as to whether the law is understandable or ought to be enforceable, but uses these to allow guilty motorists to get off scot-free.
[quote][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: Yes, it is like a burglar being stopped by a policeman and saying "clear off while I phone my lawyer!".[/quote] Hardly. The sheer fact that Nick Freeman has become involved is an admission of guilt from the people bringing the case. He only ever represents people who are morally and in most respects legally as guilty as hell, but is able to find loopholes that make no difference to the man in the street as to whether the law is understandable or [italic]ought[/italic] to be enforceable, but uses these to allow guilty motorists to get off scot-free. Stevie D
  • Score: -3

4:19pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

Stevie D wrote:
Pinza-C55 wrote:
Yes, it is like a burglar being stopped by a policeman and saying "clear off while I phone my lawyer!".

Hardly. The sheer fact that Nick Freeman has become involved is an admission of guilt from the people bringing the case. He only ever represents people who are morally and in most respects legally as guilty as hell, but is able to find loopholes that make no difference to the man in the street as to whether the law is understandable or ought to be enforceable, but uses these to allow guilty motorists to get off scot-free.
Nice theory. I am not a motorist nor do I defend motorists if they are breaking the law, however in this case it is the inescapable fact that an independent adjudicator found that the council were misapplying a law and unlawfully issuing PCNs. You may not like his findings but they stand. I've read his full findings and one of the most staggering facts is that the council admitted that they had neither sufficient staffing or resources to properly run the scheme, with the result that Person X gets a PCN and Person Y happens to get lucky!
If the law is to applied at all it should applied fairly and equally to everbody, not just a case of "Throw those PCNs in the bin, it's time to go home".
[quote][p][bold]Stevie D[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: Yes, it is like a burglar being stopped by a policeman and saying "clear off while I phone my lawyer!".[/quote] Hardly. The sheer fact that Nick Freeman has become involved is an admission of guilt from the people bringing the case. He only ever represents people who are morally and in most respects legally as guilty as hell, but is able to find loopholes that make no difference to the man in the street as to whether the law is understandable or [italic]ought[/italic] to be enforceable, but uses these to allow guilty motorists to get off scot-free.[/p][/quote]Nice theory. I am not a motorist nor do I defend motorists if they are breaking the law, however in this case it is the inescapable fact that an independent adjudicator found that the council were misapplying a law and unlawfully issuing PCNs. You may not like his findings but they stand. I've read his full findings and one of the most staggering facts is that the council admitted that they had neither sufficient staffing or resources to properly run the scheme, with the result that Person X gets a PCN and Person Y happens to get lucky! If the law is to applied at all it should applied fairly and equally to everbody, not just a case of "Throw those PCNs in the bin, it's time to go home". Pinza-C55
  • Score: 0

5:02pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Stevie D says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
I've read his full findings and one of the most staggering facts is that the council admitted that they had neither sufficient staffing or resources to properly run the scheme, with the result that Person X gets a PCN and Person Y happens to get lucky!

And how is that different to any other law enforcement? Drivers doing 90mph on the A64 will be prosecuted one day but not the next, depending on where the police patrols are. The fact that some people get fined but not all does not mean that the law should not be upheld, and unless there is systematic discrimination into how the people are chosen to be fined or let off, it is no reason to cancel the fines of the people who got caught.
[quote][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: I've read his full findings and one of the most staggering facts is that the council admitted that they had neither sufficient staffing or resources to properly run the scheme, with the result that Person X gets a PCN and Person Y happens to get lucky![/quote] And how is that different to any other law enforcement? Drivers doing 90mph on the A64 will be prosecuted one day but not the next, depending on where the police patrols are. The fact that some people get fined but not all does not mean that the law should not be upheld, and unless there is systematic discrimination into how the people are chosen to be fined or let off, it is no reason to cancel the fines of the people who got caught. Stevie D
  • Score: -1

5:33pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

Stevie D wrote:
Pinza-C55 wrote:
I've read his full findings and one of the most staggering facts is that the council admitted that they had neither sufficient staffing or resources to properly run the scheme, with the result that Person X gets a PCN and Person Y happens to get lucky!

And how is that different to any other law enforcement? Drivers doing 90mph on the A64 will be prosecuted one day but not the next, depending on where the police patrols are. The fact that some people get fined but not all does not mean that the law should not be upheld, and unless there is systematic discrimination into how the people are chosen to be fined or let off, it is no reason to cancel the fines of the people who got caught.
It's different because this is being enforced through the use of ANPR cameras which don't need holidays or sick leave. The registration numbers are gathered automatically but COYC has neither the staff nor resources to deal with the PCNs or more especially appeals against the PCN's.
Did you actually read the report?
[quote][p][bold]Stevie D[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: I've read his full findings and one of the most staggering facts is that the council admitted that they had neither sufficient staffing or resources to properly run the scheme, with the result that Person X gets a PCN and Person Y happens to get lucky![/quote] And how is that different to any other law enforcement? Drivers doing 90mph on the A64 will be prosecuted one day but not the next, depending on where the police patrols are. The fact that some people get fined but not all does not mean that the law should not be upheld, and unless there is systematic discrimination into how the people are chosen to be fined or let off, it is no reason to cancel the fines of the people who got caught.[/p][/quote]It's different because this is being enforced through the use of ANPR cameras which don't need holidays or sick leave. The registration numbers are gathered automatically but COYC has neither the staff nor resources to deal with the PCNs or more especially appeals against the PCN's. Did you actually read the report? Pinza-C55
  • Score: 0

4:12am Thu 3 Apr 14

Magicman! says...

Interesting to see the anti-closure letters all seem to come from the same pool of about 7 contributors.
Interesting to see the anti-closure letters all seem to come from the same pool of about 7 contributors. Magicman!
  • Score: 0

12:04pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

Magicman! wrote:
Interesting to see the anti-closure letters all seem to come from the same pool of about 7 contributors.
What's your point?
[quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: Interesting to see the anti-closure letters all seem to come from the same pool of about 7 contributors.[/p][/quote]What's your point? Pinza-C55
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree