Experiences: Parking Fines

Where to buy? Where can I find? How do I? Getting started.
Post Reply
User avatar
filecore
Posts: 365
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:37 am

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by filecore » Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:20 pm

Upphew wrote:
umit wrote:Another example: Let's say OP parked his car in a payment zone, took the receipt from the ticket machine, but forgot to put it inside the windshield... When he came back he found the 40e ticket under the wiper... I remember reading somewhere on this forum that, in that situation if you take the ticket and the receipt they cancel it. So, what is the difference, as long as he can prove it???
They might cancel or not, as it is required to put the stub to the window. Only case where they are certain to to cancel is if you are ticketed from not having the stub on motorcycle.
Precisely this. If they're feeling generous, they might say "oh, you have the ticket, we'll forget it this time". However, since the rules quite clearly state that you have to purchase the ticket and display it in your car window, then by failing to do the latter, isn't it quite obvious that you're failing to follow the rules? And what's the penalty for failing to follow the rules?



Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Sponsor:

Finland Forum Ad-O-Matic
 

umit
Posts: 358
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 12:08 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by umit » Tue Feb 23, 2010 7:49 pm

MikeD wrote:Tell me, do you think that if I park in a time-limited zone and then "forget" to move my car before the time is up, I should not be fined? If not, how is it any different from the op's situation? And if there is no need to obey the rules in case you "make a mistake" why have rules in the first place?
filecore wrote: However, since the rules quite clearly state that you have to purchase the ticket and display it in your car window, then by failing to do the latter, isn't it quite obvious that you're failing to follow the rules? And what's the penalty for failing to follow the rules?
Huh, other helpless monkeys here...

@MikeD: Yes, of course you should be fined! The difference is clear: in your situation you have violated the rule in reality (de facto), however the OP didn't violate the rule de facto but on paper. The rules are there to protect a "good". The "good" in time limited zone rule is to give everybody equal chance to use a parking facility by preventing people leaving their cars there for months...

Thus, if my carelessness harms the "good" the rule is protecting, I need to suffer the consecuences of my stupidity. Otherwise (and if I can prove it) I would argue with the stupid officers and helpless monkeys as long as it takes :twisted:


MikeD
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:54 pm

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by MikeD » Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:10 pm

umit wrote:
MikeD wrote:Huh, other helpless monkeys here...

@MikeD: Yes, of course you should be fined! The difference is clear: in your situation you have violated the rule in reality (de facto), however the OP didn't violate the rule de facto but on paper. The rules are there to protect a "good". The "good" in time limited zone rule is to give everybody equal chance to use a parking facility by preventing people leaving their cars there for months...

Thus, if my carelessness harms the "good" the rule is protecting, I need to suffer the consecuences of my stupidity. Otherwise (and if I can prove it) I would argue with the stupid officers and helpless monkeys as long as it takes :twisted:
He violated [in reality] the rule by not setting the disc correctly. Based on your argument, if I were able to prove that no one else needed the parking space (i.e. the space next to it was not occupied during my stay) I wouldn't need to pay the fine either. The point of exact, written rules is that everyone knows what they can and cannot do, and all this "interpretation" you people are suggesting would only leave the door open for all sorts of egotistical idiots to do pretty much as they please. I'm not saying that all the rules are good or even that they should always be obeyed, what I'm saying that if you break the rules (on purpose or by accident) and there are consequences (such as the parking ticket), you really don't have a valid reason to complain. If you don't like the rules per se, there are ways to try and change them.


User avatar
network_engineer
Posts: 647
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:21 am

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by network_engineer » Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:51 pm

MikeD wrote:... egotistical idiots ...
Trust me I could answer you back if I wanted to, but I choose not to. :evil: Meekness and weakness mean entirely different things.
if you break the rules (on purpose or by accident) and there are consequences (such as the parking ticket), you really don't have a valid reason to complain. If you don't like the rules per se, there are ways to try and change them.
Do read the posts again, anyone can read, I suppose one would need to be a native English speaker to understand the text on screen and realise the intent therein. Enough and subtly said! Oh well, miracles do happen, so let us try again:

1. I am NOT complaining against the authorities or the process. Seeking readdresal or clarity on the matter and justifications is NOT complaining. Perhaps in whatever country you hail from - not in Finland.
2. The question I have put to the authorities is simply this: Is the disc the only and final means to indicate the used (parking) period. Or are they willing to cancel the fine based on other evidence that they might consider relevant. If not, I will happily pay my fine.
3. Yes, this is based on a process provided by law.

What part of these do you NOT understand?

I am signing off now... no fun continuing when posters are simply circling the same point over and over again. I am sure I will get a letter within the course of time, and if they waive it, then I know the disc does not the final role, and if they don't waive it, then I will know for sure that the disc is the deciding factor and I WILL pay the fine.

I am sure you will come back with some rhetorical rebuttal without even reading the posts. :thumbsdown:


umit
Posts: 358
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 12:08 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by umit » Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:57 pm

MikeD wrote:Based on your argument, if I were able to prove that no one else needed the parking space (i.e. the space next to it was not occupied during my stay) I wouldn't need to pay the fine either.
You can try your chance, I don't see any problem in that...

Similar to your example, if you park your car at 4h time limited zone and just before the end of the period you just reset the disk for another 4 hours you may get a ticket if a warden recognizes this (a friend got a ticket like this). However, if you change your car's place and reset the disk you shouldn't get a ticket (not confirmed yet, though).


User avatar
Mook
Posts: 2945
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 9:25 pm
Location: Etelä Tuusula
Contact:

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by Mook » Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:23 pm

For some reason, I just sat and read through all the self-righteous sh1te. And I wondered, what was the point again. Then I looked:
network_engineer wrote:Question: Any chance of getting this fine waived off? Any other experiences?

So the question was maybe "have you ever gotten away with something, in Finland?" (if not it was a complete and utter waste of time)

So:
- If it was a male parking warden you might have managed to get the ticket cancelled
- If you give a big smile to the dinner ladies and look a bit hungry you might get some extra food at lunch
---
Image http://blog.enogastronomist.com | http://blog.enogastronomisti.com


User avatar
network_engineer
Posts: 647
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:21 am

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by network_engineer » Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:44 pm

So the question was maybe "have you ever gotten away with something, in Finland?" (if not it was a complete and utter waste of time)
No, not at all, the post was after I submitted the readdressal form, the intent was only to understand what the authorities point of view was. Any reply would not have had any bearing whatsoever. :)


User avatar
filecore
Posts: 365
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:37 am

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by filecore » Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:46 pm

Then why does this thread keep continuing?


MikeD
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:54 pm

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by MikeD » Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:39 am

network_engineer wrote:
MikeD wrote:... egotistical idiots ...
Trust me I could answer you back if I wanted to, but I choose not to. :evil: Meekness and weakness mean entirely different things.
if you break the rules (on purpose or by accident) and there are consequences (such as the parking ticket), you really don't have a valid reason to complain. If you don't like the rules per se, there are ways to try and change them.
Do read the posts again, anyone can read, I suppose one would need to be a native English speaker to understand the text on screen and realise the intent therein. Enough and subtly said! Oh well, miracles do happen, so let us try again:

1. I am NOT complaining against the authorities or the process. Seeking readdresal or clarity on the matter and justifications is NOT complaining. Perhaps in whatever country you hail from - not in Finland.
2. The question I have put to the authorities is simply this: Is the disc the only and final means to indicate the used (parking) period. Or are they willing to cancel the fine based on other evidence that they might consider relevant. If not, I will happily pay my fine.
3. Yes, this is based on a process provided by law.

What part of these do you NOT understand?

I am signing off now... no fun continuing when posters are simply circling the same point over and over again. I am sure I will get a letter within the course of time, and if they waive it, then I know the disc does not the final role, and if they don't waive it, then I will know for sure that the disc is the deciding factor and I WILL pay the fine.

I am sure you will come back with some rhetorical rebuttal without even reading the posts. :thumbsdown:
Rest assured, I've read and understood every single post in this thread. As for your question (number 2 on your list), the legislation on the matter is perfectly clear to anyone who can read Finnish:

TLL 28 a § (7.9.1990/843)
Pysäköintikiekon käyttövelvollisuus

Jos pysäköinnin enimmäisaikaa on liikennemerkein rajoitettu, autoa ei saa pysäköidä ilman pysäköintikiekkoa, jos kunta on päättänyt ottaa pysäköintikiekon käyttöön kunnan alueella. Kiekkoa ei kuitenkaan käytetä maksullisella pysäköintipaikalla ja pysäköintikiekon käyttövelvollisuus on liikennemerkein osoitettava.

Pysäköintikiekko on pysäköinnin ajaksi sijoitettava näkyvään paikkaan autossa ja siihen on merkittävä saapumisaika siten kuin liikenneministeriö tarkemmin määrää.


And a rough translation:
Road Traffic Act 28 a §
Usage of parking disc

If the maximum time for parking is limited by traffic signs, an automobile may not be parked without a parking disc if the disc is in use in the municipality. The disc is not to be used if there is a fee for parking; and there needs to be a sign indicating that the disc is to be used.

The parking disc is to be set in a place where it is visible and the arrival time has to be marked as per closer instructions from the Traffic Ministry [i.e. next full or half hour].


To me, that states quite clearly that the disc is what matters. If you're not sure whether or not you've actually broken a rule, I'd suggest to first get to know the related legislation and if you still think that you've been treated unfairly, only then seek readdressal and clarification. Doing so would have saved a lot of time and frustration. If by some miracle your fine is waived, it's not going to be because of your evidence but because someone in an office is showing a bit (too much) leniency.

As for the direction this discussion has taken, I find it amazing that (assuming you've read and understood everything) you've failed to grasp that we're discussing what could potentially happen if people were let off on grounds such as what you're trying to do here.


User avatar
network_engineer
Posts: 647
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:21 am

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by network_engineer » Wed Feb 24, 2010 9:48 am

MikeD wrote: ...
TLL 28 a § (7.9.1990/843)
Pysäköintikiekon käyttövelvollisuus
Jos pysäköinnin enimmäisaikaa on liikennemerkein rajoitettu, autoa ei saa pysäköidä ilman pysäköintikiekkoa
...
Thanks, that is indeed the first valuable input I have seen from you so far. That is what I was searching for, but did not recollect reading it.

Thanks.


User avatar
filecore
Posts: 365
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:37 am

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by filecore » Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:17 am

network_engineer wrote:Thanks, that is indeed the first valuable input I have seen from you so far.
It's what everyone else has been telling you all throughout this thread! Perhaps you can't read English properly? :lol:
network_engineer wrote:That is what I was searching for, but did not recollect reading it.
Then you weren't trying very hard: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/alkup/1990/19900843?search[type]=pika&search[pika]=Pys%C3%A4k%C3%B6intikiekko

EDIT: Ah, the URL tags aren't working due to the square brackets in finlex's search format. Fixed now (escaped them into HTML entities).
Last edited by filecore on Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:27 am, edited 3 times in total.


User avatar
filecore
Posts: 365
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:37 am

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by filecore » Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:19 am

Duplicate post edited away.


User avatar
Pursuivant
Posts: 15094
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:51 am
Location: Bath & Wells

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by Pursuivant » Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:26 pm

filecore wrote:Then why does this thread keep continuing?
Because the parking wardens are a bane, and everyone wants to know if you can get off by squirming :lol:
"By the pricking of my thumbs,
Something wicked this way comes."


MTB
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:16 pm

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by MTB » Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:33 pm

In my opinion, the way parking reinforcement is implemented in Finland is very wrong.

1. I got a parking fine in winter when I was parked just before of a parking sign. And then from the sign and for the length of about 3 cars, there was a pile of snow which stayed there for weeks. So, not only the parking places are not enough (otherwise I assume that no normal people would risk a fine and park outside them), but they are blocked for different reasons, mainly municipality's fault in this case - depositing the snow from the road in the parking places, even though 5 meters away, just behind the sidewalk there was a "green area" and plenty of space to deposit snow.

2. There are renovations going on around the place I live in. Some 40 parking places are now inside the construction sites, and people park in the street. Shouldn't there be temporary parking places build? There are zones which allow this without disturbing traffic. Not even one temporary parking place has been created, as a sign of good will, but there were fines issued several times.

3. I was once parked with half of the car before the sign, and half after the sign. Some flexibility never hurts and this could have been overlooked by parking wardens, but I got the fine. No issue until here. After my car, there were other 2 cars without a fine, with the last one blocking the tram railway, and the tram waiting. Tough luck. I went away with the fine, the tram stayed.

4. How can someone justify that an appeal about a parking fine is made to the same authority who issued it?
I can also send all of you a letter, saying "by this paper, I inform you that MTB decided everybody from this forum to pay him 5 euros, no latter than 2 weeks from now on. Any complains about this should be addressed directly to MTB, specifying "complain" on the envelope", but first the full amount needs to be paid in his account and it will be reimbursed if your complain is admitted - please note that typically it takes 6 weeks to analyze the complains.

5. How is possible that a private company is issuing parking fines?

6. There was some official from municipality saying in a newspaper that parking fines are an important source of income for them, and they pay their (parking warden) salaries out of that. This is very wrong, as in any law systems it is specified that the purpose of fines is coercive, and not to raise money for the budget or pay salaries. Because main concern of a traffic warden should be reinforcing the meaning of the law, and not the form it is written. For example, what if (theoretical example) my wheel is 1 cm over the painted stripe on the ground? As long as the other car can park safely and doesn't complain or is not impeded in any way, then a fine should not be given. If car is one centimeter over the line and some other person complains, then a fine should be given.

7. How come I am checked for drunk driving once every 3 years, but I get 3 parking fines per year? :mrgreen: And then occasionally there are some gun incidents in schools and supermarkets, but no worries, most of the people parked their car correctly when they went shooting. Unfortunately this activity doesn't pay off, as criminals usually don't pay their fines, so not enough budget raised for salaries.


DMC
Posts: 1232
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 9:17 am

Re: Experiences: Parking Fines

Post by DMC » Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:59 pm

MTB wrote:7. How come I am checked for drunk driving once every 3 years, but I get 3 parking fines per year?
Because one is your choice and one isn't. You don't decide how often you get pulled in to a random breath test, but you do decide how often you park illegally. Parking fines are imposed to deter people from parking where they should not. In your case the message does not seem to be getting through.


Post Reply