Council stands by fine, but I'll keep fighting

Council stands by fine, but I'll keep fighting

Council stands by fine, but I'll keep fighting

First published in News by

SOUTHEND Council says it stands by the fine its spy car issued to Graham Wilkinson, which has prompted other motorists to claim they are being deliberatley targeted.

Mr Wilkinson, of Jena Close, Shoebury, was stopped at the zebra crossing in Caulfield Road, Shoebury, for just seven seconds. Pictures sent to him by the council showed children crossing for the duration he was stationary.

During this time his son Joel, 12, jumped out of his dad’s van to get to school, but despite Mr Wilkinson being unable to drive on due to the children on the crossing, he was still handed a £35 fine.

He received the notice on Friday, March 7 and took his complaint to the council the following Monday, but the council says it sees no evidence to overturn the decision.

Andrew Lewis, the council’s corporate director for place, said: “Mr Wilkinson’s reported account would appear to differ with the CCTV footage and from that footage we can see why the PCN was issued by our contractor APCOA.

“The footage shows the vehicle braking well in advance of the crossing and before pedestrians were waiting to cross.

“We would invite Mr Wilkinson to come in to view the footage and we will gladly explain the reason for this ticket being issued.

“If having done this he still wants to appeal, we have an appeals process that will consider that.”

In response, Mr Wilkinson said: “I am still going to appeal.

The Highway Code warns you to be aware of pedestrians when approaching a crossing.

“I guess the Council can’t be seen to be giving in.

“I could do without all the hassle, but the bottom line is that if people do not stand up then nothing will happen and whoever dishes out the fines will just do what they want to do.

“I’m going to get back in contact with the policeman who told me I hadn’t broken any law and see if he will back em up with the council."

Comments (10)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:38am Tue 18 Mar 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Good job too, why do these motorists think they can get away with it
Good job too, why do these motorists think they can get away with it carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -3

7:53am Tue 18 Mar 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

so if he pays he is admitting to parking on a zig zag...then that makes it a 3 points and another fine by the police for parking where he did, guess you have to go all the way and not pay, can we view the whole 7 plus seconds.?
so if he pays he is admitting to parking on a zig zag...then that makes it a 3 points and another fine by the police for parking where he did, guess you have to go all the way and not pay, can we view the whole 7 plus seconds.? DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 8

8:36am Tue 18 Mar 14

railfan235 says...

its not only that he could of dropped the kid off 50 yeards before the crossing there fore hes not on zigzags sulky joel would of got some exersize and the dad would have not got fined as far as i see it it is a offense to stop on a zigzag he was stopped before the peds crossed the road a door was opened and a passenger got out hmmmm that's illegal let me break it down

1 van stopped on crossing

2 passanger door opens and someone got out. if any door is open on a Vehicle its classed as parked

3 he could of dropped the sulky kid of 50 yards down the street or walked to school or caught the bus

the fine stands its a offense thats it
its not only that he could of dropped the kid off 50 yeards before the crossing there fore hes not on zigzags sulky joel would of got some exersize and the dad would have not got fined as far as i see it it is a offense to stop on a zigzag he was stopped before the peds crossed the road a door was opened and a passenger got out hmmmm that's illegal let me break it down 1 van stopped on crossing 2 passanger door opens and someone got out. if any door is open on a Vehicle its classed as parked 3 he could of dropped the sulky kid of 50 yards down the street or walked to school or caught the bus the fine stands its a offense thats it railfan235
  • Score: 2

9:02am Tue 18 Mar 14

Barry Bas says...

railfan235 wrote:
its not only that he could of dropped the kid off 50 yeards before the crossing there fore hes not on zigzags sulky joel would of got some exersize and the dad would have not got fined as far as i see it it is a offense to stop on a zigzag he was stopped before the peds crossed the road a door was opened and a passenger got out hmmmm that's illegal let me break it down 1 van stopped on crossing 2 passanger door opens and someone got out. if any door is open on a Vehicle its classed as parked 3 he could of dropped the sulky kid of 50 yards down the street or walked to school or caught the bus the fine stands its a offense thats it
I'm being pedantic here but he was not actually on the crossing was he. To me that would mean he was on the actual black and white stripes.

The way I see it is that if you are not meant to set anyone down or pick anyone up on the zig zags whether he did stop for people crossing first or not an offence was commited.
[quote][p][bold]railfan235[/bold] wrote: its not only that he could of dropped the kid off 50 yeards before the crossing there fore hes not on zigzags sulky joel would of got some exersize and the dad would have not got fined as far as i see it it is a offense to stop on a zigzag he was stopped before the peds crossed the road a door was opened and a passenger got out hmmmm that's illegal let me break it down 1 van stopped on crossing 2 passanger door opens and someone got out. if any door is open on a Vehicle its classed as parked 3 he could of dropped the sulky kid of 50 yards down the street or walked to school or caught the bus the fine stands its a offense thats it[/p][/quote]I'm being pedantic here but he was not actually on the crossing was he. To me that would mean he was on the actual black and white stripes. The way I see it is that if you are not meant to set anyone down or pick anyone up on the zig zags whether he did stop for people crossing first or not an offence was commited. Barry Bas
  • Score: 10

9:57am Tue 18 Mar 14

maxell says...

1st off you need to pay the fine to be compliant, if you have not paid the fine or opted to take the issues through the courts, then they will have you on non compliance which will more than likly to impose a greater penalty, make sure that it is noted that the payment was made under duress, Once you are compliant then you can set about reclaining your perceived damages through the small claims court, this will then be heard by somebody that will have noting to do with the parking issue and will look at the merits of the case , there will be duty solicitors that could offer you advice at the time should you not have legal representation, take it up further in the press and highlight just how much public money is being wasted with stupid bureacocracy, we have a situation her where a human is being told what to do by a computer, Look up definitions of parking, parked, and an angle you take is that they are questioning your ability to read the road and ask them to profuce evidence of this , if what you say is truthful then I suggest that you read the road according to the circumstances at the time and acted with accordingly , I dont feel there is a judge in the land that would not reconise this as farcical. below is a link you may care to visit ( I have not read it all but it mabe of some help) http://keycases.park
ingandtrafficappeals
.gov.uk/docs/schwarz
-v-camden.pdf
1st off you need to pay the fine to be compliant, if you have not paid the fine or opted to take the issues through the courts, then they will have you on non compliance which will more than likly to impose a greater penalty, make sure that it is noted that the payment was made under duress, Once you are compliant then you can set about reclaining your perceived damages through the small claims court, this will then be heard by somebody that will have noting to do with the parking issue and will look at the merits of the case , there will be duty solicitors that could offer you advice at the time should you not have legal representation, take it up further in the press and highlight just how much public money is being wasted with stupid bureacocracy, we have a situation her where a human is being told what to do by a computer, Look up definitions of parking, parked, and an angle you take is that they are questioning your ability to read the road and ask them to profuce evidence of this , if what you say is truthful then I suggest that you read the road according to the circumstances at the time and acted with accordingly , I dont feel there is a judge in the land that would not reconise this as farcical. below is a link you may care to visit ( I have not read it all but it mabe of some help) http://keycases.park ingandtrafficappeals .gov.uk/docs/schwarz -v-camden.pdf maxell
  • Score: 2

10:04am Tue 18 Mar 14

maxell says...

when writing my last post I was not aware the doors were opened and a person transaction to place , then your driving ability could come under question as an offence would have been commited, I retract my previous information, take the rap its affair cop,
when writing my last post I was not aware the doors were opened and a person transaction to place , then your driving ability could come under question as an offence would have been commited, I retract my previous information, take the rap its affair cop, maxell
  • Score: 4

10:16am Tue 18 Mar 14

whateverhappened says...

If as the council states they filmed for more than just the alleged offence it brings a new dimension to these cars. i thought they took a photo of the offence, but it seems they drive round and video everything. Or was the video car parked on the zig zags filming. I would very much like this man to go to court to test the legality of the council seemingly filming children outside schools without permission...how many of the people with accsess to this footage are CRB checked
If as the council states they filmed for more than just the alleged offence it brings a new dimension to these cars. i thought they took a photo of the offence, but it seems they drive round and video everything. Or was the video car parked on the zig zags filming. I would very much like this man to go to court to test the legality of the council seemingly filming children outside schools without permission...how many of the people with accsess to this footage are CRB checked whateverhappened
  • Score: 4

12:34pm Tue 18 Mar 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

whateverhappened wrote:
If as the council states they filmed for more than just the alleged offence it brings a new dimension to these cars. i thought they took a photo of the offence, but it seems they drive round and video everything. Or was the video car parked on the zig zags filming. I would very much like this man to go to court to test the legality of the council seemingly filming children outside schools without permission...how many of the people with accsess to this footage are CRB checked
I think it starts filming when they spot an offending vehicle.
[quote][p][bold]whateverhappened[/bold] wrote: If as the council states they filmed for more than just the alleged offence it brings a new dimension to these cars. i thought they took a photo of the offence, but it seems they drive round and video everything. Or was the video car parked on the zig zags filming. I would very much like this man to go to court to test the legality of the council seemingly filming children outside schools without permission...how many of the people with accsess to this footage are CRB checked[/p][/quote]I think it starts filming when they spot an offending vehicle. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 1

2:14pm Tue 18 Mar 14

niki-loo says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
whateverhappened wrote:
If as the council states they filmed for more than just the alleged offence it brings a new dimension to these cars. i thought they took a photo of the offence, but it seems they drive round and video everything. Or was the video car parked on the zig zags filming. I would very much like this man to go to court to test the legality of the council seemingly filming children outside schools without permission...how many of the people with accsess to this footage are CRB checked
I think it starts filming when they spot an offending vehicle.
but according to the article it says they filmed him breaking well before the crossing? so do they just film you on the off chance you "might" do something?
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whateverhappened[/bold] wrote: If as the council states they filmed for more than just the alleged offence it brings a new dimension to these cars. i thought they took a photo of the offence, but it seems they drive round and video everything. Or was the video car parked on the zig zags filming. I would very much like this man to go to court to test the legality of the council seemingly filming children outside schools without permission...how many of the people with accsess to this footage are CRB checked[/p][/quote]I think it starts filming when they spot an offending vehicle.[/p][/quote]but according to the article it says they filmed him breaking well before the crossing? so do they just film you on the off chance you "might" do something? niki-loo
  • Score: 3

2:38pm Tue 18 Mar 14

Joe Clark says...

maxell wrote:
when writing my last post I was not aware the doors were opened and a person transaction to place , then your driving ability could come under question as an offence would have been commited, I retract my previous information, take the rap its affair cop,
It takes a man to admit they errored in a post on a public forum well done for admitting that when you originally posted you were wrong, it is good too see somebody man up and admit their error in public and not keep quiet about their mistake.

Shame that others can't do the same, I'm not just saying that in relation to this story but the countless others that have come and gone and those in the future that will come and then go.

As for this story: Is it legal to permit a passenger get out a car whilst on the ZigZags at a pedestrian crossing if not then an offence has been committed and the fine is just, personally I always thought you could not let passengers out on ZigZags.
[quote][p][bold]maxell[/bold] wrote: when writing my last post I was not aware the doors were opened and a person transaction to place , then your driving ability could come under question as an offence would have been commited, I retract my previous information, take the rap its affair cop,[/p][/quote]It takes a man to admit they errored in a post on a public forum well done for admitting that when you originally posted you were wrong, it is good too see somebody man up and admit their error in public and not keep quiet about their mistake. Shame that others can't do the same, I'm not just saying that in relation to this story but the countless others that have come and gone and those in the future that will come and then go. As for this story: Is it legal to permit a passenger get out a car whilst on the ZigZags at a pedestrian crossing if not then an offence has been committed and the fine is just, personally I always thought you could not let passengers out on ZigZags. Joe Clark
  • Score: 4

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