£100,000 profit made by council camera car

Bournemouth Echo: £100,000 profit made by council camera car £100,000 profit made by council camera car

THE controversial Bournemouth council camera car made more than £100,000 profit last year, new figures have revealed.

From March 2011 until March this year CCTV camera enforcement across the borough cost the local authority £38,305 in operating costs, equipment maintenance, fuel and Southcote Road depot charges.

But income generated during the same period totalled £138,399, the Daily Echo has discovered.

The camera car was launched in July 2009. From March 2010 until March 2011, when the car was only targeting drivers who park on school zigzags and bus stops, it generated an income of £80,199 with £38,385 expenditure costs.

But in October 2010 – halfway through the financial year – the car was also used to enforce no loading and no waiting restrictions and annual income soared by nearly £60,000.

Figures for 2011/12 are not available yet but are due to be even higher, as they will be for a full year of enforcing school zig-zags, bus stops, no loading and no waiting areas.

The revenue raised is used to offset the cost of enforcement and the provision of car parking within Bournemouth.

Cllr Michael Filer, cabinet member for transport and parking, said: “I support the camera car wholeheartedly. We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools.

“As far as the surplus is concerned, all this money goes back into our roads and into our safety operations. It’s helping to install new cycle arrangements, generally it’s for the good of the town. Without it, these improvements would not happen at all.”

And Bournemouth Council’s parking and traffic manager Gary Powell said: “The increase in income during the second year is due to our decision to start enforcing no loading and no waiting restrictions to help improve road safety and reduce congestion.

“No loading and no waiting restrictions were introduced to prevent vehicles from parking and causing a road safety issue or affecting the free flow of traffic.

“CCTV camera enforcement is not a means of taxing the motorist but an effective way to improve road safety through improved compliance with the restrictions in place."

A DISABLED Southbourne man who was one of the first motorists to be filmed on the council car camera said: “This is an awful lot of money and I’d like to know where it is going.”

Retired businessman Roger Ryder, 68, was fined after being caught parking on a bus stop outside the Co-op in Tuckton.

He said: “I paid up because it is against the law so you can’t argue with that but I’d like to see the money being used to improve the local roads – such as filling in potholes. The last thing I would like the money being used for is putting in more speed humps – we’ve enough of those already in Bournemouth.

“I have a disabled badge and thought about appealing against my fine because I’d just popped in to buy a newspaper and there wasn’t anywhere else to park – but I was told I had no chance so I paid up.”

Winton-based taxi driver Tony Walker, who claimed earlier this year that the camera car was issuing fines “like confetti”, said plans to blockade Bournemouth town centre in protest over parking tickets had been called off.

He said: “At long last common sense seems to be prevailing. We were getting ticketed when we went into shops to get 80 and 90-year-olds who needed a taxi but couldn’t stand out on the pavement waiting for us, in all weathers.”

Comments (76)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:50am Tue 18 Dec 12

EdBmth says...

Perhaps the car should do a few passes of station approach in the afternoons. There seem to be a small minority of taxi drivers who wait on the slip road approach to Asda. It causes and obstruction and is dangerous.

It is this minorit that should be dealt with rather than the Taxi drivers trying to collect the 80-90 year old from the shops.
Perhaps the car should do a few passes of station approach in the afternoons. There seem to be a small minority of taxi drivers who wait on the slip road approach to Asda. It causes and obstruction and is dangerous. It is this minorit that should be dealt with rather than the Taxi drivers trying to collect the 80-90 year old from the shops. EdBmth
  • Score: 0

8:50am Tue 18 Dec 12

funkyferret says...

Good to see it is actually returning a profit.
Sad to see it needs to exist.
Don't like the fines?
Don't park there. Simples.
Good to see it is actually returning a profit. Sad to see it needs to exist. Don't like the fines? Don't park there. Simples. funkyferret
  • Score: 0

8:59am Tue 18 Dec 12

rayc says...

Cllr Michael Filer said "We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools."

Why not as that was the purpose for which the car was provided in the first place? How many deaths and serious injuries were there around schools before the car was introduced compared with now? How can he possibly justify the remark that the car has saved lives and serious injuries?
By all means justify the operation of the car by the income it generates for the Council but don't attempt to justify it's use to enforce loading restrictions on safety grounds.
Cllr Michael Filer said "We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools." Why not as that was the purpose for which the car was provided in the first place? How many deaths and serious injuries were there around schools before the car was introduced compared with now? How can he possibly justify the remark that the car has saved lives and serious injuries? By all means justify the operation of the car by the income it generates for the Council but don't attempt to justify it's use to enforce loading restrictions on safety grounds. rayc
  • Score: 0

8:59am Tue 18 Dec 12

bourne free says...

If you had a product that made £100k profit would you invest in more ??
Watch Out !
If you had a product that made £100k profit would you invest in more ?? Watch Out ! bourne free
  • Score: 0

9:00am Tue 18 Dec 12

Kernow2008 says...

It Doesn't need to exist, people have picked up and drooped of where they shouldn't for years without causing a problem, the council have just found a niche in the market to raise more revenue, what will be next, jaywalking, pedestrians crossing the road before the little man says so, the list is endless.
Surveillance cameras today echo the truths of the film 1984, this country is slowly turning into a totalitarian society whereby controlling all aspects of our daily lives.
It Doesn't need to exist, people have picked up and drooped of where they shouldn't for years without causing a problem, the council have just found a niche in the market to raise more revenue, what will be next, jaywalking, pedestrians crossing the road before the little man says so, the list is endless. Surveillance cameras today echo the truths of the film 1984, this country is slowly turning into a totalitarian society whereby controlling all aspects of our daily lives. Kernow2008
  • Score: 0

9:05am Tue 18 Dec 12

fantasanta says...

EdBmth wrote:
Perhaps the car should do a few passes of station approach in the afternoons. There seem to be a small minority of taxi drivers who wait on the slip road approach to Asda. It causes and obstruction and is dangerous.

It is this minorit that should be dealt with rather than the Taxi drivers trying to collect the 80-90 year old from the shops.
very valid point actually and they exceed the rank designated spaces all over the town , it does need better control . dont believe either the 80 - 90 year old passenger bit thats just a load of flannel ,whats the percentage of customers in this age range and how did they get to the shop in the first place , £5 each way for a pint of milk and a packet of biscuits you dont have to chew is a bit expensive on a pension
[quote][p][bold]EdBmth[/bold] wrote: Perhaps the car should do a few passes of station approach in the afternoons. There seem to be a small minority of taxi drivers who wait on the slip road approach to Asda. It causes and obstruction and is dangerous. It is this minorit that should be dealt with rather than the Taxi drivers trying to collect the 80-90 year old from the shops.[/p][/quote]very valid point actually and they exceed the rank designated spaces all over the town , it does need better control . dont believe either the 80 - 90 year old passenger bit thats just a load of flannel ,whats the percentage of customers in this age range and how did they get to the shop in the first place , £5 each way for a pint of milk and a packet of biscuits you dont have to chew is a bit expensive on a pension fantasanta
  • Score: 0

9:11am Tue 18 Dec 12

live-and-let-live says...

rayc wrote:
Cllr Michael Filer said "We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools." Why not as that was the purpose for which the car was provided in the first place? How many deaths and serious injuries were there around schools before the car was introduced compared with now? How can he possibly justify the remark that the car has saved lives and serious injuries? By all means justify the operation of the car by the income it generates for the Council but don't attempt to justify it's use to enforce loading restrictions on safety grounds.
my words exactly. this car is there to generate money. if i stop my car to drop my mother off near the library it will cost me money. but it wont ever cost a life because i wouldnt stop where there was any risk to anyone else. i hope the council wont find it necessary to increase council tax this year as it has the moneymaking car instead.
[quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: Cllr Michael Filer said "We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools." Why not as that was the purpose for which the car was provided in the first place? How many deaths and serious injuries were there around schools before the car was introduced compared with now? How can he possibly justify the remark that the car has saved lives and serious injuries? By all means justify the operation of the car by the income it generates for the Council but don't attempt to justify it's use to enforce loading restrictions on safety grounds.[/p][/quote]my words exactly. this car is there to generate money. if i stop my car to drop my mother off near the library it will cost me money. but it wont ever cost a life because i wouldnt stop where there was any risk to anyone else. i hope the council wont find it necessary to increase council tax this year as it has the moneymaking car instead. live-and-let-live
  • Score: 0

9:13am Tue 18 Dec 12

sea poole says...

Would love to be able to have 'pay back' to this scheme. Recently followed one of these cars and whilst I was sticking to the speed limit of 30mph, the camera car was moving ahead rapidly...If only I'd got one of those wretched cameras...!
Would love to be able to have 'pay back' to this scheme. Recently followed one of these cars and whilst I was sticking to the speed limit of 30mph, the camera car was moving ahead rapidly...If only I'd got one of those wretched cameras...! sea poole
  • Score: 0

9:14am Tue 18 Dec 12

mysticalshoelace says...

Cllr Michael Filer, cabinet member for transport and parking, said: “I support the camera car wholeheartedly. We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools.
What a load of spin! The only reason the camera car exists is to generate income for the council!
[quote]Cllr Michael Filer, cabinet member for transport and parking, said: “I support the camera car wholeheartedly. We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools.[/quote]What a load of spin! The only reason the camera car exists is to generate income for the council! mysticalshoelace
  • Score: 0

9:47am Tue 18 Dec 12

dirtyboy says...

I hope they paid the appropriate taxes for the moneys they collected?
I hope they paid the appropriate taxes for the moneys they collected? dirtyboy
  • Score: 0

9:48am Tue 18 Dec 12

speedy231278 says...

"Cllr Michael Filer, cabinet member for transport and parking, said: “I support the camera car wholeheartedly. We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools."

Probably because it hasn't, and they're only interested in counting the money.
"Cllr Michael Filer, cabinet member for transport and parking, said: “I support the camera car wholeheartedly. We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools." Probably because it hasn't, and they're only interested in counting the money. speedy231278
  • Score: 0

9:49am Tue 18 Dec 12

Tom 'Boscombe' Jones says...

The money will be used to offset the cost of enforcement, 100,000 that's a council wage then, or maybe its for double paying a traffic consultant...
The money will be used to offset the cost of enforcement, 100,000 that's a council wage then, or maybe its for double paying a traffic consultant... Tom 'Boscombe' Jones
  • Score: 0

9:53am Tue 18 Dec 12

ashleycross says...

Lot of bad drivers posting on here I see,(just for a change!) proving the need for these cars, which I have found absolutely fantastic for making my son's walk to school much safer.
Please, all local councils in the echo area, buy loads more of these and ignore this ridiculous reporting by someone who shows no sign of caring for the needs of pedestrians or other drivers' need to park or pull out safely without twits parking dangerously so you can't see where you are going.
Lot of bad drivers posting on here I see,(just for a change!) proving the need for these cars, which I have found absolutely fantastic for making my son's walk to school much safer. Please, all local councils in the echo area, buy loads more of these and ignore this ridiculous reporting by someone who shows no sign of caring for the needs of pedestrians or other drivers' need to park or pull out safely without twits parking dangerously so you can't see where you are going. ashleycross
  • Score: 0

9:53am Tue 18 Dec 12

Old Colonial says...

Of course lives and serious injuries saved cannot be quantified. That would require 'blind trials'.

The only quantifiable way of judging success is to see whether parking on school zig-zags, bus stops, no loading and no waiting areas has been significantly reduced. Has it? If not, then this is just a nice little cash generator.
Of course lives and serious injuries saved cannot be quantified. That would require 'blind trials'. The only quantifiable way of judging success is to see whether parking on school zig-zags, bus stops, no loading and no waiting areas has been significantly reduced. Has it? If not, then this is just a nice little cash generator. Old Colonial
  • Score: 0

10:04am Tue 18 Dec 12

uvox44 says...

ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better? uvox44
  • Score: 0

10:15am Tue 18 Dec 12

HRH of Boscombe says...

dirtyboy wrote:
I hope they paid the appropriate taxes for the moneys they collected?
Do you? So you would rather it more widely distributed than spent on local issues?
[quote][p][bold]dirtyboy[/bold] wrote: I hope they paid the appropriate taxes for the moneys they collected?[/p][/quote]Do you? So you would rather it more widely distributed than spent on local issues? HRH of Boscombe
  • Score: 0

10:17am Tue 18 Dec 12

Lord Spring says...

How to make a million pounds in a year,

Photo cars parked on pavements also those parked to close to junctions.
How to make a million pounds in a year, Photo cars parked on pavements also those parked to close to junctions. Lord Spring
  • Score: 0

10:18am Tue 18 Dec 12

The Liberal says...

I doubt it saves many lives, but some people do seem to think they can park anywhere they like – on pedestrian crossing zigzags, junctions, bus stops etc – thus making life more difficult (and often more hazardous) for others.
I doubt it saves many lives, but some people do seem to think they can park anywhere they like – on pedestrian crossing zigzags, junctions, bus stops etc – thus making life more difficult (and often more hazardous) for others. The Liberal
  • Score: 0

10:26am Tue 18 Dec 12

rayc says...

uvox44 wrote:
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
"would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules?"

I would rather that the two things were not related at all. Enforcing traffic regulations and providing parking etc. should not be provided with the intention of making a profit so that Council Tax is reduced.
The reason given for the providing the car was to save the lives and risk of serious injuries to schoolchildren in the vicinity of their schools. Now the reason appears to be to to install new cycle arrangements etc. Without offenders there would presumably not be any new cycle arrangements?
[quote][p][bold]uvox44[/bold] wrote: ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?[/p][/quote]"would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules?" I would rather that the two things were not related at all. Enforcing traffic regulations and providing parking etc. should not be provided with the intention of making a profit so that Council Tax is reduced. The reason given for the providing the car was to save the lives and risk of serious injuries to schoolchildren in the vicinity of their schools. Now the reason appears to be to to install new cycle arrangements etc. Without offenders there would presumably not be any new cycle arrangements? rayc
  • Score: 0

10:58am Tue 18 Dec 12

The Renegade Master says...

Yeah yeah yeah.... we know, don't park illegally and you won't get a ticket blah blah blah. Shut up!

The simple fact remains that the Council are using OUR money to devise more ways of extorting more and more cash from US. I find that principle distasteful.

Perhaps there should be a bad cycling car too, just to upset Mike Chalkey!
Yeah yeah yeah.... we know, don't park illegally and you won't get a ticket blah blah blah. Shut up! The simple fact remains that the Council are using OUR money to devise more ways of extorting more and more cash from US. I find that principle distasteful. Perhaps there should be a bad cycling car too, just to upset Mike Chalkey! The Renegade Master
  • Score: 0

11:07am Tue 18 Dec 12

mysticalshoelace says...

uvox44 wrote:
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
The main reason for council tax increases are council's being extremely bad at financial management and wasting money on useless things that aren't needed or simply don't work - surf reef/imax/beach pods being a prime examples.
[quote][p][bold]uvox44[/bold] wrote: ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?[/p][/quote]The main reason for council tax increases are council's being extremely bad at financial management and wasting money on useless things that aren't needed or simply don't work - surf reef/imax/beach pods being a prime examples. mysticalshoelace
  • Score: 0

11:16am Tue 18 Dec 12

tricky1007 says...

The Renegade Master wrote:
Yeah yeah yeah.... we know, don't park illegally and you won't get a ticket blah blah blah. Shut up!

The simple fact remains that the Council are using OUR money to devise more ways of extorting more and more cash from US. I find that principle distasteful.

Perhaps there should be a bad cycling car too, just to upset Mike Chalkey!
I did not get a ticket from it this year! I park where i should as do most people, and it is right, dont park illegally and you wont get a ticket. Its people with the mentality of 'i am not hurting anyone and i am not parked in a dangerous place' that deserve to get a ticket. The amount of times i have seen people in wheelchairs, or prams, or young children been made to walk out into the road to get round these cars, yes i see that as dangerous!
[quote][p][bold]The Renegade Master[/bold] wrote: Yeah yeah yeah.... we know, don't park illegally and you won't get a ticket blah blah blah. Shut up! The simple fact remains that the Council are using OUR money to devise more ways of extorting more and more cash from US. I find that principle distasteful. Perhaps there should be a bad cycling car too, just to upset Mike Chalkey![/p][/quote]I did not get a ticket from it this year! I park where i should as do most people, and it is right, dont park illegally and you wont get a ticket. Its people with the mentality of 'i am not hurting anyone and i am not parked in a dangerous place' that deserve to get a ticket. The amount of times i have seen people in wheelchairs, or prams, or young children been made to walk out into the road to get round these cars, yes i see that as dangerous! tricky1007
  • Score: 0

11:17am Tue 18 Dec 12

Gary Sherborne says...

To help people get involved more in local politics and governance.Why wont the council film their meetings at the Townhall ?
To help people get involved more in local politics and governance.Why wont the council film their meetings at the Townhall ? Gary Sherborne
  • Score: 0

11:17am Tue 18 Dec 12

Hessenford says...

Methinks the council cctv car takes photos indiscriminately rather than video and leaves drivers who have in fact not broken the law to defend them selves, setting down and picking up passengers is allowed on most yellow lines unless it states that no dropping off or picking up of passengers is allowed.
I successfully defended my self only a few months ago when I was photographed picking up my wife and two young children, a photo was taken of me, as the driver standing at the passenger side of my vehicle when in fact I was making sure my children were firmly in their seat belts, they said I had parked and was waiting, I quoted the law concerning seat belts for children and the ticket was quashed, more people need to appeal these revenue raising tickets, if doing something illegal then suffer the fine if not then appeal.
Methinks the council cctv car takes photos indiscriminately rather than video and leaves drivers who have in fact not broken the law to defend them selves, setting down and picking up passengers is allowed on most yellow lines unless it states that no dropping off or picking up of passengers is allowed. I successfully defended my self only a few months ago when I was photographed picking up my wife and two young children, a photo was taken of me, as the driver standing at the passenger side of my vehicle when in fact I was making sure my children were firmly in their seat belts, they said I had parked and was waiting, I quoted the law concerning seat belts for children and the ticket was quashed, more people need to appeal these revenue raising tickets, if doing something illegal then suffer the fine if not then appeal. Hessenford
  • Score: 0

11:23am Tue 18 Dec 12

lizcait says...

I have no objections to these schemes & agree to those being fined for parking illegally, however I do believe that some of the fines sent out are purely cash making, I myself was given a fine (for making a maneuver!) - which you could clearly see from the councils own "evidence" - supposedly making out I was parked but through their own photos you could see my reverse lights & car moving!! If I had parked then fair enough, I would of taken it as a slap on the wrists, I appealed the fine and was sent a cancelation & apology.
Many elderly / vulnerable people would pay up not knowing or even having the courage to fight against the bullies who go on a power trip to gain their £35 - which to those people, is a lot of money with today's financial troubles!
I have no objections to these schemes & agree to those being fined for parking illegally, however I do believe that some of the fines sent out are purely cash making, I myself was given a fine (for making a maneuver!) - which you could clearly see from the councils own "evidence" - supposedly making out I was parked but through their own photos you could see my reverse lights & car moving!! If I had parked then fair enough, I would of taken it as a slap on the wrists, I appealed the fine and was sent a cancelation & apology. Many elderly / vulnerable people would pay up not knowing or even having the courage to fight against the bullies who go on a power trip to gain their £35 - which to those people, is a lot of money with today's financial troubles! lizcait
  • Score: 0

11:38am Tue 18 Dec 12

Morrigan says...

""Retired businessman Roger Ryder, 68, was fined after being caught parking on a bus stop outside the Co-op in Tuckton.

He said: “I paid up because it is against the law so you can’t argue with that.

“I have a disabled badge and thought about appealing against my fine because I’d just popped in to buy a newspaper and there wasn’t anywhere else to park – but I was told I had no chance so I paid up.”

An appeal because you have a Blue Badge would not have been successful - having a blue badge does NOT give you carte blanche to park anywhere you please - and parking in a bus stop is not permitted under the blue badge user rules or the Highway Code - he is lucky he didn't get his badge taken away for misuse, which seems to be happening more and more these days because BB holders think they are immune to the road rules of using one.

Whatever people say about the camera car, it is obviously seen as necessary by the council - but if no one parked where they shouldn't then the car would run at a loss.

The fact that it is a devious, underhand and cowardly way to go about things is irrelevant to the council - they are devious through and through in many of their dealings, so this car is no different in that aspect.

Just don't give them reasons to use it/make money from it - it's no good moaning about it, while parking illegally, thus still giving the council what they consider justifiable reasons to use it in the first place :o/
""Retired businessman Roger Ryder, 68, was fined after being caught parking on a bus stop outside the Co-op in Tuckton. He said: “I paid up because it is against the law so you can’t argue with that. “I have a disabled badge and thought about appealing against my fine because I’d just popped in to buy a newspaper and there wasn’t anywhere else to park – but I was told I had no chance so I paid up.” An appeal because you have a Blue Badge would not have been successful - having a blue badge does NOT give you carte blanche to park anywhere you please - and parking in a bus stop is not permitted under the blue badge user rules or the Highway Code - he is lucky he didn't get his badge taken away for misuse, which seems to be happening more and more these days because BB holders think they are immune to the road rules of using one. Whatever people say about the camera car, it is obviously seen as necessary by the council - but if no one parked where they shouldn't then the car would run at a loss. The fact that it is a devious, underhand and cowardly way to go about things is irrelevant to the council - they are devious through and through in many of their dealings, so this car is no different in that aspect. Just don't give them reasons to use it/make money from it - it's no good moaning about it, while parking illegally, thus still giving the council what they consider justifiable reasons to use it in the first place :o/ Morrigan
  • Score: 0

11:53am Tue 18 Dec 12

timwel says...

Great when does it start saving lives on the A338 catching tail-gaters and loons rather than raising revenue for dastardly crimes like parking?
Great when does it start saving lives on the A338 catching tail-gaters and loons rather than raising revenue for dastardly crimes like parking? timwel
  • Score: 0

11:55am Tue 18 Dec 12

rayc says...

Morrigan wrote:
""Retired businessman Roger Ryder, 68, was fined after being caught parking on a bus stop outside the Co-op in Tuckton.

He said: “I paid up because it is against the law so you can’t argue with that.

“I have a disabled badge and thought about appealing against my fine because I’d just popped in to buy a newspaper and there wasn’t anywhere else to park – but I was told I had no chance so I paid up.”

An appeal because you have a Blue Badge would not have been successful - having a blue badge does NOT give you carte blanche to park anywhere you please - and parking in a bus stop is not permitted under the blue badge user rules or the Highway Code - he is lucky he didn't get his badge taken away for misuse, which seems to be happening more and more these days because BB holders think they are immune to the road rules of using one.

Whatever people say about the camera car, it is obviously seen as necessary by the council - but if no one parked where they shouldn't then the car would run at a loss.

The fact that it is a devious, underhand and cowardly way to go about things is irrelevant to the council - they are devious through and through in many of their dealings, so this car is no different in that aspect.

Just don't give them reasons to use it/make money from it - it's no good moaning about it, while parking illegally, thus still giving the council what they consider justifiable reasons to use it in the first place :o/
"Just don't give them reasons to use it/make money from it - it's no good moaning about it, while parking illegally, thus still giving the council what they consider justifiable reasons to use it in the first place"

Good advise. At least make them work for their money.
Same with Dorset Roadsafe and the No Excuse campaign, keep to the speed limit, wear a seat belt and never touch a mobile phone unless safely parked with the engine off.
[quote][p][bold]Morrigan[/bold] wrote: ""Retired businessman Roger Ryder, 68, was fined after being caught parking on a bus stop outside the Co-op in Tuckton. He said: “I paid up because it is against the law so you can’t argue with that. “I have a disabled badge and thought about appealing against my fine because I’d just popped in to buy a newspaper and there wasn’t anywhere else to park – but I was told I had no chance so I paid up.” An appeal because you have a Blue Badge would not have been successful - having a blue badge does NOT give you carte blanche to park anywhere you please - and parking in a bus stop is not permitted under the blue badge user rules or the Highway Code - he is lucky he didn't get his badge taken away for misuse, which seems to be happening more and more these days because BB holders think they are immune to the road rules of using one. Whatever people say about the camera car, it is obviously seen as necessary by the council - but if no one parked where they shouldn't then the car would run at a loss. The fact that it is a devious, underhand and cowardly way to go about things is irrelevant to the council - they are devious through and through in many of their dealings, so this car is no different in that aspect. Just don't give them reasons to use it/make money from it - it's no good moaning about it, while parking illegally, thus still giving the council what they consider justifiable reasons to use it in the first place :o/[/p][/quote]"Just don't give them reasons to use it/make money from it - it's no good moaning about it, while parking illegally, thus still giving the council what they consider justifiable reasons to use it in the first place" Good advise. At least make them work for their money. Same with Dorset Roadsafe and the No Excuse campaign, keep to the speed limit, wear a seat belt and never touch a mobile phone unless safely parked with the engine off. rayc
  • Score: 0

11:56am Tue 18 Dec 12

timwel says...

' £38,305 in operating costs, equipment maintenance, fuel and Southcote Road depot charges'

Oh and then the cost of an employee to drive the car (plus their pension) and the administration to process the fines,...... funny that how local authorities have no labour costs like in the real world. This exercise probably made a loss for us tax payers.
' £38,305 in operating costs, equipment maintenance, fuel and Southcote Road depot charges' Oh and then the cost of an employee to drive the car (plus their pension) and the administration to process the fines,...... funny that how local authorities have no labour costs like in the real world. This exercise probably made a loss for us tax payers. timwel
  • Score: 0

12:01pm Tue 18 Dec 12

Mudefordman says...

someone suggested that the money taken might be invested on the roads,
that's a laugh, even the money created by the road fund licence doesn't always go on the roads. I believe it goes in one big pot and the government do with it what they will
someone suggested that the money taken might be invested on the roads, that's a laugh, even the money created by the road fund licence doesn't always go on the roads. I believe it goes in one big pot and the government do with it what they will Mudefordman
  • Score: 0

12:12pm Tue 18 Dec 12

rayc says...

If there are so many offenders why isn't there a corresponding number of deaths and serious injuries? We are led to believe that every offence is a hazard to safety and even the council do not claim that they detect all of them. If there is a correlation between offences and serious accidents we would expect the front page of the Echo to be reporting them on a daily basis.
If there are so many offenders why isn't there a corresponding number of deaths and serious injuries? We are led to believe that every offence is a hazard to safety and even the council do not claim that they detect all of them. If there is a correlation between offences and serious accidents we would expect the front page of the Echo to be reporting them on a daily basis. rayc
  • Score: 0

12:19pm Tue 18 Dec 12

HRH of Boscombe says...

Mudefordman wrote:
someone suggested that the money taken might be invested on the roads, that's a laugh, even the money created by the road fund licence doesn't always go on the roads. I believe it goes in one big pot and the government do with it what they will
Do a freedom of info request to find out what proportion was allocated to the Highways Agency.
[quote][p][bold]Mudefordman[/bold] wrote: someone suggested that the money taken might be invested on the roads, that's a laugh, even the money created by the road fund licence doesn't always go on the roads. I believe it goes in one big pot and the government do with it what they will[/p][/quote]Do a freedom of info request to find out what proportion was allocated to the Highways Agency. HRH of Boscombe
  • Score: 0

12:25pm Tue 18 Dec 12

bosco1 says...

Its amazing that this camera car is so good for bus lanes and school areas but cannot be used for pavement parking.!! If people walk or try to walk down Holdenhurst Road during the evening just take a look at the cars on the pavement outside the Old Tesco store.According to Gary Powell parking and traffic Manager cars parked on the pavement at night are or may be outside the Councils normal working hours.!!Therefore so basicly he's saying Park on the pavements but please dont park in the bus lanes.!! So why cant the Camera car be used to tackle other issues.?!!
Its amazing that this camera car is so good for bus lanes and school areas but cannot be used for pavement parking.!! If people walk or try to walk down Holdenhurst Road during the evening just take a look at the cars on the pavement outside the Old Tesco store.According to Gary Powell parking and traffic Manager cars parked on the pavement at night are or may be outside the Councils normal working hours.!!Therefore so basicly he's saying Park on the pavements but please dont park in the bus lanes.!! So why cant the Camera car be used to tackle other issues.?!! bosco1
  • Score: 0

12:29pm Tue 18 Dec 12

Justin666 says...

I would very happily take a couple of turns round the town in my car for £30,000 pa and pass my pics on to the Council.
I would very happily take a couple of turns round the town in my car for £30,000 pa and pass my pics on to the Council. Justin666
  • Score: 0

12:31pm Tue 18 Dec 12

BIGTONE says...

Can someone put me right on this?

I was under the impression that under current legislation local authorities are supposed to be a non profit organisation.Has all that now changed?
Can someone put me right on this? I was under the impression that under current legislation local authorities are supposed to be a non profit organisation.Has all that now changed? BIGTONE
  • Score: 0

1:24pm Tue 18 Dec 12

Imaximus says...

This is quite simple...If it didnt make a profit then they wouldnt have it. The only way to stop it making a profit is to not get fined. The only way to not get fined is to not park illegally. Its up to you guys to make it not make a profit. Problem solved.
This is quite simple...If it didnt make a profit then they wouldnt have it. The only way to stop it making a profit is to not get fined. The only way to not get fined is to not park illegally. Its up to you guys to make it not make a profit. Problem solved. Imaximus
  • Score: 0

2:05pm Tue 18 Dec 12

static kill says...

If someone were to get some foreign number plates they wouldn't get caught, or need to have road tax.
If someone were to get some foreign number plates they wouldn't get caught, or need to have road tax. static kill
  • Score: 0

3:02pm Tue 18 Dec 12

muscliffman says...

If readers believe this to be an inappropriate or underhand means of generating the Counciul £100,000 then do not pay it.

In fact this can be achieved perfectly legally, by not parking or driving where the law says you should not.

Works for me!
If readers believe this to be an inappropriate or underhand means of generating the Counciul £100,000 then do not pay it. In fact this can be achieved perfectly legally, by not parking or driving where the law says you should not. Works for me! muscliffman
  • Score: 0

3:10pm Tue 18 Dec 12

Imaximus says...

muscliffman wrote:
If readers believe this to be an inappropriate or underhand means of generating the Counciul £100,000 then do not pay it.

In fact this can be achieved perfectly legally, by not parking or driving where the law says you should not.

Works for me!
Exactly....well said.
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: If readers believe this to be an inappropriate or underhand means of generating the Counciul £100,000 then do not pay it. In fact this can be achieved perfectly legally, by not parking or driving where the law says you should not. Works for me![/p][/quote]Exactly....well said. Imaximus
  • Score: 0

4:14pm Tue 18 Dec 12

djd says...

Great idea this camera car, so people park where they don't think they are causing a danger to other road users. It's only their opinion that they are not causing a danger, why do you think the restrictions are there in the first place.
A lot of posts mention pavement parking, probably the biggest menace in Bournemouth. The council hasn't adopted the regulations to make it illegal. Please adopt the regulations, please ticket all those who do park on the pavement. 'pavements are for people, not for cars.' How do motorists react to pedestrians walking on the carriageway???
Great idea this camera car, so people park where they don't think they are causing a danger to other road users. It's only their opinion that they are not causing a danger, why do you think the restrictions are there in the first place. A lot of posts mention pavement parking, probably the biggest menace in Bournemouth. The council hasn't adopted the regulations to make it illegal. Please adopt the regulations, please ticket all those who do park on the pavement. 'pavements are for people, not for cars.' How do motorists react to pedestrians walking on the carriageway??? djd
  • Score: 0

5:18pm Tue 18 Dec 12

sivvy says...

I hate and detest that camera car. This town is so full of yellow lines that even visiting a local shop can be a big chore as one usually has to hunt around to find a parking spot so that you can pop in for a peper and a pint of milk. Must be a nightmare for hard working traders. By the way i dont park illegally as a rule,but then i am not perfect like some of you "goody-goodys" on here.
I hate and detest that camera car. This town is so full of yellow lines that even visiting a local shop can be a big chore as one usually has to hunt around to find a parking spot so that you can pop in for a peper and a pint of milk. Must be a nightmare for hard working traders. By the way i dont park illegally as a rule,but then i am not perfect like some of you "goody-goodys" on here. sivvy
  • Score: 0

5:41pm Tue 18 Dec 12

PokesdownMark says...

£38k costs seems low to me. Does this include staff costs? Assuming at least one driver and one person in the office. Salary before tax, pension, NI contribution, desk charges, associated IT equipment and data storage charges. Car reg look-up via DVLA. Fuel charges of course. Really all that comes to less than £40k? Some creative accounting perhaps? Assumptions about shared costs?
£38k costs seems low to me. Does this include staff costs? Assuming at least one driver and one person in the office. Salary before tax, pension, NI contribution, desk charges, associated IT equipment and data storage charges. Car reg look-up via DVLA. Fuel charges of course. Really all that comes to less than £40k? Some creative accounting perhaps? Assumptions about shared costs? PokesdownMark
  • Score: 0

5:48pm Tue 18 Dec 12

Hollers says...

uvox44 wrote:
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
[quote][p][bold]uvox44[/bold] wrote: ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?[/p][/quote]This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced. Hollers
  • Score: 0

6:12pm Tue 18 Dec 12

Old Colonial says...

Hollers wrote:
uvox44 wrote:
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.
[quote][p][bold]Hollers[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]uvox44[/bold] wrote: ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?[/p][/quote]This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.[/p][/quote]Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car. Old Colonial
  • Score: 0

6:35pm Tue 18 Dec 12

tbpoole says...

Old Colonial wrote:
Hollers wrote:
uvox44 wrote:
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.
Logic dictates that as the penalty for serious crimes is a spell in prison no one will ever commit an offence, but real life isn't like that. That doesn't mean they shouldn't try to enforce though.
[quote][p][bold]Old Colonial[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hollers[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]uvox44[/bold] wrote: ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?[/p][/quote]This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.[/p][/quote]Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.[/p][/quote]Logic dictates that as the penalty for serious crimes is a spell in prison no one will ever commit an offence, but real life isn't like that. That doesn't mean they shouldn't try to enforce though. tbpoole
  • Score: 0

7:09pm Tue 18 Dec 12

Desperado says...

I am very interested in buying a franchise in this business .
I am very interested in buying a franchise in this business . Desperado
  • Score: 0

8:17pm Tue 18 Dec 12

daily reporter says...

why cant the council use some of the money to build drop off points that work like a single road with barriers down each side and when you get to a gap in the barrier your passangers can get out/in but you cant wait or stay because cars behind will make you move on, this way it is self regulating, traffic runs freely along the road which runs parallel to the drop off road.
why cant the council use some of the money to build drop off points that work like a single road with barriers down each side and when you get to a gap in the barrier your passangers can get out/in but you cant wait or stay because cars behind will make you move on, this way it is self regulating, traffic runs freely along the road which runs parallel to the drop off road. daily reporter
  • Score: 0

8:18pm Tue 18 Dec 12

s-pb2 says...

Excellent news, well done Bournemouth Council. Im all in favour of fining the arrogant and stupid who believe the laws dont apply to them. The money then gets pumped back into investing more elsewhere, it sounds win win to me. All in favour of the council investing in more cameras to fine more arrogant people and more stupid people.
Excellent news, well done Bournemouth Council. Im all in favour of fining the arrogant and stupid who believe the laws dont apply to them. The money then gets pumped back into investing more elsewhere, it sounds win win to me. All in favour of the council investing in more cameras to fine more arrogant people and more stupid people. s-pb2
  • Score: 0

8:21pm Tue 18 Dec 12

s-pb2 says...

Old Colonial wrote:
Hollers wrote:
uvox44 wrote:
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.
You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again
[quote][p][bold]Old Colonial[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hollers[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]uvox44[/bold] wrote: ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?[/p][/quote]This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.[/p][/quote]Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.[/p][/quote]You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again s-pb2
  • Score: 0

8:35pm Tue 18 Dec 12

theoakman says...

If, as is portrayed, the camera vehicle is detecting more offences and generating revenue, then it would be fair to argue that it is not effective in deterring the problem of illegal or inconsiderate parking and should probably be scrapped for the more effective high profile effect of the old fashioned traffic warden. They at least would see reason if you were just dropping off or collecting someone who may not be able to get to the car any other way. The camera car is purely a cash cow with no tolerance or remorse and basically condones all offences it detects.
If, as is portrayed, the camera vehicle is detecting more offences and generating revenue, then it would be fair to argue that it is not effective in deterring the problem of illegal or inconsiderate parking and should probably be scrapped for the more effective high profile effect of the old fashioned traffic warden. They at least would see reason if you were just dropping off or collecting someone who may not be able to get to the car any other way. The camera car is purely a cash cow with no tolerance or remorse and basically condones all offences it detects. theoakman
  • Score: 0

8:38pm Tue 18 Dec 12

Wageslave says...

Is this the same as the number plate recognition car, because that also picks up untaxed vehicles.I pay my car tax so should everyone else. Those without usually have no MOT or insurance, which means unroady worthy cars that can't brake ,for example, and no compensation when they hit you.Fine them and lock them up.
Is this the same as the number plate recognition car, because that also picks up untaxed vehicles.I pay my car tax so should everyone else. Those without usually have no MOT or insurance, which means unroady worthy cars that can't brake ,for example, and no compensation when they hit you.Fine them and lock them up. Wageslave
  • Score: 0

8:46pm Tue 18 Dec 12

djd says...

Wageslave wrote:
Is this the same as the number plate recognition car, because that also picks up untaxed vehicles.I pay my car tax so should everyone else. Those without usually have no MOT or insurance, which means unroady worthy cars that can't brake ,for example, and no compensation when they hit you.Fine them and lock them up.
This car is operated by the Local Authority and is used to detect parking offences which the Council deal with.
The ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) cars are operated by the police and are used to detect vehicles being used without tax, MoT or insurance, also vehicles on the police stolen vehicle database and vehicles in which police have an interest.
[quote][p][bold]Wageslave[/bold] wrote: Is this the same as the number plate recognition car, because that also picks up untaxed vehicles.I pay my car tax so should everyone else. Those without usually have no MOT or insurance, which means unroady worthy cars that can't brake ,for example, and no compensation when they hit you.Fine them and lock them up.[/p][/quote]This car is operated by the Local Authority and is used to detect parking offences which the Council deal with. The ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) cars are operated by the police and are used to detect vehicles being used without tax, MoT or insurance, also vehicles on the police stolen vehicle database and vehicles in which police have an interest. djd
  • Score: 0

9:32pm Tue 18 Dec 12

rayc says...

s-pb2 wrote:
Old Colonial wrote:
Hollers wrote:
uvox44 wrote:
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.
You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again
"You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again"

Or that Council's flood the roads with ever increasing unnecessary restrictions so as to to force drivers to use their car parks and meters.
[quote][p][bold]s-pb2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Old Colonial[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hollers[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]uvox44[/bold] wrote: ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?[/p][/quote]This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.[/p][/quote]Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.[/p][/quote]You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again[/p][/quote]"You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again" Or that Council's flood the roads with ever increasing unnecessary restrictions so as to to force drivers to use their car parks and meters. rayc
  • Score: 0

9:44pm Tue 18 Dec 12

Jetwasher says...

Bstards , I always give the two fingers up to the driver when I see it about be nice to see a rpg attack on it :)
Bstards , I always give the two fingers up to the driver when I see it about be nice to see a rpg attack on it :) Jetwasher
  • Score: 0

10:07pm Tue 18 Dec 12

EGHH says...

How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!!
How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!! EGHH
  • Score: 0

10:46pm Tue 18 Dec 12

WitchfinderGeneral58 says...

Won't be going to Bournemouth any time soon then - Daylight robbery :(
Won't be going to Bournemouth any time soon then - Daylight robbery :( WitchfinderGeneral58
  • Score: 0

10:48pm Tue 18 Dec 12

spooki says...

EGHH wrote:
How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!!
I could use the disabled parking in the bit of road near Tesco (used to be Borders) in Bmth Square as an example there: the amount of times I've gone to park there and can't because some lazy whatsit in a BMW/Merc is waiting or a delivery/builders van is parked there is just amazing. It's 'disabled parking'. Not 'fully capable-bodied park where you like'. I've never seen this camera car but if it cuts down on dodgy driving behaviour I'm all for it.

Oh and if you're the woman who told me to shut up because I told her to try putting her phone down whilst driving, I hope you get caught.
[quote][p][bold]EGHH[/bold] wrote: How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!![/p][/quote]I could use the disabled parking in the bit of road near Tesco (used to be Borders) in Bmth Square as an example there: the amount of times I've gone to park there and can't because some lazy whatsit in a BMW/Merc is waiting or a delivery/builders van is parked there is just amazing. It's 'disabled parking'. Not 'fully capable-bodied park where you like'. I've never seen this camera car but if it cuts down on dodgy driving behaviour I'm all for it. Oh and if you're the woman who told me to shut up because I told her to try putting her phone down whilst driving, I hope you get caught. spooki
  • Score: 0

10:56pm Tue 18 Dec 12

cynicist says...

How can the camera car make it safer by sending a fine in the mail two weeks after the offence?

If they were truly serious about people parking dangerously, they would tow their cars.

But in all honesty, I hope it does not come to that.

The real winners are the ones who convinced the council to purchase the equipment in the first place.
How can the camera car make it safer by sending a fine in the mail two weeks after the offence? If they were truly serious about people parking dangerously, they would tow their cars. But in all honesty, I hope it does not come to that. The real winners are the ones who convinced the council to purchase the equipment in the first place. cynicist
  • Score: 0

11:24pm Tue 18 Dec 12

ashleycross says...

Old Colonial wrote:
Of course lives and serious injuries saved cannot be quantified. That would require 'blind trials'.

The only quantifiable way of judging success is to see whether parking on school zig-zags, bus stops, no loading and no waiting areas has been significantly reduced. Has it? If not, then this is just a nice little cash generator.
it has see my comment must have been simultaneous to yours
[quote][p][bold]Old Colonial[/bold] wrote: Of course lives and serious injuries saved cannot be quantified. That would require 'blind trials'. The only quantifiable way of judging success is to see whether parking on school zig-zags, bus stops, no loading and no waiting areas has been significantly reduced. Has it? If not, then this is just a nice little cash generator.[/p][/quote]it has see my comment must have been simultaneous to yours ashleycross
  • Score: 0

11:31pm Tue 18 Dec 12

ashleycross says...

timwel wrote:
Great when does it start saving lives on the A338 catching tail-gaters and loons rather than raising revenue for dastardly crimes like parking?
good point. personally i always make a point of calling 101 and reporting tailgaters on the A338 or at least calling their employer. It doesn't take long and could save a life, just think of it as being like donating blood
[quote][p][bold]timwel[/bold] wrote: Great when does it start saving lives on the A338 catching tail-gaters and loons rather than raising revenue for dastardly crimes like parking?[/p][/quote]good point. personally i always make a point of calling 101 and reporting tailgaters on the A338 or at least calling their employer. It doesn't take long and could save a life, just think of it as being like donating blood ashleycross
  • Score: 0

11:40pm Tue 18 Dec 12

ashleycross says...

djd wrote:
Great idea this camera car, so people park where they don't think they are causing a danger to other road users. It's only their opinion that they are not causing a danger, why do you think the restrictions are there in the first place.
A lot of posts mention pavement parking, probably the biggest menace in Bournemouth. The council hasn't adopted the regulations to make it illegal. Please adopt the regulations, please ticket all those who do park on the pavement. 'pavements are for people, not for cars.' How do motorists react to pedestrians walking on the carriageway???
very interesting djd-can you post which regulations these are? I think I can see another campaign in the making for the advertiser
[quote][p][bold]djd[/bold] wrote: Great idea this camera car, so people park where they don't think they are causing a danger to other road users. It's only their opinion that they are not causing a danger, why do you think the restrictions are there in the first place. A lot of posts mention pavement parking, probably the biggest menace in Bournemouth. The council hasn't adopted the regulations to make it illegal. Please adopt the regulations, please ticket all those who do park on the pavement. 'pavements are for people, not for cars.' How do motorists react to pedestrians walking on the carriageway???[/p][/quote]very interesting djd-can you post which regulations these are? I think I can see another campaign in the making for the advertiser ashleycross
  • Score: 0

12:14am Wed 19 Dec 12

s-pb2 says...

rayc wrote:
s-pb2 wrote:
Old Colonial wrote:
Hollers wrote:
uvox44 wrote:
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.
Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.
You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again
"You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again"

Or that Council's flood the roads with ever increasing unnecessary restrictions so as to to force drivers to use their car parks and meters.
I manage to deal with these 'unnecessary restrictions' with absolutely no problem at all, so why cant you?
[quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]s-pb2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Old Colonial[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hollers[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]uvox44[/bold] wrote: ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?[/p][/quote]This assumes that because of the camera car our Council Tax will be less that it might otherwise have been. I'm not convinced.[/p][/quote]Logic dictates that if the car scheme is a success as a deterrent,all illegal parking/stopping will disappear. In which case there would be no income from fines and a loss on using the car.[/p][/quote]You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again[/p][/quote]"You forget that the great British public are by and large a stupid bunch and will repeat the same mistakes over and over again" Or that Council's flood the roads with ever increasing unnecessary restrictions so as to to force drivers to use their car parks and meters.[/p][/quote]I manage to deal with these 'unnecessary restrictions' with absolutely no problem at all, so why cant you? s-pb2
  • Score: 0

5:35am Wed 19 Dec 12

Phixer says...

daily reporter wrote:
why cant the council use some of the money to build drop off points that work like a single road with barriers down each side and when you get to a gap in the barrier your passangers can get out/in but you cant wait or stay because cars behind will make you move on, this way it is self regulating, traffic runs freely along the road which runs parallel to the drop off road.
Service roads already exist - and you still get the arrogant drivers who block the way.
[quote][p][bold]daily reporter[/bold] wrote: why cant the council use some of the money to build drop off points that work like a single road with barriers down each side and when you get to a gap in the barrier your passangers can get out/in but you cant wait or stay because cars behind will make you move on, this way it is self regulating, traffic runs freely along the road which runs parallel to the drop off road.[/p][/quote]Service roads already exist - and you still get the arrogant drivers who block the way. Phixer
  • Score: 0

5:53am Wed 19 Dec 12

justdreaming says...

Well done the council !
If motorists were not so bloody selfish and inconsiderate and obeyed the laws which were made for the benefit of all. Then they would not get fined, i say serve them right.
Keep up the good work Council.
Well done the council ! If motorists were not so bloody selfish and inconsiderate and obeyed the laws which were made for the benefit of all. Then they would not get fined, i say serve them right. Keep up the good work Council. justdreaming
  • Score: 0

8:16am Wed 19 Dec 12

sar72 says...

Is this the same camera car that's often seen speeding around Westbourne?
Maybe they should take a closer look at their council employees work vehicles...as they are often spotted outside blockbusters in Westbourne parked on the pavement??!!!!
Is this the same camera car that's often seen speeding around Westbourne? Maybe they should take a closer look at their council employees work vehicles...as they are often spotted outside blockbusters in Westbourne parked on the pavement??!!!! sar72
  • Score: 0

9:04am Wed 19 Dec 12

devilstail says...

As a driver and Cyclist I welcome this initiative, I have been following a lot of conversation over road use and motorists and cyclists and one thing that has come to light that there is a lack of knowledge of the Highway Code and that some people seem to make the rules up as they go along. However in doing so they just inconvenience others. Yellow lines and non parking areas are there for a reason usually safety, by illegally parking these idiots put other road users at risk and cause congestion. Lets be honest the majority of it is down to bone idle laziness, because someone can't bet bothered to walk a couple hundred metres from a legal parking place.
So let me explain something to those in denial out there, it does not matter how big your car is, how expensive it is, how fast it is, whether you drive for a living or how important you think you are, unless you are in the emergency response vehicle responding to an emergency, you have no more rights on the road to any other road users.
If people got this through their thick skulls and started obeying the LAW, there would be less accidents and less congestion and no need for such measures as this car and speed cameras.
It is time that there was a zero tolerance on anti social road use and would welcome more of these cars on the road.
Before the usual troll's start trying to flame me no I do not park illegally and never have because I have 2 legs and know how to use them.
As a driver and Cyclist I welcome this initiative, I have been following a lot of conversation over road use and motorists and cyclists and one thing that has come to light that there is a lack of knowledge of the Highway Code and that some people seem to make the rules up as they go along. However in doing so they just inconvenience others. Yellow lines and non parking areas are there for a reason usually safety, by illegally parking these idiots put other road users at risk and cause congestion. Lets be honest the majority of it is down to bone idle laziness, because someone can't bet bothered to walk a couple hundred metres from a legal parking place. So let me explain something to those in denial out there, it does not matter how big your car is, how expensive it is, how fast it is, whether you drive for a living or how important you think you are, unless you are in the emergency response vehicle responding to an emergency, you have no more rights on the road to any other road users. If people got this through their thick skulls and started obeying the LAW, there would be less accidents and less congestion and no need for such measures as this car and speed cameras. It is time that there was a zero tolerance on anti social road use and would welcome more of these cars on the road. Before the usual troll's start trying to flame me no I do not park illegally and never have because I have 2 legs and know how to use them. devilstail
  • Score: 0

9:12am Wed 19 Dec 12

ashleycross says...

EGHH wrote:
How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!!
When I was a child delivery drivers kept a little trolley in the van called I think a dolly, which they used to move what they were delivering from their vehicle to the place they delivering to. It would be interesting to know why we never see these any more.Could it be that they will make a comeback with better enforcement against bad parking?
[quote][p][bold]EGHH[/bold] wrote: How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!![/p][/quote]When I was a child delivery drivers kept a little trolley in the van called I think a dolly, which they used to move what they were delivering from their vehicle to the place they delivering to. It would be interesting to know why we never see these any more.Could it be that they will make a comeback with better enforcement against bad parking? ashleycross
  • Score: 0

9:16am Wed 19 Dec 12

devilstail says...

With regards to the scourge of people parking on pavements it is illegal, however a loophole exists in proving a car drove on to the pavement

http://www.roadswere
notbuiltforcars.com/
1835highwayact/

Scotland is making moves towards this anti social behaviour

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-scotland-sc
otland-politics-2069
1167
With regards to the scourge of people parking on pavements it is illegal, however a loophole exists in proving a car drove on to the pavement http://www.roadswere notbuiltforcars.com/ 1835highwayact/ Scotland is making moves towards this anti social behaviour http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-sc otland-politics-2069 1167 devilstail
  • Score: 0

9:20am Wed 19 Dec 12

devilstail says...

ashleycross wrote:
EGHH wrote:
How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!!
When I was a child delivery drivers kept a little trolley in the van called I think a dolly, which they used to move what they were delivering from their vehicle to the place they delivering to. It would be interesting to know why we never see these any more.Could it be that they will make a comeback with better enforcement against bad parking?
In Blandford there are a couple of companies that abuse this and it is not uncommon to see 2 or 3 of their vans illegally parked, for long periods of time in a dangerous spot.
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EGHH[/bold] wrote: How many delivery drivers have been caught by this bloody car when they are only doing their job I wonder. At least a traffic warden gives you a few minutes to unload. This car is like speed cameras - one trick ponies there to generate income!![/p][/quote]When I was a child delivery drivers kept a little trolley in the van called I think a dolly, which they used to move what they were delivering from their vehicle to the place they delivering to. It would be interesting to know why we never see these any more.Could it be that they will make a comeback with better enforcement against bad parking?[/p][/quote]In Blandford there are a couple of companies that abuse this and it is not uncommon to see 2 or 3 of their vans illegally parked, for long periods of time in a dangerous spot. devilstail
  • Score: 0

10:36am Wed 19 Dec 12

outlawselfinterest says...

GREAT!

An unqualified GOOD NEWS story.

Well done Bournemouth Council!

Anti-social (or very lazy) motorists penalised and the income put into other road safety schemes.

Perfect!

And if it reduces the Council Tax bill by even a few pounds, well, that's even better.

It's just a shame that many other towns in the area don't have the expertise that was in Bournemouth when this scheme was introduced.
GREAT! An unqualified GOOD NEWS story. Well done Bournemouth Council! Anti-social (or very lazy) motorists penalised and the income put into other road safety schemes. Perfect! And if it reduces the Council Tax bill by even a few pounds, well, that's even better. It's just a shame that many other towns in the area don't have the expertise that was in Bournemouth when this scheme was introduced. outlawselfinterest
  • Score: 0

11:11am Wed 19 Dec 12

The Renegade Master says...

This parking car is about one thing only: making money.
Anyone who can't see that is an idiot.
This parking car is about one thing only: making money. Anyone who can't see that is an idiot. The Renegade Master
  • Score: 0

11:22am Wed 19 Dec 12

The Renegade Master says...

tricky1007 wrote:
The Renegade Master wrote:
Yeah yeah yeah.... we know, don't park illegally and you won't get a ticket blah blah blah. Shut up!

The simple fact remains that the Council are using OUR money to devise more ways of extorting more and more cash from US. I find that principle distasteful.

Perhaps there should be a bad cycling car too, just to upset Mike Chalkey!
I did not get a ticket from it this year! I park where i should as do most people, and it is right, dont park illegally and you wont get a ticket. Its people with the mentality of 'i am not hurting anyone and i am not parked in a dangerous place' that deserve to get a ticket. The amount of times i have seen people in wheelchairs, or prams, or young children been made to walk out into the road to get round these cars, yes i see that as dangerous!
So you like the idea of the Council using OUR money to find new ways of extorting more money out of US? Can you not see what's wrong with that principle? It wouldn't be so bad if the money made from this scam was spent on improving services but it clearly isn't.
[quote][p][bold]tricky1007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Renegade Master[/bold] wrote: Yeah yeah yeah.... we know, don't park illegally and you won't get a ticket blah blah blah. Shut up! The simple fact remains that the Council are using OUR money to devise more ways of extorting more and more cash from US. I find that principle distasteful. Perhaps there should be a bad cycling car too, just to upset Mike Chalkey![/p][/quote]I did not get a ticket from it this year! I park where i should as do most people, and it is right, dont park illegally and you wont get a ticket. Its people with the mentality of 'i am not hurting anyone and i am not parked in a dangerous place' that deserve to get a ticket. The amount of times i have seen people in wheelchairs, or prams, or young children been made to walk out into the road to get round these cars, yes i see that as dangerous![/p][/quote]So you like the idea of the Council using OUR money to find new ways of extorting more money out of US? Can you not see what's wrong with that principle? It wouldn't be so bad if the money made from this scam was spent on improving services but it clearly isn't. The Renegade Master
  • Score: 0

11:58am Wed 19 Dec 12

live-and-let-live says...

can anyone tell us how much money poole council have made from its cash-cow car?
can anyone tell us how much money poole council have made from its cash-cow car? live-and-let-live
  • Score: 0

12:23pm Wed 19 Dec 12

Molecatcher says...

Cllr Michael Filer said "We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools."

Probably because you have absolutely no evidence to support a claim that it has saved lives at all... Get a grip Councillor...
Cllr Michael Filer said "We can’t count the number of lives and serious injuries that have been saved by having the camera car, especially around schools." Probably because you have absolutely no evidence to support a claim that it has saved lives at all... Get a grip Councillor... Molecatcher
  • Score: 0

5:12pm Thu 20 Dec 12

aerolover says...

rayc wrote:
uvox44 wrote:
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
"would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules?"

I would rather that the two things were not related at all. Enforcing traffic regulations and providing parking etc. should not be provided with the intention of making a profit so that Council Tax is reduced.
The reason given for the providing the car was to save the lives and risk of serious injuries to schoolchildren in the vicinity of their schools. Now the reason appears to be to to install new cycle arrangements etc. Without offenders there would presumably not be any new cycle arrangements?
Will the car catch cyclists who run red lights, ride with no lights or weave in and out of slow moving traffic? Answer no because they don't have to register or pay road tax so no one can find out who was riding.
To make the road fair everyone should have to pay some road tax, car driver or cyclist and display a registration number.
You can have it all ways, every one has to obey the laws of the road.
[quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]uvox44[/bold] wrote: ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?[/p][/quote]"would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules?" I would rather that the two things were not related at all. Enforcing traffic regulations and providing parking etc. should not be provided with the intention of making a profit so that Council Tax is reduced. The reason given for the providing the car was to save the lives and risk of serious injuries to schoolchildren in the vicinity of their schools. Now the reason appears to be to to install new cycle arrangements etc. Without offenders there would presumably not be any new cycle arrangements?[/p][/quote]Will the car catch cyclists who run red lights, ride with no lights or weave in and out of slow moving traffic? Answer no because they don't have to register or pay road tax so no one can find out who was riding. To make the road fair everyone should have to pay some road tax, car driver or cyclist and display a registration number. You can have it all ways, every one has to obey the laws of the road. aerolover
  • Score: 0

11:11pm Thu 20 Dec 12

s-pb2 says...

aerolover wrote:
rayc wrote:
uvox44 wrote:
ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?
"would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules?"

I would rather that the two things were not related at all. Enforcing traffic regulations and providing parking etc. should not be provided with the intention of making a profit so that Council Tax is reduced.
The reason given for the providing the car was to save the lives and risk of serious injuries to schoolchildren in the vicinity of their schools. Now the reason appears to be to to install new cycle arrangements etc. Without offenders there would presumably not be any new cycle arrangements?
Will the car catch cyclists who run red lights, ride with no lights or weave in and out of slow moving traffic? Answer no because they don't have to register or pay road tax so no one can find out who was riding.
To make the road fair everyone should have to pay some road tax, car driver or cyclist and display a registration number.
You can have it all ways, every one has to obey the laws of the road.
What about skateboarders? mobility scooters? longboarders? rollerbladers? pedestrians even? Would you tax an 8 year old? Daft suggestion and completely unworkable
[quote][p][bold]aerolover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]uvox44[/bold] wrote: ray c - here's a simple question as you seem to moan about anything that raises money - would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules? One you can avoid through not parking where you shouldn't , the other everyone would have to pay- which is better?[/p][/quote]"would you rather see your Council Tax go up or have the council raise money through fines on drivers breaking the rules?" I would rather that the two things were not related at all. Enforcing traffic regulations and providing parking etc. should not be provided with the intention of making a profit so that Council Tax is reduced. The reason given for the providing the car was to save the lives and risk of serious injuries to schoolchildren in the vicinity of their schools. Now the reason appears to be to to install new cycle arrangements etc. Without offenders there would presumably not be any new cycle arrangements?[/p][/quote]Will the car catch cyclists who run red lights, ride with no lights or weave in and out of slow moving traffic? Answer no because they don't have to register or pay road tax so no one can find out who was riding. To make the road fair everyone should have to pay some road tax, car driver or cyclist and display a registration number. You can have it all ways, every one has to obey the laws of the road.[/p][/quote]What about skateboarders? mobility scooters? longboarders? rollerbladers? pedestrians even? Would you tax an 8 year old? Daft suggestion and completely unworkable s-pb2
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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