- Mobile site
- E-Newsletters
-
- News feed
- Find us on Twitter
@wimbledonnews
Follow us on Twitter
- Find us on Facebook
Wimbledon Guardian
Like us on Facebook
Council refuses to publish traffic warden's 'bible' (From Wimbledon Guardian)
Contact us: Got a photo? Text SLPICS to 80360, click to upload your story or call
020 8722 6333
Merton Council refuses to publish traffic warden's 'bible'
5:00am Monday 15th October 2012 in Parking Madness By Omar Oakes
Council refuses to publish traffic warden's 'bible'
Merton Council has refused to publish the advice it gives traffic wardens on how flexible they should be in interpreting parking bylaws.
After reporting many extraordinary tales from motorists, the Wimbledon Guardian launched its Parking Madness series this year to highlight these stories and hold the authority to account.
Merton Council, like all councils, is given statutory guidance by the Department for Transport (2004) stating it should publish parking protocols to show motorists it is exercising its powers “flexibly and judge each case on its merits”.
In July, a council spokeswoman said this document comprised a handbook given to civil enforcement officers (CEOs), but would not release a copy.
Known as an Enforcement Code of Practice, or traffic warden's 'bible', it is readily available on other London councils' websites, including Richmond-upon-Thames, Westminster, and Islington.
Last month, our request under the Freedom of Information Act was also rejected, on the grounds that more detailed guidance would be published “by the end of the year”.
We spoke to a former Merton parking warden about what guidance he was given about flexibility during his six years issuing tickets until he retired – at a time when the council went from having eight CEOs to 31 today.
He said: “There used to be a handbook.
“They had about three sheets of A4 when I was a parking officer which was their firm but fair policy, but where that is now I have no idea.
“Someone showed it to me. It wasn’t particularly comprehensive.
“I was always told that we always gave five minutes before giving someone a ticket – that’s where that came from.
“What have they got to hide?”
Comments(5)
GR-London
says...
10:46am Mon 15 Oct 12
If we lived in a genuinely fair and democratic country run by honest politicians, they would react to the councils lack of transparency and abuse of power and make some new laws to bring about some balance and accountability.
You would think that Robert Mugabe runs the UK.
Tobermory
says...
11:05am Mon 15 Oct 12
Parking Charter
Please note that due to many new parking initiatives for our residents, the Charter is currently being reviewed by our Members. When available, the Parking Charter for 2011 will be displayed here.
http://www.richmond.
gov.uk/home/transpor
t_and_streets/parkin
g/parking_contact_de
tails/parking_charte
r.htm
Last updated May 2011, great reporting as usual Omar!
Smart Cookie
says...
1:58pm Mon 15 Oct 12
The first is why Merton Council deems itself free to disregard its duties under the Freedom of Information Act and to have had NOT available for the public to see some traffic orders as the law requires of them.
The second is to wonder which local authority Tobermory is paid by to spring to the rapid defence of local authorities as he does every time issues of parking enforcement irregularities is reported.
Smart Cookie
says...
2:22pm Mon 15 Oct 12
If Tobermory were a little less self-righteous and a little more diligent he would find the Richmond information referred to by reporter Omar at http://www.richmond.
gov.uk/home/transpor
t_and_streets/parkin
g/parking_fines.htm
Tobermory says...
9:29am Mon 15 Oct 12
I find the Guardians 'parking madness' campaign rather baffling, what exactly is the point? Everyday half the defendants at Wimbledon Magistrates Court are found NOT guilty of criminal charges, why not have a 'Police madness' campaign? Surely being accused and facing a criminal record wrongly is far more serious than a £100 parking ticket?
If finding a council car legally parked on yellow lines is the best the Guardian can do in the way of journalism then its a rather poor excuse for a 'news'paper.