Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hate Parking Tickets? Fixed Fights Them In Court For You

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–139 of 139 posts

Re: Hate Parking Tickets? Fixed Fights Them In Court For You

#131

Post by splat »

grkvlt wrote: post #120
splat wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a cyclist, though, sometimes the light will never turn. Most states treat bicycles identically to cars as far as red lights go. So, sorry, but I'm not going to wait at a red light for 45 minutes when it's freezing out for a car to show up and switch the light for me.

How would the red-light camera affect you as a cyclist, anyway? Bicycles don't have license details affixed to them, and also shouldn't trigger the camera for exactly the same reason they won't trigger the light-change cycle.

I can still get a ticket from an officer.

Re: Hate Parking Tickets? Fixed Fights Them In Court For You

#132

Post by dangrossman »

eli wrote: post #118
splat wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a cyclist, though, sometimes the light will never turn. Most states treat bicycles identically to cars as far as red lights go. So, sorry, but I'm not going to wait at a red light for 45 minutes when it's freezing out for a car to show up and switch the light for me.

I'm skeptical that there are very many lights that would take more than a few minutes to change even without a car. Maybe cyclists should just be allowed to proceed through a red light since they are unlikely to hurt anyone besides themselves... But the rule does kinda make sense. If there are lights that rely on car sensors then obviously fixing that would be the right thing to do regardless of the law.

There's a couple in my area, so they can't be that rare. They're on arterial roads with small side-streets or shopping center exits, and after a certain hour at night, the signal never cycles unless a car trips the sensor on the smaller road.

Re: Hate Parking Tickets? Fixed Fights Them In Court For You

#133

Post by qq66 »

greenyoda wrote: post #27
rgbrenner wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness, are you sure they should be parking there if it's not a loading zone? I once was stuck behind a truck that refused to move on a one-lane street for 20 minutes while he insisted on unloading, backing up traffic 3 blocks down the street.

In midtown NYC, there are lots of narrow streets that have small businesses lining both sides of the street and cars parked on both sides of the street. The only way to deliver anything to these businesses would be to double park the truck. Making double parking illegal there is essentially outlawing commerce on these streets.

San Francisco's solution is to allow short-term double parking for commercial deliveries. It's less infuriating to other drivers when it's explicitly legal.

Re: Hate Parking Tickets? Fixed Fights Them In Court For You

#134

Post by codfrantic »

grkvlt wrote: post #120
splat wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a cyclist, though, sometimes the light will never turn. Most states treat bicycles identically to cars as far as red lights go. So, sorry, but I'm not going to wait at a red light for 45 minutes when it's freezing out for a car to show up and switch the light for me.

How would the red-light camera affect you as a cyclist, anyway? Bicycles don't have license details affixed to them, and also shouldn't trigger the camera for exactly the same reason they won't trigger the light-change cycle.

>and also shouldn't trigger the camera for exactly the same reason they won't trigger the light-change cycle.

I have a similar problem on my motorcycle. There are many lights which are not triggered by my being there. But the camera's always know. I wish they used the same loop / detector!

Re: Hate Parking Tickets? Fixed Fights Them In Court For You

#135

Post by cjrp »

eigenvector wrote: post #119
DanBC wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how you can claim that most people are opposed to speed limits being enforced. Especially in the UK.

I think most people would like speed limits enforced with some sensible discretion. To give an extreme example, you shouldn't receive a $150 fine for going 1 km/h over the limit. Before photo radar, there were a limited number of police officers to enforce speed limits, so most limits weren't enforced most of the time. Police focused on catching the worst offenders, so going, say, 60 km/h in 50 km/h zone or 110 km/h…

In the UK, most cameras allow 10% + 1mph. So in a 30mph zone, 35mph is the speed at which you'll get prosecuted.

Re: Hate Parking Tickets? Fixed Fights Them In Court For You

#136

Post by ceejayoz »

splat wrote: post #131
grkvlt wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would the red-light camera affect you as a cyclist, anyway? Bicycles don't have license details affixed to them, and also shouldn't trigger the camera for exactly the same reason they won't trigger the light-change cycle.

I can still get a ticket from an officer.

That'd be a pretty easy ticket to beat. Telling the cop it's a sensor light you can't trigger is going to work on any reasonable officer, and if not it's going to be pretty easy to contest in traffic court.

Re: Hate Parking Tickets? Fixed Fights Them In Court For You

#137

Post by ceejayoz »

russell_h wrote: post #103
joeframbach wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do lawyers need to be involved? The rules are here: http://www.sfmta.com/services/permits-citations/contest-cita... All it takes is to submit a letter. Doesn't say who has to submit the letter.

Have you done that successfully? My fiance got a ticket on Muni that was clearly in error (her Clipper Card record showed her tagging 9 minutes prior to the ticket being issued). We followed the instructions for submitting a protest, and never heard back. After some back and forth, it seemed like the protest process was just /dev/null-ed, so we paid up just to make the problem go away. My take-away was that if you wa…

> As I understand it, fare evasion was a criminal offense until a few years ago, when they decriminalized it in favor of the new citation system, in order to save money on court costs.

It also changes the requirement from "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" to "the preponderance of the evidence", a much lower standard.

Re: Hate Parking Tickets? Fixed Fights Them In Court For You

#138

Post by rhino369 »

joeframbach wrote: post #101
rhino369 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't have to say anything like that. The determination of practicing law without a law license isn't based on what the government body requires, but generally on rules about what is and isn't legal practice. I assume they've looked at legal ethics decisions before they opened for business. But who knows, start ups sometimes cut legal corners.

Practicing law? This isn't a courthouse. Sure the SFMTA operates with the blessing of the government, but I do not believe "parking court" is in the same realm as the "courthouse" you're thing of.

Practicing law is more than just appearing in a court. I'm not totally sure where the line is, but writing a defense letter is definitely near the line.

They may just have supervising attorney's who double check all the work before it goes out the door. A lot of small firms have teams of paralegals who do paperwork and one attorney who signs off.

In CA it's defined as: 'As the term is generally understood, the practice of the law is the doing or performing services in a court of justice, in any matter depending therein, throughout its various stages, and in conformity to the adopted rules of procedure. But in a larger sense it includes legal advice and counsel, and the preparation of legal instruments and contracts by which legal rights are secured although such matter may or may not be depending in a court.'

Re: Hate Parking Tickets? Fixed Fights Them In Court For You

#139

Post by 5555624 »

splat wrote: post #100
eli wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, sorry, I still don't think that's OK. There may be reasons for running a red light, but "it's late and I'm impatient" isn't one of them.

As a cyclist, though, sometimes the light will never turn. Most states treat bicycles identically to cars as far as red lights go. So, sorry, but I'm not going to wait at a red light for 45 minutes when it's freezing out for a car to show up and switch the light for me.

In some locations, there are exceptions for cyclists at lights which "never turn." In Virginia, since July 2011, it's two minutes or two cycles of the light § 46.2-833 B:

"Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if a driver of a motorcycle or moped or a bicycle rider approaches an intersection that is controlled by a traffic light, the driver or rider may proceed through the intersection on a steady red light only if the driver or rider (i) comes to a full and complete stop at the intersection for two complete cycles of the traffic light or for two minutes, whichever is shorter, (ii) exercises due care as provided by law, (iii) otherwise treats the traffic control device as a stop sign, (iv) determines that it is safe to proceed, and (v) yields the right of way to the driver of any vehicle approaching on such other highway from either direction. "

Post reply on HN