We successfully contested a street sweeping ticket because the sign we were parked under said street sweeping ran through 11/30, not 12/31. We took a photo and the city said 'Well. You were wrong, but we'll let it go this time.'
Not our fault they missed a sign (we had just moved, and never parked under the other signs, so had no idea they were different), and they were really bitchy about it, but we got it dropped.
I think calling it corrupt is pushing it. It's more like city employees who develop a small sense of self and their only joy is inflicting their tiny little bureaucratic power upon others.
I call it corrupt - if it was not legal for the ticket to be issued (in the case of the snow parking one years ago), but they say they did nothing wrong, in order to prevent it from being used as precedent, they are trying to preserve their ability to ticket people unlawfully. Thus, it's corrupt.
Actually, I think it's so they never set any precedent of having certain types of tickets overturned. That way, no one can ever say ,"But you said you were wrong about my friend's ticket." Each case is considered individual.
no subject
Not our fault they missed a sign (we had just moved, and never parked under the other signs, so had no idea they were different), and they were really bitchy about it, but we got it dropped.
no subject
This is their standard response, even when it is clear the city was wrong.
They did this to someone who was ticketed before the ticket window opened in a snow emergency a few years back.
It's obviously corrupt, but how does one fight it?
no subject
OK, corrupt works.
no subject
no subject