Automotive

[Merged] Ask me anything about TORONTO Parking Tickets

Jr. Member
Mar 7, 2007
113 posts
3 upvotes
Fox1971 wrote:
You probably were parked in a "no park zone". If you parked right under the sign as you say, enough of your vehicle was in the "no park zone" to permit enforcement. Post the pictures if you have them.
Well you probably know more about this than I do so here are the pictures and you can judge for yourself.
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/ ... 9-1547.jpg[/IMG]
There were only two signs. The one above is probably saying that there's no parking 4pm-6pm mon-fri. So it doesn't affect me as it was Saturday.

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/ ... 1548-2.jpg[/IMG]
If you look in the very right of this picture you can see the legs of the sign. The sign is at roughly the halfway mark of my car. Putting half of my car before the sign and half behind the sign. I'm thinking now, that he gave me the ticket because of that. But there must have been room for 4 cars behind mine before you hit the corner.

Fox1971 wrote:
Trust me, even if the PEO made a mistake, he isn't going to lose his job no matter how much you might want him to.
I know people make mistakes. I make mistakes at my job all the time. However, I never said that he should lose his job for making a mistake.
In my original post I was talking about the possibility of the parking official giving the ticket simply because they knew that it would be highly unlikely and unfeasible for me to fight it. And if that were true, that they should lose their job. But your right, even if that were true he still probably wouldn't lose his job.

Fox1971 wrote:
It is just a minor parking ticket, not an eviction notice so settle down. You are just creating stress for yourself. And what if you had not missed the "lil worm"? How would things have been different? Would you have bullied the "jerk" with your razor wit until he ran away? Would you have assaulted him? Please elaborate on what you would have done because I am most curious.
I know its just a minor parking ticket and I know its only $40 bucks. Judging by your posts, I'm guessing you are or were employed by the PEO at one time, so I apologize if I antagonized you. However, I absolutely guarantee, that if you had received a $40 dollar late fee from your credit card company even though you made all your payments on time, because of a mess up by the credit card company, and you had to go through the same kind of troubles and effort to fix it, that you would be just as pissed.

To satisfy your curiosity, no I would not have bullied him and no I would definitely not have assaulted him. I'd have been pissed for sure, can't deny that. But I would tried to remain nice and reason with the person. Mainly, I would just be trying to understand why he was giving me a ticket. I'd probably ask him to at least give me the two bucks back that I spent on the parking anyway lol.
Maybe I shouldn't have referred to the person as a "lil worm", my apologies.

Fox1971 wrote:
Apparently you didn't do everything the right way though. You made a mistake, got caught and instead of just accepting responsibility you decided to go on a "rant", your word, without even considering the possibility that you were the one in the wrong.
Well first of all, I didn't know why the ticket was given and couldn't understand, so I technically could not have accepted responsibility. I did consider the possibility that I was in the wrong, hence those 3 scenarios I thought out.

Fox1971 wrote:
Pay your ticket and move on. How's that for advice?
Probably the best advice one could give. Probably spent at least two hours posting on rfd about this, could have made that money back working overtime. But its not about the money. It's the principle, if you pay for the parking, you shouldn't be getting a ticket.

Anyways, if you could look at the pictures I posted and give me your opinion, I'd appreciate it. Tried calling the TAGS number 20 times today throughout the day and couldn't get through once.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Nov 21, 2009
12732 posts
1810 upvotes
Aznek, there was a post few months ago about similar ticket but on Front Street. the sign was saying no parking 4pm-6pm but a ticket was issued before 4pm because there was another sign 100m down the street that prohibited parking from 3:30pm-6pm or something like that. most probably one half of your car was in no parking zone. you would need to check other signs on this street. try google view
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jul 26, 2009
1829 posts
103 upvotes
Toronto
Aznek wrote: Well you probably know more about this than I do so here are the pictures and you can judge for yourself.
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/ ... 9-1547.jpg[/IMG]
There were only two signs. The one above is probably saying that there's no parking 4pm-6pm mon-fri. So it doesn't affect me as it was Saturday.
Actually there were three signs on that pole. You just conveniently forgot to include the relevant one in the frame when you took the picture. I checked Google Street View for the address on the ticket and here is the link to the exact location where you were parked. This is the exact same sign post you photographed but now everybody can see the "No Parking" sign posted at the top of the pole above the the other two signs.

http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=618+bloor+ ... .3,,1,0.43

Aznek wrote: [IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/ ... 1548-2.jpg[/IMG]
If you look in the very right of this picture you can see the legs of the sign. The sign is at roughly the halfway mark of my car. Putting half of my car before the sign and half behind the sign. I'm thinking now, that he gave me the ticket because of that. But there must have been room for 4 cars behind mine before you hit the corner.
The sign post can also be clearly seen in your photo and it is next to the front passenger door of your car which puts a little more than half of the total length of your vehicle in the enforceable "No Parking" zone.
Aznek wrote: I know people make mistakes. I make mistakes at my job all the time. However, I never said that he should lose his job for making a mistake.
In my original post I was talking about the possibility of the parking official giving the ticket simply because they knew that it would be highly unlikely and unfeasible for me to fight it. And if that were true, that they should lose their job. But your right, even if that were true he still probably wouldn't lose his job.
People do make mistakes but that clearly wasn't the case here. At least not on the part of the officer so I guess his job is safe for now.
Aznek wrote: I know its just a minor parking ticket and I know its only $40 bucks. Judging by your posts, I'm guessing you are or were employed by the PEO at one time, so I apologize if I antagonized you. However, I absolutely guarantee, that if you had received a $40 dollar late fee from your credit card company even though you made all your payments on time, because of a mess up by the credit card company, and you had to go through the same kind of troubles and effort to fix it, that you would be just as pissed.
I am still a PEO in Mississauga but I used to work in Toronto.
Aznek wrote: To satisfy your curiosity, no I would not have bullied him and no I would definitely not have assaulted him. I'd have been pissed for sure, can't deny that. But I would tried to remain nice and reason with the person. Mainly, I would just be trying to understand why he was giving me a ticket. I'd probably ask him to at least give me the two bucks back that I spent on the parking anyway lol.
Maybe I shouldn't have referred to the person as a "lil worm", my apologies.
Apology accepted.
Aznek wrote: Well first of all, I didn't know why the ticket was given and couldn't understand, so I technically could not have accepted responsibility. I did consider the possibility that I was in the wrong, hence those 3 scenarios I thought out.
I think I have clearly demonstrated above why you got the ticket.
Aznek wrote: Probably the best advice one could give. Probably spent at least two hours posting on rfd about this, could have made that money back working overtime. But its not about the money. It's the principle, if you pay for the parking, you shouldn't be getting a ticket.
Principles don't matter if you pay for parking and then park where you are not supposed to. The officer was right and you were wrong. Period.
Aznek wrote: Anyways, if you could look at the pictures I posted and give me your opinion, I'd appreciate it. Tried calling the TAGS number 20 times today throughout the day and couldn't get through once.
I looked at the pictures and you know the result.
Deal Addict
Feb 9, 2008
3235 posts
227 upvotes
Fox1971 wrote: Actually there were three signs on that pole. You just conveniently forgot to include the relevant one in the frame when you took the picture. I checked Google Street View for the address on the ticket and here is the link to the exact location where you were parked. This is the exact same sign post you photographed but now everybody can see the "No Parking" sign posted at the top of the pole above the the other two signs.

http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=618+bloor+ ... .3,,1,0.43

lol
Feedback: HoFo, RFD
Deal Guru
User avatar
Nov 21, 2009
12732 posts
1810 upvotes
:arrowu:
geez
Aznek, who are you trying to fool?
Jr. Member
Jan 4, 2009
118 posts
2 upvotes
Toronto
Fox1971 wrote: An agent cannot fight a ticket effectively on their own because they cannot present evidence nor give testimony in place of the driver. That would be considered hearsay evidence and would not be admitted at trial. The driver of the vehicle must be present to give testimony otherwise the only thing an agent can do is plead guilty on their behalf. Anything else would be a wasted effort.
Oops! A mental lapse on my part. Quite true.

I suppose before the trial the agent could present the pay stub to the prosecutor to see if the case can be thrown out. If not the trial proceeds and the agent can only plead guilty.

But it's a moot point now given that the Google Streetview you found shows the car was half-way in the no-parking zone and was ticketed for that reason.
Jr. Member
Mar 7, 2007
113 posts
3 upvotes
Oh jeez lol, your right about that. I honestly didn't remember seeing that sign, I must have been raging too much. Probably should have checked the street view.

And your absolutely right, that is the location. The restaurants right there haha.

vero95 wrote: :arrowu:
geez
Aznek, who are you trying to fool?
What would I gain from fooling you guys? Its not like you could removed the ticket if I convinced you guys I was innocent. I came here looking for advice on why I had received the ticket and what to do about the ticket itself. And you did indeed clear it up. Thanks fox, and again my apologies for the name calling. I just wish I had the correct information for you guys before I started ranting.

Just one more question for you though. Why does the ticket say that I parked during a prohibited time/day even though I received the ticket for parking in a no park zone.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jul 26, 2009
1829 posts
103 upvotes
Toronto
Aznek wrote: Oh jeez lol, your right about that. I honestly didn't remember seeing that sign, I must have been raging too much. Probably should have checked the street view.

And your absolutely right, that is the location. The restaurants right there haha.
I'm glad I could clarify things for you. Whenever you park, especially in downtown Toronto, take a minute to carefully look at the signs because it can save you a huge headache later on.
Aznek wrote: What would I gain from fooling you guys? Its not like you could removed the ticket if I convinced you guys I was innocent. I came here looking for advice on why I had received the ticket and what to do about the ticket itself. And you did indeed clear it up. Thanks fox, and again my apologies for the name calling. I just wish I had the correct information for you guys before I started ranting.
No problem.
Aznek wrote: Just one more question for you though. Why does the ticket say that I parked during a prohibited time/day even though I received the ticket for parking in a no park zone.
That is just the wording of the charge. Some No Parking zones have time/date restrictions and it's just easier to have one charge to cover all scenarios rather than one for simple No Parking and another for various time/date restrictions.
Member
Nov 17, 2009
251 posts
81 upvotes
Toronto
5dark wrote: If you're going to go with ambiguous assertions that PEOs are generally disliked you'd have to accept ambiguous assertions that most ticket fighters try to get legitimate tickets axed on technicalities.
I believe that's called a non sequitour, there's no logical connection between these two ambiguous assertions :)

And what are you calling a technicality? Wouldn't you agree that a parking violation per se is a technicality? So if a person gets a ticket for overstaying their paid time by 2 minutes is it not reasonable to make a charter argument if they don't get a timely trial, etc etc

As I see it we have one set of arbitrary man-made rules being fought using other arbitrary man-made rules. Seems like fair play to me. No reason to get all heavy and emotional about it, throwing words like 'honor' and 'betrayal' around, it's all mostly about the money.
Deal Addict
Feb 9, 2008
3235 posts
227 upvotes
vlasko29 wrote: I believe that's called a non sequitour, there's no logical connection between these two ambiguous assertions :)

And what are you calling a technicality? Wouldn't you agree that a parking violation per se is a technicality? So if a person gets a ticket for overstaying their paid time by 2 minutes is it not reasonable to make a charter argument if they don't get a timely trial, etc etc

As I see it we have one set of arbitrary man-made rules being fought using other arbitrary man-made rules. Seems like fair play to me. No reason to get all heavy and emotional about it, throwing words like 'honor' and 'betrayal' around, it's all mostly about the money.

They can make a charter argument if they don't get a timely trial, but what was their original grounds for contesting the charge?
Did they overstay by 2 minutes, or not?

I see it as mostly the enforcement of rules, not money.
Why have rules if they're unenforced.
Feedback: HoFo, RFD
Member
Nov 17, 2009
251 posts
81 upvotes
Toronto
5dark wrote: They can make a charter argument if they don't get a timely trial, but what was their original grounds for contesting the charge?
Did they overstay by 2 minutes, or not?
The original grounds for contesting the charge was the arbitrary right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
5dark wrote: I see it as mostly the enforcement of rules, not money.
Why have rules if they're unenforced.
The Romans said, cui bono, who benefits? Sure, there are legitimate traffic control considerations, but if you've been following the mayoral campaign you know how much City Hall needs the cool $80 million that parking enforcement brings in.
Member
Nov 17, 2009
251 posts
81 upvotes
Toronto
Fox1971 wrote: A lack of loyalty and honour are, in my opinion, much more dangerous than any potential pitfall those qualities or values may foster. I suspect that most ethical people feel the same as I do.
I suspect that in the context of the film, the 2 dead and 2 dishonorably discharged marines and their families, to say nothing of the military lawyer characters, might disagree with you.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Nov 21, 2009
12732 posts
1810 upvotes
Aznek wrote: Oh jeez lol, your right about that. I honestly didn't remember seeing that sign, I must have been raging too much. Probably should have checked the street view.

And your absolutely right, that is the location. The restaurants right there haha.



What would I gain from fooling you guys? Its not like you could removed the ticket if I convinced you guys I was innocent. I came here looking for advice on why I had received the ticket and what to do about the ticket itself. And you did indeed clear it up. Thanks fox, and again my apologies for the name calling. I just wish I had the correct information for you guys before I started ranting.

Just one more question for you though. Why does the ticket say that I parked during a prohibited time/day even though I received the ticket for parking in a no park zone.

it's OK to make a mistake if you are able to admit it later. it shows some guts and frankly many people can't do it
you learn from your own mistakes or from mistakes others make. therefore I am reading this thread ;)
Deal Addict
Feb 9, 2008
3235 posts
227 upvotes
vlasko29 wrote: The original grounds for contesting the charge was the arbitrary right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

The Romans said, cui bono, who benefits? Sure, there are legitimate traffic control considerations, but if you've been following the mayoral campaign you know how much City Hall needs the cool $80 million that parking enforcement brings in.
You won't speculate on the motives or defence of the accused but you're going to assume the motives of the city? Sorry that's a double standard.

Your quote alludes to ulterior motives. Yet the motive here is no more than enforcement, plain and clear.

The truth is civilization needs rules, even parking rules. And rules need enforcement.
It's citizens who benefit, or we'd have cars in fire lanes, hospital zones, handicapped spots, blocking driveways, etc.

vlasko29 wrote: I suspect that in the context of the film, the 2 dead and 2 dishonorably discharged marines and their families, to say nothing of the military lawyer characters, might disagree with you.

I'm sure some other fictional story outlines how a lack of respect for, or active undermining of the law would result in chaos or a breakdown a civilization.
vero95 wrote: it's OK to make a mistake if you are able to admit it later. it shows some guts and frankly many people can't do it
you learn from your own mistakes or from mistakes others make. therefore I am reading this thread ;)

+1, I retract my "lol" from earlier
Feedback: HoFo, RFD
Member
Nov 17, 2009
251 posts
81 upvotes
Toronto
5dark wrote: You won't speculate on the motives or defence of the accused but you're going to assume the motives of the city? Sorry that's a double standard.
I don't know what you are referring to when you say that I "won't speculate on the motives or defence of the accused" My point was that the defense fights a technical violation (2 min late) on technical grounds (charter of rights), relying on the presumption of innocence. I hope you are not suggesting we do away with that, btw.
5dark wrote: Your quote alludes to ulterior motives. Yet the motive here is no more than enforcement, plain and clear.
I don't consider raising money for the city an ulterior motive, and my statement alludes to no such thing. Neither do I think it's a particularly high or noble or superior calling. It's a job, not unlike many other municipal or private sector jobs. However I do have difficulty recalling the last time I heard of traitors to brothers and sisters in Animal Services or Waste Management :) That sort of inappropriate sentiment is all I am taking issue with.
5dark wrote: The truth is civilization needs rules, even parking rules. And rules need enforcement.
It's citizens who benefit, or we'd have cars in fire lanes, hospital zones, handicapped spots, blocking driveways, etc.
You are not wrong about the rules. But in the case at hand, the bulk of enforcement/fines has nothing to with fire lanes, hospital zones, handicapped spots. Here are the stats.
http://fightyourtickets.ca/statistics/t ... n-toronto/
5dark wrote: I'm sure some other fictional story outlines how a lack of respect for, or active undermining of the law would result in chaos or a breakdown a civilization.
I'd be delighted to hear of one.

The real stories that illustrate my point don't have Tom Cruise, Demi Moore, Jack Nicholson, et al in them, so people don't know of them as much as of the fictional ones, regrettably.
Deal Addict
Feb 9, 2008
3235 posts
227 upvotes
vlasko29 wrote: I don't know what you are referring to when you say that I "won't speculate on the motives or defence of the accused" My point was that the defense fights a technical violation (2 min late) on technical grounds (charter of rights), relying on the presumption of innocence. I hope you are not suggesting we do away with that, btw.

I don't consider raising money for the city an ulterior motive, and my statement alludes to no such thing. Neither do I think it's a particularly high or noble or superior calling. It's a job, not unlike many other municipal or private sector jobs. However I do have difficulty recalling the last time I heard of traitors to brothers and sisters in Animal Services or Waste Management :) That sort of inappropriate sentiment is all I am taking issue with.

You are not wrong about the rules. But in the case at hand, the bulk of enforcement/fines has nothing to with fire lanes, hospital zones, handicapped spots. Here are the stats.
http://fightyourtickets.ca/statistics/t ... n-toronto/

I'd be delighted to hear of one.

The real stories that illustrate my point don't have Tom Cruise, Demi Moore, Jack Nicholson, et al in them, so people don't know of them as much as of the fictional ones, regrettably.
Please quote where you think I suggested getting rid of the presumption of innocence.

I'd love to hear your defence for being 2 minutes late then when it goes to trial. I.E. why you're taking it to trial.

There are no traitors in Animal Services because no former animal services employee uses their knowledge of the system to undermine Animal Services.
Think about how a cop would be regarded if they join an organization like ex-coppers but to get criminals off criminal offence charges.


Okay so what do the majority have to do with?
No Parking -”Park Signed Highway during Prohibited Time/Days”
Expired Meter Offences – “Park at Expired Meter, Fail to Deposit Fee/Display Receipt”
No Vaild Permit – “Park on/at Prohibited area/location without a Permit”

I don't see the problem. The kids crossing the crosswalk benefit from cars not parking too close, reducing visibility. Commuters benefit from not having to drive in one lane only on a two lane because someone decided to park during rush hour. The garbage and snow trucks benefit because cars aren't parked in their operating area. The city and the person who actually pays the city to park benefits because no freeloader is taking up a spot in a busy area. Residents benefit because they can park on their street instead of non-permitted people. Businesses and people benefit from cars not parking in loading zones and pedestrian pathways.
Feedback: HoFo, RFD
Member
Nov 17, 2009
251 posts
81 upvotes
Toronto
5dark wrote: Please quote where you think I suggested getting rid of the presumption of innocence.
I said I hope you don't. It seems you don't. So we can agree that you don't. However one can't help but notice:
5dark wrote: Think about how a cop would be regarded if they join an organization like ex-coppers but to get criminals off criminal offence charges.
That is a strange thing to say for someone who believes in the presumption of innocence: a charge is not a conviction, and an accused is not a criminal, not by a long shot, that happens to be the definition of the presumption of innocence. And I hope that both a cop and an ex-copper are regarded with equal indifference, "without passion or prejudice", in a manner of speaking.
5dark wrote: I'd love to hear your defence for being 2 minutes late then when it goes to trial. I.E. why you're taking it to trial.
I thought we've covered this. The reason one would take it to trial is because you have a right to do so. To be presumed innocent and to have the Crown make a case. That is why.
5dark wrote: There are no traitors in Animal Services because no former animal services employee uses their knowledge of the system to undermine Animal Services.
I give up. :facepalm:
5dark wrote: Okay so what do the majority have to do with?
No Parking -”Park Signed Highway during Prohibited Time/Days”
Expired Meter Offences – “Park at Expired Meter, Fail to Deposit Fee/Display Receipt”
No Vaild Permit – “Park on/at Prohibited area/location without a Permit”

I don't see the problem. The kids crossing the crosswalk benefit from cars not parking too close, reducing visibility. Commuters benefit from not having to drive in one lane only on a two lane because someone decided to park during rush hour. The garbage and snow trucks benefit because cars aren't parked in their operating area. The city and the person who actually pays the city to park benefits because no freeloader is taking up a spot in a busy area. Residents benefit because they can park on their street instead of non-permitted people. Businesses and people benefit from cars not parking in loading zones and pedestrian pathways.
Very good examples. There is a public benefit to parking enforcement. And it makes lots of money for the city. Win-win. The reason why I agree that the second part is more important than the first is explained in the "barriers to justice" section of the same site.

http://fightyourtickets.ca/statistics/t ... ue-source/
Newbie
Oct 15, 2010
1 posts
Canada
Fox1971 wrote: You were probably tagged by a security guard who is certified to issue Toronto parking tickets. They issue hand written tickets that must be turned in to Toronto Police who then manually enter the information on the tickets into the system. I don't know how long that process takes but it can be prolonged by guards not turning their copies of the tickets within the required 48 hours from issuance. I've seen guards hold onto their copies of tickets for a couple of weeks before turning them in. That isn't supposed to happen but it does. Keep checking online or if you prefer call them and ask about it.

I am in a similar situation. It has been 13 days since I received my ticket (October 3, 2010) and the parking ticket number has yet to show up in the system (I have tried online and by phone). I must pay this ticket by Monday as the set fine is due within 15 days of issue. If the ticket number is still not yet found on the system by Monday, what does this mean? Both the online and phone systems say I can still pay my ticket without the ticket number being found in the system, but I am feeling hesitant. Please advise? Thank you!

Update: (October 18, 2010)
I spoke with a client service representative about my situation. She explained the situation similarly to Fox1971, though she stated clearly that it may take from two weeks to a month from the date of issuance before the ticket number enters the system since it was not an electronically entered ticket.

She also explained that I was not going to be penalized for not paying the set fine within 15 calendar days and that there is something of a grace period for payment (up to a month) for these kinds of tickets. I should specify that my ticket was for parking on private property without consent (in my case, my friend's condo parking lot and I didn't think I would be staying very long, so I didn't get a visitor's parking pass), so if you find yourself in this spot, you should try calling yourself. The woman on the phone was very kind to explain all of this to me. Anyway, I will continue to check the online system and if it is not there by then, she said I could call back on October 29th (I'm not sure why this specific date, but it will be 26 days since issuance).
Newbie
Sep 8, 2010
3 posts
286 cook rd
I recently asked a parking officer when are people were allowed to park on the village at york university without getting a ticket. he told me exactly that parking there between the evening and the next morning was okay. and that weekends are free. however, i got a ticket for parking more than 3 hours on a SUNDAY (like 7:30am-11am). note that there were almost no vehicles around, only a couple. plus, 3 hours after i went out to get my ticket, the car behind me has parked more than 3 hours and got no ticket. this makes no sense to me. anybody care to explain?! please?! thank you.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jul 26, 2009
1829 posts
103 upvotes
Toronto
yesnapoleon wrote: I am in a similar situation. It has been 13 days since I received my ticket (October 3, 2010) and the parking ticket number has yet to show up in the system (I have tried online and by phone). I must pay this ticket by Monday as the set fine is due within 15 days of issue. If the ticket number is still not yet found on the system by Monday, what does this mean? Both the online and phone systems say I can still pay my ticket without the ticket number being found in the system, but I am feeling hesitant. Please advise? Thank you!

Update: (October 18, 2010)
I spoke with a client service representative about my situation. She explained the situation similarly to Fox1971, though she stated clearly that it may take from two weeks to a month from the date of issuance before the ticket number enters the system since it was not an electronically entered ticket.

She also explained that I was not going to be penalized for not paying the set fine within 15 calendar days and that there is something of a grace period for payment (up to a month) for these kinds of tickets. I should specify that my ticket was for parking on private property without consent (in my case, my friend's condo parking lot and I didn't think I would be staying very long, so I didn't get a visitor's parking pass), so if you find yourself in this spot, you should try calling yourself. The woman on the phone was very kind to explain all of this to me. Anyway, I will continue to check the online system and if it is not there by then, she said I could call back on October 29th (I'm not sure why this specific date, but it will be 26 days since issuance).

Even I didn't know it could take that long. I just knew that hand written tickets take time because they needed to be entered manually into the system. Private agents who take too long to turn in their white copies don't help to improve the situation.

Top