Parking Ticket Payment Scam Busted

In other parking scam news... I had the pleasure of spending my Saturday at Pier 79 retrieving my Mom's impounded car. Now I wasn't too angry, since the car was towed for a completely legitimate reason (my own stupidity). However, three quarters of the people their retrieving cars were quite upset. Turns out they had all been towed on cross streets in the 30s between 8th and 9th Aves.

The problem? New MUNI meters. Meters that were placed in commercial zones. All these fine New Yorkers (and tourists) paid their $5 for an hour or two of parking, put their receipts on the dash, then came back to find their cars gone. All their cars were towed for commercial zone violations.

Now the question is... is the towing their fault? There were some commercial parking signs. But doesn't the presence of parking meters negate that? Is this a scam to get an extra $300 out of poor suckers who are already overpaying for street parking?

fishtale-

My recent ticket has a bubble in section indicating what the violation and penalty are. The highest dollar amount on there was $115 for parking in a No Standing/Stopping or at a fire hydrant. My experience got bumped up to $300 due to the $185 towing fee (which can have $20 a day added for storage, if you take your time getting your car back), but as for tickets it looks like $115 is the max.

Pray tell, HOW did a guy used Google Maps to show the ticket he got was totally stupid?

meL-

Yea I thought that was confusing too. What it's saying is that the police scan the ticket they write, which then gets sent to the courts. However, the scan isn't very clear. So if you don't bring your copy of the ticket (which theoretically is readable), and the only copy they have (the scan) is unreadable, then it's an automatic dismissal.

Just a quick comment re not bringing in the ticket: I do actually state in my book when it is and isn't a good idea to bring it in, (for example, if there's an obvious omission then you should bring it in) and I do state that the judges will scan for defects - but I also point out that you have a better chance of them finding that defect (and appealing if they don't) if you ask them to look - since some defects are not as obvious as others. The article(s) reporting on the book tend to go for the dramatic and risk missing some of the details.

In addition, re automatic mitigation: while one can argue that it is sometimes a good idea, my goal in writing the book was to explain the best way of fighting tickets (rather than settling). If, after reading it, you still think you have no chance, then by all means go for a settlement. But I do believe that if you consistently fight then you will do better than if you consistenly settle.

Finally, the book is actually available at bookstores and on amazon - so people can check it out for themselves. And the technical defects section is only about 15 pages of a 192 page book.

Thanks,
Haskell Nussbaum

I've been a parking judge longer than Nussbaum. ALWAYS bring in your parking ticket. It's a legal document. It's irresponsible to suggest otherwise.

Don't buy this book. You don't need it. Clerks and judges automatically look for defects and are there to help. You don't have to ask them!

If you don't have a legal defense, take the automatic reduction every time. Double parked for "just a minute"? That's not a legal defense. Take the reduction. This book will probably result in people fighting things they shouldn't, and LOSING money!

Use common sense, know the law, check out nyc.gov and don't buy this book, and when you go to a help center, tell the honest truth.

Don't play games with the judge (e.g., not bringing in the ticket is one). Most all of the scans are readable (Nussbaum should know this), and you'll just look like a nitpick or worse. Plus, you might have to pay for copies. Just terrible advice for one to pay for!

Barry Popik is correct. Mitigation is no more per the settlement program. It's nothing that PVB should be proud of because drivers who want to tell their stories or think they have a valid defense are financially penalized for doing so. Worse yet, if the clerk who is, after all, just a clerk and not an attorney, misses a defective summons which the respondent then settles, the judge can't get this corrected. So, a respondent can settle a defective ticket and then get hit full fine by the judge on one that's enforceable. Such is justice in the big city in an agency where getting them in and out the door "over lunch" is more meaningful that doing the right thing AND where it can always be blamed on the judge whose name is on the decision.
Also, the problem with the scanner system is stale, at least two years old and was very shortlived.
However, Haskell is correct on a couple of things: 1/that someone, in the form of senior judges, is always looking over the judges' shoulders, scrutinizing the work product, etc. and, as he noted, it's largely about the not guilty verdicts; 2/that some, but not all, judges are pressured by a constant numbers game in terms of how many tickets they hear on any given day and 3/that many of the "rules" applied by judges aren't discoverable by the public or clear from reading the law itself. Fortunately, Haskell left a while back and doesn't have to hear the phrase "you are not the respondent's attorney" which is the mantra of the current hierarchy.
Haskell surely did judge live cases at PVB but not for very long.
One crucial thing to add which his book doesn't mention: if you feel aggrieved, then write to the mayor, your city councilman or any other public official about it. You'd be surprised at how sensitive the city is about negative press. You might get an apology letter and a refund!

discount viagra discount viagra

Gee, funny that Haskell Nussbaum never responded again here...