Defective Parking Ticket Information for NJ

[Mother Russia]

What is the name of your state? New Jersey

I received a parking ticket for parking over 2 hours in a 2-hour, no-meter parking zone. The ticket however does not have the "first observed" time printed on it and my tires were not chalked.

I went to the municipality and explained to the clerk at the Violations window my situation. She told me that the officer was not required to fill out that spot. I requested to see something written to prove that (because I believe that the "first observed" slot is for exactly this type of a violation). She said that she did not have anything to show to me and offered to talk to the police, who she said had their way of marking the cars. The sergeant told me all about how they log cars and how they most likely have a record of my car being in violation and whatnot. He actually told me "Yeah he (the parking enforcement officer) just logs it by hand in a book, it would take too long to put on every ticket." (at this point I'm going: "WTF?!?!?!? Do your flippin' job! It consists of riding in a 3-wheeled go cart and writing tickets! Do it well! Don't cut corners!"). But again NOTHING in writing that proves that the parking enforcement officer can legally take this shortcut and not state the first observed time on the ticket.

In the state on New York there is a pamphlet published by the Department of Finance that outlines (for the driver) all the things that must be properly filled out on a ticket in order for it to be valid. (Among them, by the way, is "first observed" for "violations requiring multiple sightings such as feeding the meter and overtime parking")

I can't find anything like that for the state of New Jersey.

Any help or advise in finding such information, or regarding my situation would be appreciated.

[Zigner]

The question is begging to be asked: Did you, in fact, park in excess of the allowed time?

[Mother Russia]

oh

yeah i did. shame on me.

[Mother Russia]

oh

yeah i did. shame on me.

The police and the clerks offered me to plea not guilty and dispute the ticket in court.

I don't want to plea not guilty, however, because they'll just whip out their book that shows the car in violation. I want them to admit that they didn't fill out the ticket properly.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by Mother Russia

oh

yeah i did. shame on me.

The police and the clerks offered me to plea not guilty and dispute the ticket in court.

I don't want to plea not guilty, however, because they'll just whip out their book that shows the car in violation. I want them to admit that they didn't fill out the ticket properly.

They've already given you their answer on that point...

[Mother Russia]

did they though?
i mean i find it kinda strange that they dont fill out that space and give "it saves us time" as a reason, AND that they cannot produce anything that says that that is legal.

[patstew]

Originally Posted by Mother Russia

did they though?
i mean i find it kinda strange that they dont fill out that space and give "it saves us time" as a reason, AND that they cannot produce anything that says that that is legal.

I think you're going at this bass ackwards. It looks like there's nothing that says it's ILLEGAL not to show the chalk time on the ticket, as you said: "In the state on New York there is a pamphlet published by the Department of Finance that outlines (for the driver) all the things that must be properly filled out on a ticket in order for it to be valid. (Among them, by the way, is "first observed" for "violations requiring multiple sightings such as feeding the meter and overtime parking")

I can't find anything like that for the state of New Jersey."

If it's not ILLEGAL... well, draw your own conclusions.

And as for saving time by recording chalk times in writing, while I doubt there's a significant difference (though it depends on their method of issuing tickets), I know all about having to "cut corners" because of understaffing. You've got to do the best you can with what you have.

[The Occultist]

Whether or not the "first observed" time is required, I don't even see why anybody would care about that. What is the point of that space? To "prove" that the officer did indeed observe the vehicle at that time?