• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Muni Meter Credit Card Failure

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

nysal01

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New York, New York

Over many months, the City of New York has been replacing its many old-fashioned parking meters with "Muni Meters." These new Muni Meters supposedly offer motorists the convenience of paying with a credit card.

When the meters are working properly, a motorist inserts his or her credit card and then selects the amount of time he or she is purchasing. The Muni Meter will then display the message "Contacting Bank For Approval." If the card is "Approved" then a receipt is printed with the expiration time. The motorist must then leave the receipt on the vehicle's dashboard so that it is readable through the windshield. Credit card is listed as a payment option on any meter's rate placard, and is specified by NYC law.

On numerous occasions during this past year, I have tried to pay at a Muni Meter with a credit card and the display reads "Processing Error" and then "Transaction Finished." It seems that the Muni Meter wireless network has had a chronic recurring problem with authorizing credit cards, and DOT is aware of this and has said so in emails to me.

When a Muni Meter failed like I described, I called NYC's info number (311) on my cell phone. I filed a complaint and submitted a service request, and got a confirmation number each time. I placed a hand-written note on the dashboard that read "Muni Meter #xxx-xxxx Broken mm/dd/yy. Complaint Filed #c1-1-xxxxxxxxxx. On most of these occasions, I didn't get a ticket. But on two occasions, I did get tickets. The charge was the same both times: failure to display a Muni Meter receipt.

The first time, I pleaded Not Guilty online, describing my call to 311 and the service request number. The ticket was dismissed.

But on the other occasion, after I pleaded Not Guilty online, the ALJ declared that I AM guilty, because a check of the Muni Meter (at a later date) showed it to be in good working order.

I am currently appealing this decision. I have described the Muni Meter credit card problem, sent in photos of a Muni Meter failing as described, confirmation from NYC of the complaint, including an admission from the DOT of the Muni Meter system failure, my cell phone record of that call, and the legal precedent from the previous case.

I am hopeful that I will prevail.

nysal01
 
Last edited:


FlyingRon

Senior Member
You were lucky they let you out on your early appearances. Malfunctioning meters (either traditional or muni system) are not license to park illegally even with a complaint filed.
Since you knew you hadn't paid there isn't much legal defense to you parking anyhow.
 

The Occultist

Senior Member
FR is correct. The law is typically that if a meter is malfunctioning (this includes a parking meter that requires old-fashioned coin-change to be inserted), then the parking spot becomes a "no parking" zone.
 

nysal01

Junior Member
You were lucky they let you out on your early appearances. Malfunctioning meters (either traditional or muni system) are not license to park illegally even with a complaint filed.
Since you knew you hadn't paid there isn't much legal defense to you parking anyhow.
I think that I had parked legally, because the muni meter had malfunctioned. I tried other Muni Meters on the block too.

NYC law states that if a parking meter has malfunctioned, then a motorist MAY park at that location for no more than one hour, regardless of the posted time limit in that particular area. In the case of muni meters, motorists must first attempt to pay at another working muni meter on that same block. If all the meters on the block are broken, then the one hour rule applies. I looked it up.
 
Last edited:

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
You are not correct.

NYC law states that if a parking meter has malfunctioned, then a motorist MAY park at that location for no more than one hour, regardless of the posted time limit in that particular area. In the case of muni meters, motorists must first attempt to pay at another working muni meter on that same block. If all the meters on the block are broken, then the one hour rule applies. I looked it up.
If you looked it up, post the citation.
 

nysal01

Junior Member
If you looked it up, post the citation.
Section 4-08
PARKING, STOPPING, STANDING
[...]
(3) Parking at broken or missing meters.
(i) No person shall park a vehicle at a broken or failed meter for longer
than sixty minutes (one hour).
(ii) No person shall park a vehicle at a missing meter for longer than the
maximum amount of time lawfully permitted in that parking meter zone.
(iii) Where parking spaces in a parking field or on a block are controlled
by “Muni-Meters,” and a “Muni-Meter” is broken or missing, the person
seeking to purchase a parking receipt shall use a functional “Muni-Meter”
in the same parking field or on the same block, to purchase a parking
receipt and shall display it pursuant to paragraph 10 of this subdivision.
(a) If all “Muni-Meters” in a parking field or on a block are broken,
no person shall park a vehicle for longer than sixty minutes (one hour) in
or on such “Muni-Meter” controlled parking field or block.
Section 4-08
29
(b) If all “Muni-Meters” in a parking field or on a block are missing,
no person shall park a vehicle for longer than the maximum amount of
time lawfully permitted in or on such “Muni-Meter” controlled parking field
or block.



I read and reread your post. Was there a legal question in there somewhere or was this just a blog post?
You're right. I should have included question: "Has this ever happened to you? "
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Section 4-08
PARKING, STOPPING, STANDING
[...]
(3) Parking at broken or missing meters.
(i) No person shall park a vehicle at a broken or failed meter for longer
than sixty minutes (one hour).
(ii) No person shall park a vehicle at a missing meter for longer than the
maximum amount of time lawfully permitted in that parking meter zone.
(iii) Where parking spaces in a parking field or on a block are controlled
by “Muni-Meters,” and a “Muni-Meter” is broken or missing, the person
seeking to purchase a parking receipt shall use a functional “Muni-Meter”
in the same parking field or on the same block, to purchase a parking
receipt and shall display it pursuant to paragraph 10 of this subdivision.

(a) If all “Muni-Meters” in a parking field or on a block are broken,
no person shall park a vehicle for longer than sixty minutes (one hour) in
or on such “Muni-Meter” controlled parking field or block.
Section 4-08
29
(b) If all “Muni-Meters” in a parking field or on a block are missing,
no person shall park a vehicle for longer than the maximum amount of
time lawfully permitted in or on such “Muni-Meter” controlled parking field
or block.





You're right. I should have included question: "Has this ever happened to you? "
So, the long and short of it is that your citation was valid (both of them) - and by the time you posted your question, you had already done the research to prove it!
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
If the Munimeter functions properly when taking cash (quarters) or parking cards, the mere failure of the credit card authorization system will not get you out of a ticket absent a really, really lenient ALJ. You were lucky to get out of the earlier ticket.
 

nysal01

Junior Member
If the Munimeter functions properly when taking cash (quarters) or parking cards, the mere failure of the credit card authorization system will not get you out of a ticket absent a really, really lenient ALJ. You were lucky to get out of the earlier ticket.
Why should luck or leniency have anything to do with this?

The first judge said that my statements of fact (meter failure, complaint, etc.) justified a dismissal. I assumed that this ruling was based on the law and not the judge's temperament. If so, then isn't the same thing true in this second case ?
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
Why should luck or leniency have anything to do with this?

The first judge said that my statements of fact (meter failure, complaint, etc.) justified a dismissal. I assumed that this ruling was based on the law and not the judge's temperament. If so, then isn't the same thing true in this second case ?
What part of my post is unclear? There are 3 potential ways to pay. If 2 of 3 work, the meter, while not fully operational, is also not "broken", either. Thus, the ALJ took some pity on you and let you off the hook when he did not technically have to. I'm merely telling you not to expect similar results every time you go to contest a parking ticket.
 

nysal01

Junior Member
What part of my post is unclear? There are 3 potential ways to pay. If 2 of 3 work, the meter, while not fully operational, is also not "broken", either. Thus, the ALJ took some pity on you and let you off the hook when he did not technically have to. I'm merely telling you not to expect similar results every time you go to contest a parking ticket.
Which law states that if 2 of 3 work the meter is not broken? Did I miss something?

If the coin mechanism becomes jammed and the meter will not accept coins, then must a motorist pay with a card ?
 
Last edited:

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top