parking ticket in santa monica ca

[smithe]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? ca

In Santa Monica, CA , I have parked at a meter ( the new kind that takes credit cards ) and paid my money. The meter flashes green saying that I have 1.5 hours to park. I come back from my appointment and the meter is still flashing green. I notice I have a ticket. I can't figure out why they would give me a ticket. Then I see the ticket is for no parking street sweeping. I look for a sign. There is a sign stating the street sweeping hours. So why did the meter take my money and say I am ok to park for 1.5 hours.

The City of Los Angeles ' s parking meters (the new ones) will not accept your money or give you any time on the meter, if there is a parking restriction on the spot at the time you try to park there.

It is the same in other cities.

I am sure the City of Santa Monica is making a fortune on these tickets. Every other space on the street was filled with cars, and they also got tickets. Is this legal?

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? ca

In Santa Monica, CA , I have parked at a meter ( the new kind that takes credit cards ) and paid my money. The meter flashes green saying that I have 1.5 hours to park. I come back from my appointment and the meter is still flashing green. I notice I have a ticket. I can't figure out why they would give me a ticket. Then I see the ticket is for no parking street sweeping. I look for a sign. There is a sign stating the street sweeping hours. So why did the meter take my money and say I am ok to park for 1.5 hours.

The City of Los Angeles ' s parking meters (the new ones) will not accept your money or give you any time on the meter, if there is a parking restriction on the spot at the time you try to park there.

It is the same in other cities.

I am sure the City of Santa Monica is making a fortune on these tickets. Every other space on the street was filled with cars, and they also got tickets. Is this legal?

Of course it is - you can't park there during posted no-parking times. It's simple.

 

[sandyclaus]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? ca

In Santa Monica, CA , I have parked at a meter ( the new kind that takes credit cards ) and paid my money. The meter flashes green saying that I have 1.5 hours to park. I come back from my appointment and the meter is still flashing green. I notice I have a ticket. I can't figure out why they would give me a ticket. Then I see the ticket is for no parking street sweeping. I look for a sign. There is a sign stating the street sweeping hours. So why did the meter take my money and say I am ok to park for 1.5 hours.

The City of Los Angeles ' s parking meters (the new ones) will not accept your money or give you any time on the meter, if there is a parking restriction on the spot at the time you try to park there.

It is the same in other cities.

I am sure the City of Santa Monica is making a fortune on these tickets. Every other space on the street was filled with cars, and they also got tickets. Is this legal?

Of course it is - you can't park there during posted no-parking times. It's simple.

It seems that the meters in the City of LA are programmed to prevent foolish people from paying for parking that isn't available to them during restricted hours. The fact that the ones in the City of Santa Monica aren't doesn't make what the City is doing illegal. It just means they have higher expectations of the people who use the meters and figure they are smart enough to read the signs and NOT waste their money paying for parking when they aren't supposed to be parking.

 

[Sloop John D]

It seems that the meters in the City of LA are programmed to prevent foolish people from paying for parking that isn't available to them during restricted hours. The fact that the ones in the City of Santa Monica aren't doesn't make what the City is doing illegal. It just means they have higher expectations of the people who use the meters and figure they are smart enough to read the signs and NOT waste their money paying for parking when they aren't supposed to be parking.

I don't think there's any need for the attitude. It wouldn't be a stretch to say there's something misleading about setting up a metered space that says its available if you pay, then placing another sign nearby saying it actually isn't.

Although it might be confusing, it's not illegal. If you like, you can challenge the ticket. I think your best bet would be to point out that there are signs in conflict, with one saying there's no parking available, and another saying that parking is available if you pay. I think your odds of success are low, but it doesn't cost you anything to try.

 

[quincy]

I don't think there's any need for the attitude. It wouldn't be a stretch to say there's something misleading about setting up a metered space that says its available if you pay, then placing another sign nearby saying it actually isn't.

Although it might be confusing, it's not illegal. If you like, you can challenge the ticket. I think your best bet would be to point out that there are signs in conflict, with one saying there's no parking available, and another saying that parking is available if you pay. I think your odds of success are low, but it doesn't cost you anything to try.

As described by smithe, there were no "signs in conflict." There was a sign and there were meters. Nothing misleading.

You do not park in spaces with signs that say "Handicapped Parking" if you are not handicapped, do you, even though the meters for those spaces work? This is no different.

A driver is expected to read signs before parking in a space. Most drivers will not park, feed the meter after getting out of the parked car, and then look for signs to see if they are parking legally.

 

[Sloop John D]

As described by smithe, there were no "signs in conflict." There was a sign and there were meters. Nothing misleading.

You don't have to tell me it's unlikely to be successful. I pointed that fact out myself. Generally, though, I think it's better to give options and provide realistic expectations instead of just saying nothing can be done while patronizing the person who needs help.

 

[quincy]

... If you like, you can challenge the ticket. I think your best bet would be to point out that there are signs in conflict, with one saying there's no parking available, and another saying that parking is available if you pay. ...

Yes, Sloop John, challenging the ticket by telling the court you didn't read the visible sign - a sign that indicated parking was not allowed at the time you parked and paid - is certainly an option.

And, yes, there are always options and things that "can be done."

Other options when you are legitimately ticketed for a parking violation, for example, are to cry, to kick and stomp your feet, to say it's not fair, to say other cities work differently, to say "but everyone else did it, too," or to pay the ticket.

That said, smithe only asked if it was "legal" for Santa Monica to post "no parking" signs near working meters, and that question was answered correctly. It is legal. In fact, in most cities, it is not all that unusual (or that confusing).




(this was posted with patronizing attitude )

 

[smithe]

failure of city to properly program parking meter

Actually my point in my questions is this:

These parking meters are easily programmed in the city's main office to not accept payment when parking for the spot is restricted. The city failed to do so. So, when it accepts the money doesn't the city enter into a contract with me, that my payment allows me to park in the spot for the time shown on the meter.

 

[Silverplum]

Actually my point in my questions is this:

These parking meters are easily programmed in the city's main office to not accept payment when parking for the spot is restricted. The city failed to do so. So, when it accepts the money doesn't the city enter into a contract with me, that my payment allows me to park in the spot for the time shown on the meter.

Is that your view, after reading? Okay, then.

 

[quincy]

Actually my point in my questions is this:

These parking meters are easily programmed in the city's main office to not accept payment when parking for the spot is restricted. The city failed to do so. So, when it accepts the money doesn't the city enter into a contract with me, that my payment allows me to park in the spot for the time shown on the meter.

Then, if you intend to fight the ticket, you have another option not considered previously.

You can argue that you entered into a contract with the city when you paid for the parking (but, of course, you would have to ignore the fact that one of the terms of this contract was apparently not read or understood by you).

I do know that the argument wouldn't fly very well here in Michigan because we have the "new" meters and none of them are programmed. Drivers are expected to read the signs and only park at the times parking is allowed.

 

[Zigner]

Actually my point in my questions is this:

These parking meters are easily programmed in the city's main office to not accept payment when parking for the spot is restricted. The city failed to do so. So, when it accepts the money doesn't the city enter into a contract with me, that my payment allows me to park in the spot for the time shown on the meter.

The law has not changed since the time of "dumb meters" that couldn't be programmed at all. If the sign says no parking during certain hours, then there's no parking during those hours. It really IS that simple.

 

[Zigner]

You do not park in spaces with signs that say "Handicapped Parking" if you are not handicapped, do you, even though the meters for those spaces work? This is no different.

In CA, you don't have to pay for meters if you have a handicap placard/license plate.

(Of course, that has nothing to do with the overall message you're giving...I just thought I'd point it out since the OP's already heard he was wrong several times and just can't accept it.)

 

[quincy]

In CA, you don't have to pay for meters if you have a handicap placard/license plate.

(Of course, that has nothing to do with the overall message you're giving...I just thought I'd point it out since the OP's already heard he was wrong several times and just can't accept it.)

In fairness to smithe, it was Sloop John who first mentioned challenging the ticket. Perhaps this put the idea in smithe's head that there was a legitimate argument that could be made. Originally smithe just wanted to know the legality of having working meters next to no parking signs and, of course, it is perfectly legal.

Thanks for setting me straight on California's handicapped spaces.

 

[smithe]

santa monica's meters

The city of santa monica does program the meters. The only time they don't program the meters is for street sweeping.

 

[Zigner]

The city of santa monica does program the meters. The only time they don't program the meters is for street sweeping.

Irrelevant.