I'm a local CEO (Civil Enforcement Officer - parking attendant in lay-mans terms), and would be willing to listen to you all your questions and queries about parking in West Berkshire. I will try to provide sensible, factually correct answers.. My presence here is not officialy sanctioned, so I may be limited in terms of the answers I am able to give.
If i get abuse from anyone, I will just not participate. We all have a job to do, and would rather do this job than scrounge from the State.
Welcome to the site greenmeanie it will be interesting to get your perspective. Think you are a braver man than me to raise your head above the parapet, hope you have a tough skin too.
We're a civilised part of the country (sort of) but have any of the team been physically abused or spat at? (You hear about it in other areas where parking is done by CEOs rather than the police but assume that it's a step too far around here) Do you carry DNA kits in case being spat at...? (That is, to collect DNA as evidence AFTER you've rammed your pocket book up the little scrote's alimentary canal)
Personally, as I've argued on this board numerous times, without the CEOs, without parking restrictions, without a means to move people on or prosecute them when they block parking spaces all day long, any town would quickly grind to a halt. Nobody likes getting a ticket and will always try to wriggle out of it when they DO get one, but parking measures are here to stay and they serve a purpose. And my relatives living in the Westfields area where permit parking is in place think it's great now, as the police traffic warden hardly ever used to visit or ticket 'over-stayers'
I'm a local CEO (Civil Enforcement Officer - parking attendant in lay-mans terms), and would be willing to listen to you all your questions and queries about parking in West Berkshire. I will try to provide sensible, factually correct answers.. My presence here is not officialy sanctioned, so I may be limited in terms of the answers I am able to give.
If i get abuse from anyone, I will just not participate. We all have a job to do, and would rather do this job than scrounge from the State.
So, who is going to start?
If I get abuse I won't participate. Is that like the signs firms who are useless at customer service asking you not to abuse the staff!!! In other words, we are so badly managed we can't take the knocks.
If I get abuse I won't participate. Is that like the signs firms who are useless at customer service asking you not to abuse the staff!!! In other words, we are so badly managed we can't take the knocks.
No it is not like that at all; it is just common courtesy. No one is under any obligation to be here. If you just want to spoil it for everyone, carry on being rude, but this person could possibly give us some useful information and help us understand things better!
If I get abuse I won't participate. Is that like the signs firms who are useless at customer service asking you not to abuse the staff!!! In other words, we are so badly managed we can't take the knocks.
Isn't it more common courtesy that one doesn't swear at, spit at or assault the staff of a service you are using.
Surely you must agree that it's not "bad management" if an organisation requests that you refrain from doing so?
We're a civilised part of the country (sort of) but have any of the team been physically abused or spat at? (You hear about it in other areas where parking is done by CEOs rather than the police but assume that it's a step too far around here) Do you carry DNA kits in case being spat at...? (That is, to collect DNA as evidence AFTER you've rammed your pocket book up the little scrote's alimentary canal)
I have noticed your staunch defence of us Spartcus, thank you!!
To be honest, we rarely experience physical abuse. Most of the time, its low level verbal abuse, which is usually water off a ducks back. However, the things people say to us sometimes are totally disgusting.
We can understand why people get upset, a parking ticket isn't a nice thing to receive, but unfortunatly, if you break the rules, then you have to expect the possiblilty of getting one, and equally, we have to expect the possibilty of a bit of abuse. Most of the time, its all to do with how WE handle the situation which dictates how abusive the customer gets. We have had a couple of incidents of physical abuse, including having drivers attepmt to run us over, but the Police have been involved in these situations
Perhaps I'll rephrase my first post. Its not that I wont participate, I won't respond to silly/abusive questions etc, but I can take a bit of abuse...one can't do this job if that sort of thing bothers you We are managed well, with generally consistant enforcement across the board. There will always be bad apples in any job, but generally, the team of CEO's are very professional and helpful. We are very aware of the fact that we are providing a service to the public. # and, NO, i'm not Martyn Baker in disguise!!
One of the problems, and I can't think of a workable alternative, is the fines. To some it is a huge amount of money, if it is a genuine mistake; to others, it is loose change for a deliberate infringement.
One of the problems, and I can't think of a workable alternative, is the fines. To some it is a huge amount of money, if it is a genuine mistake; to others, it is loose change for a deliberate infringement.
I understand your point, £25 or £35 can make the difference of someone on a small budget. The fines are set by central government, namely the Department of Transport, and West Berkshire Council have adopted the lower end scale of fines..
The thing is, the fines are obviously meant to be the deterrant, but people always like to chance it...
Plus, if you dont have much money, then one could argue that one should pay even more attention to the rules. Its just like Blockbuster...if one can't afford to pay the late fine, then return it on time!
To reiterate: it is a lot of money for someone hard-up, who has made a genuine mistake (you can't make a deliberate mistake), but it can be loose change for someone who is well off, who doesn't care much about the rules.
I'm not saying Newbury is worse, or different, but it is one reason people are resentfull.
To reiterate: it is a lot of money for someone hard-up, who has made a genuine mistake (you can't make a deliberate mistake), but it can be loose change for someone who is well off, who doesn't care much about the rules.
I'm not saying Newbury is worse, or different, but it is one reason people are resentfull.
Isn't it more common courtesy that one doesn't swear at, spit at or assault the staff of a service you are using.
Surely you must agree that it's not "bad management" if an organisation requests that you refrain from doing so?
I'm afraid I think its appauling management. Just like Call Centres who 'can't put you through to our Manager'. The vast majority of people don't get angry when things go as they should - if they do its a one off and very rare. Where they do get frustrated is when they are up against insitutionalised incompetence, petty bureacracy, or incompetent processes. Where there is no process for staff to put things to right - that boils over into anger.
I have yet to encounter an organisation where staff don't have some opportunity to report issues back to management. Regrettably I also know too many who don't do anything about them.
So where an organisation has had to resort to spending money to install such signs it does signify bad management. I know for fact that that contention is shared by staffs working for the Railways, Post Office, some Banks, Local and National Government departments.
Internationally we have a poor reputation for grumbling and simply accepting poor service. So it takes a pretty rotten experience to make the average Brit explode - so those signs really do signify bad management.
No it is not like that at all; it is just common courtesy. No one is under any obligation to be here. If you just want to spoil it for everyone, carry on being rude, but this person could possibly give us some useful information and help us understand things better!
I don't see this as being rude. In fact I found the original comment boorish - for reasons I've also outlined. The comment didn't need to be made - that is common courtesy.
I don't see this as being rude. In fact I found the original comment boorish - for reasons I've also outlined. The comment didn't need to be made - that is common courtesy.
I simply didn't see the comment in the same light as you, nor did I see your analogy as suitable. I would imagine the poster is simply referring to the occasional ignorance and rudeness of on this and other forums of its ilk.
"If I get abuse from anyone, I will just not participate." Hardly boorish, is it?
I'm afraid I think its appauling management. Just like Call Centres who 'can't put you through to our Manager'. The vast majority of people don't get angry when things go as they should - if they do its a one off and very rare. Where they do get frustrated is when they are up against insitutionalised incompetence, petty bureacracy, or incompetent processes. Where there is no process for staff to put things to right - that boils over into anger.
I have yet to encounter an organisation where staff don't have some opportunity to report issues back to management. Regrettably I also know too many who don't do anything about them.
So where an organisation has had to resort to spending money to install such signs it does signify bad management. I know for fact that that contention is shared by staffs working for the Railways, Post Office, some Banks, Local and National Government departments.
Internationally we have a poor reputation for grumbling and simply accepting poor service. So it takes a pretty rotten experience to make the average Brit explode - so those signs really do signify bad management.
So if you assault for example a Post Office employee that's the fault of bad management of the Post Office? Back on topic, would you spit at or hit a "meanie" and blame it on bad management too?
Utterly bizarre one of the worst examples of shirking personal responsibility I've ever heard of, which is something far too prevalent in today's society.
So if you assault for example a Post Office employee that's the fault of bad management of the Post Office? Back on topic, would you spit at or hit a "meanie" and blame it on bad management too.
Utterly bizarre one of the worst examples of shirking personal responsibility I've ever heard of, which is something far too prevalent in today's society.
You know exactly what I mean and I suspect you'd are one of the 'managers' who would resort to such incompetence. As to the personal attack, again, I sincerely hope that the suggestions often made here that you work for WBC are without foundation. In my view the attitudes you demonstrate aren't really compatible with public service.
I simply didn't see the comment in the same light as you, nor did I see your analogy as suitable. I would imagine the poster is simply referring to the occasional ignorance and rudeness of on this and other forums of its ilk.
"If I get abuse from anyone, I will just not participate." Hardly boorish, is it?
To reiterate: it is a lot of money for someone hard-up, who has made a genuine mistake (you can't make a deliberate mistake), but it can be loose change for someone who is well off, who doesn't care much about the rules.
I'm not saying Newbury is worse, or different, but it is one reason people are resentfull.
All fines, not just motoring, should be on a percentage of salary basis. A fine should be a deterant, where is the deterant in a pro footballer receiving a £100 fine that he works a few minutes for, but all a pensioner has to live on for a week.
It did happen in the 90s, but it stated to hurt the well-off, so it seems, and it was dropped! The means test become unworkable. I do agree with you though.
Boor - Like a churlish, rude, or unmannerly person.
How can the passage be any of those? Brusque maybe, but not boorish.
The comment didn't need to be made - it would have been polite not to have said anything. To do so was to suggest that such a reaction was normal and expected. As these were opening remarks - I would say that's being churlish touching on rude. Rather like going into a shop or reception area for the first time and seeing a notice asking you to be polite. ...Do I really need to spell it out?
You know exactly what I mean and I suspect you'd are one of the 'managers' who would resort to such incompetence. As to the personal attack, again, I sincerely hope that the suggestions often made here that you work for WBC are without foundation. In my view the attitudes you demonstrate aren't really compatible with public service.
You have suggested those that are physically assaulted suffer such a fate because of "bad management" and now you seem to have launched into an attack on me and seem to be bickering with others. Everyone reading this can draw their own conclusions.
You have suggested those that are physically assaulted suffer such a fate because of "bad management" and now you seem to have launched into an attack on me and seem to be bickering with others. Everyone reading this can draw their own conclusions.
No, as per usual, you get the wrong end of the stick, on purpose I suspect. I have no doubt that no manager would condone physical or verbal abuse but if it does happen frequently under normal face to face interviews then there is a problem that needs investigation. Putting up a sign is strike one for anybody wishing to complain or resolve a problem. It says we get a lot of abusive people in here so watch out. If there are a lot of abusive people at the desk, the question must be why and what are we doing wrong.
I have seen these signs in hospital casualty outpatients departments and I know that staff do meet confrontational people from time to time, usually drunks who probably can't read anyway so why bother with a sign.
No, as per usual, you get the wrong end of the stick, on purpose I suspect. I have no doubt that no manager would condone physical or verbal abuse but if it does happen frequently under normal face to face interviews then there is a problem that needs investigation. Putting up a sign is strike one for anybody wishing to complain or resolve a problem. It says we get a lot of abusive people in here so watch out. If there are a lot of abusive people at the desk, the question must be why and what are we doing wrong.
I have seen these signs in hospital casualty outpatients departments and I know that staff do meet confrontational people from time to time, usually drunks who probably can't read anyway so why bother with a sign.
Putting up a sign is strike one for anybody wishing to hurt any employee of that organisation because of any grievance they may have.
It's good management and no doubt cuts the number of assaults which is better for everyone involved. It doesn't say "we get a lot of abusive people here" it says "some of our staff have been caused physically distress by a few people".
Why and what are hospitals doing wrong so that they have to put up a sign asking for their staff not to be assaulted?
it would have been polite not to have said anything.
He's laying his cards on the table; I see nothing more than that. It wasn't an impolite thing to post. He is saying, if I am abused I will ignore it, what is wrong or rude with that?
As these were opening remarks - I would say that's being churlish touching on rude. Rather like going into a shop or reception area for the first time and seeing a notice asking you to be polite. ...Do I really need to spell it out?
They were his closing remarks and frankly, people on here do need reminding.
Quoted from 9
No, as per usual, you get the wrong end of the stick, on purpose I suspect.
On this point, I don't think user23 has.
Old Goat is making a mountain out of a mole-hill with regards to greenmeanie61's opening post.
You know exactly what I mean and I suspect you'd are one of the 'managers' who would resort to such incompetence. As to the personal attack, again, I sincerely hope that the suggestions often made here that you work for WBC are without foundation. In my view the attitudes you demonstrate aren't really compatible with public service.
Unfortunately he does work for WBC - which explains a lot!
Old Goat is making a mountain out of a mole-hill with regards to greenmeanie61's opening post.
This thread has become a great example why forums like this are no place for sensible debate as we were talking about in another thread.
People don't want to talk with "the authorities" as you put it in the other thread, they want a scapegoat to get personal with and take all their gripes out on as seems to have happened with the original poster who has taken some of his free time to answer questions about his job.
You have suggested those that are physically assaulted suffer such a fate because of "bad management" and now you seem to have launched into an attack on me and seem to be bickering with others. Everyone reading this can draw their own conclusions.
You should try to moderate your own sanctimonious approach. Your usual line is to make personal attacks right from the start as you did to me here. I find you impossibly rude and to be honest somewhat lacking in several areas. This is perhaps why you have also started to suggest these forums are a waste of time - for you, personally, yes they are. No, I'm not going to 'put you on ignore' because that's what I would expect someone cowardly and unable to defend their opinions properly and without resorting to personal insult to do. Sleep well.
This thread has become a great example why forums like this are no place for sensible debate as we were talking about in another thread.
No this is just a petty squabble. No one need reply, as would be the prerogative of any 'official' presence. I don't see it as a reasonable argument in this case. For example: greenmeanie61 has made his point and now it leaves us to have a row; one which is off topic anyway, but that is down to how well the forum is moderated.
You should try to moderate your own sanctimonious approach. Your usual line is to make personal attacks right from the start as you did to me here. I find you impossibly rude and to be honest somewhat lacking in several areas. This is perhaps why you have also started to suggest these forums are a waste of time - for you, personally, yes they are. No, I'm not going to 'put you on ignore' because that's what I would expect someone cowardly and unable to defend their opinions properly and without resorting to personal insult to do. Sleep well.
Of course I didn't make a personal attack on you, I criticised what you had posted. If you can't take a bit of criticism of your point of view or see the difference between this and a personal attack perhaps you're in the wrong place.
Besides even if I did it would have been bad management on your part that caused it, wouldn't it? That's what you've been arguing.
I don't doubt for one second it did. I know what it is like here.
He's laying his cards on the table; I see nothing more than that. It wasn't an impolite thing to post. He is saying, if I am abused I will ignore it, what is wrong or rude with that?
Nonsense; however, he is correct what ever the intention.
They were his closing remarks and frankly, people on here do need reminding.
On this point, I don't think user23 has.
Old Goat is making a mountain out of a mole-hill with regards to greenmeanie61's opening post.
Well we'll just have to agree to differ. I did find the initial response somewhat 'nannyish'. Its just how you treat kids. Wholly unnecessary.
All fines, not just motoring, should be on a percentage of salary basis.
The 'unit fine' system was introduced in 1991 was discontinued pretty sharpish amid much derision. As I recall, the end came when a rich business man managed to get his accountant to show that he had almost no disposable income and thus recieved almost no fine for an offence whilst some unemployed chap with low outgoings was fined over a grand for thowing away a crisp packet.
The 'unit fine' system was introduced in 1991 was discontinued amid much derision. As I recall, the end came when a rich business man managed to get his accountant to show that he had almost no disposable income and thus recieved almost no fine for an offence whilst some unemployed chap with low outgoings was fined over a grand for thowing away a crisp packet.
It's been tried, it just didn't work.
Threep.
Perhaps the answer would be for those persons parking where they shouldn't or overstaying their limit to be given a choice for a first offence, pay the fine or attend a two hour course on how and where to park. If they really can't afford the fine here would be the way out with some instruction on the side. They call it speed awareness if you get a speeding ticket so it could be called parking awareness.
Perhaps the answer would be for those persons parking where they shouldn't or overstaying their limit to be given a choice for a first offence, pay the fine or attend a two hour course on how and where to park. If they really can't afford the fine here would be the way out with some instruction on the side. They call it speed awareness if you get a speeding ticket so it could be called parking awareness.
That's not such a bad idea. Going back to dealing with those who really can afford to pay for a moment. There are some who think that the fine is a minor inconvenience and can afford 'repeat offences' If they were made to do a two hour stint instead of a fine, that would potentially have a greater effect on them as well so hit the money rich / time poor people for once.
......Utterly bizarre one of the worst examples of shirking personal responsibility I've ever heard of, which is something far too prevalent in today's society.....
So that's not a personal attack? I agree shirking responsibility by managers in certain sectors is far too prevalent - hence the signs. I'm just sorry you can't see that.
So that's not a personal attack? I agree shirking responsibility by managers in certain sectors is far too prevalent - hence the signs. I'm just sorry you can't see that.
Of course it's not a personal attack, I'm talking about the example raised in the previous sentence. It's only a personal attack if you're one of the yobbos I'm talking about in my example. Don't get upset and take it so personally if someone questions your point of view. Admin might have to put up one of those signs you seem to have this weird hang up about.
Of course it's not a personal attack, I'm talking about the example raised in the previous sentence. It's only a personal attack if you're one of the yobbos I'm talking about in my example. Don't get upset and take it so personally if someone questions your point of view. Admin might have to put up one of those signs you seem to have this weird hang up about.
That's not how I read it and have no weird hang up - my view is based on many years experience operating and managing staff in difficult and generally challenging customer handling situtions.
So I wholly agree - random and unprovoked attacks on Postmen or indeed anyone is wholly unacceptable. In the same category as what happens in certain inner city areas where elements of the loocal populace find it acceptable to attack emergency service vehicles in their neighbourhood etc. etc. Of course that's not bad management. However, it is perhaps bad policing and highlighting the needs so often mentioned here about the need to keep on top of that.
Nevertheless, these incidents are rare - that's why they made headlines. Management adding signs and so forth where it isn't an issue - simply hightens concern by the staff; who are then on the defensive and see any raised voice or robust rebuttal of shoddy service as the start of a far more serious attack. Rather like the inept interpretation of 'Data Protection Act' or 'Human Rights Legislation' which is used so often as a shield to cover poor and inadequate process. This in turn infuriates the customer - so escalating the issue simply because of frustration.
So often, organisations put people in front of customers with absolutely no training or back up support. Hardly surprising things go wrong. Just a day is all it takes - and the front line staff won't need special signage to protect them.
For the stuff we see in Hospital A&E departments and the news reports - that is a Police and criminal justice matter.
Oh dear - I've upset teacher. Well boys, I'll leave you to it! Anyway, when you get to big School you'll discover debate is all about people with differing views, sometimes quite radically different views. John Wilkes please come back!
So what is your question, or do you know all the answers?
No I don't. Actually have no questions at all. Strong supporter of parking enforcement. The issue I had was how the question was posed. When it comes to gift horses - I always check the teeth...
EVERYBODY CALM DOWN, NOW!! This is the problem with forums...too many egos and petty arguments
If any of you have any PARKING related questions, go right ahead, otheriwse, I ain't interested to be honest. I'm not here to make silly points or to prove anyone wrong. I will provide sensible and factually correct answers to any Parking related queries.
Well chaps and chapesses, now that the dust has settled, on this and the other thread.............
Mr GM you said....I Quote, If any of you have any PARKING related questions, go right ahead, otheriwse, I ain't interested to be honest. I'm not here to make silly points or to prove anyone wrong. I will provide sensible and factually correct answers to any Parking related queries.
But you did perhaps invite a negative response by your thread heading. Again I quote...
I have an actual question !!!! I have to drive down Kings Road West quite often later at night. This has a single yellow line. Is there nothing that can be done to stop people parking on this road as it is a nightmare. You come round the corner and can't see really if anything is coming up. Also I have quite often had people walk out from behind one of the parked cars. Obviously you personally can't make this a double yellow but from what time of they day are they allowed to park on a single yellow?
I have an actual question !!!! I have to drive down Kings Road West quite often later at night. This has a single yellow line. Is there nothing that can be done to stop people parking on this road as it is a nightmare. You come round the corner and can't see really if anything is coming up. Also I have quite often had people walk out from behind one of the parked cars. Obviously you personally can't make this a double yellow but from what time of they day are they allowed to park on a single yellow?
Hi Pink
The section of Single Yellow Lines you are referring to operate between 8am and 6pm, Monday to Saturday. It is legal to park here outside of these times. Most single yellow lines apply between the same times, but not all are the same. There should always a sign stating the hours of operation, so be sure to check the times on the sign before you park. Obstructions to the highway or dangerous parking is a Police matter, as they are still criminal offences.
Perhaps the answer would be for those persons parking where they shouldn't or overstaying their limit to be given a choice for a first offence, pay the fine or attend a two hour course on how and where to park. If they really can't afford the fine here would be the way out with some instruction on the side. They call it speed awareness if you get a speeding ticket so it could be called parking awareness.
No, the answer is for people to park where they should. It is a no-brainer to understand that in 2010 you can't just park where you want to . Those that get tickets are just chancers.
Perhaps the answer would be for those persons parking where they shouldn't or overstaying their limit to be given a choice for a first offence, pay the fine or attend a two hour course on how and where to park. If they really can't afford the fine here would be the way out with some instruction on the side. They call it speed awareness if you get a speeding ticket so it could be called parking awareness.
No, the answer is for people to park where they should. It is a no-brainer to understand that in 2010 you can't just park where you want to . Those that get tickets are just chancers.
EVERYBODY CALM DOWN, NOW!! This is the problem with forums...too many egos and petty arguments
If any of you have any PARKING related questions, go right ahead, otheriwse, I ain't interested to be honest. I'm not here to make silly points or to prove anyone wrong. I will provide sensible and factually correct answers to any Parking related queries.
No, the answer is for people to park where they should. It is a no-brainer to understand that in 2010 you can't just park where you want to . Those that get tickets are just chancers.
EVERYBODY CALM DOWN, NOW!! This is the problem with forums...too many egos and petty arguments
If any of you have any PARKING related questions, go right ahead, otheriwse, I ain't interested to be honest. I'm not here to make silly points or to prove anyone wrong. I will provide sensible and factually correct answers to any Parking related queries.
No, the answer is for people to park where they should. It is a no-brainer to understand that in 2010 you can't just park where you want to . Those that get tickets are just chancers.
Indeed! I visit different places all over the south outside of work, and I've never got a parking ticket (apart from on purpose because I know I can appeal ) Parking rules aren't a secret y'know, everyone can find them out
Are you sure you didn't mean to say "Book 'em Danno!" or "Geta proper job" or "You're mother must be so proud" or something similarly banal ?
Anyway, leaving aside the fact that I've been asked that about 20 times so far this week, I sleep well thanks, extremely well I wonder what your job is?
Indeed! I visit different places all over the south outside of work, and I've never got a parking ticket (apart from on purpose because I know I can appeal ) Parking rules aren't a secret y'know, everyone can find them out
...
GM61
Presumably that is with your "park anywhere lights" flashing!!
Now didn't we used to have a gentleman on here who also had the park anywhere syndrome and could run rings round any parking ticket because the line wasn't the right thickness or something similar. You remember, right know it all who drove some exotic car and used two parking bays so that his paintwork didn't get scratched. He would also have solved the Victoria park cracking up mystery. Mate of User 23.
Now didn't we used to have a gentleman on here who also had the park anywhere syndrome and could run rings round any parking ticket because the line wasn't the right thickness or something similar. You remember, right know it all who drove some exotic car and used two parking bays so that his paintwork didn't get scratched. He would also have solved the Victoria park cracking up mystery. Mate of User 23.
Now didn't we used to have a gentleman on here who also had the park anywhere syndrome and could run rings round any parking ticket because the line wasn't the right thickness or something similar. You remember, right know it all who drove some exotic car and used two parking bays so that his paintwork didn't get scratched. He would also have solved the Victoria park cracking up mystery. Mate of User 23.
Can't remember what he posted as but he had form for getting banned from other forums for being a WuM. I think I put him on Ignore in the end as he was just here to bicker.
I remember one long thread about how he was going to expose the authorities for lack of road repairs to get back at them for receiving a parking ticket and other general threads about how he could do things much better on nearly every subject.
Can't remember whether he got banned or just left but didn't the forum get hacked not long after?
Logged
Male
Female
