The Herald yesterday ran one of the old faithful’s they do from time to time when there’s not much news going on, complain about how much voluntary tax motorists are paying to Auckland Transport.
Motorists have forked out more than $100 million in parking and vehicle fines from Auckland Transport over four years – and owe plenty more.
The council body collected $22.9 million last financial year, out of total parking charges and enforcement of $72.8 million.
Although that was down on the $23.6 million received from a total $73.2 million the previous year, the Automobile Association is disappointed at what it sees as an unabated parking blitz.
More than $52 million reaped from fines since Auckland Transport was set up in late 2010 has been for parking or bus and transit lane breaches, and just over $47 million for infringements carrying far higher penalties.
But the AA is more forgiving of action taken on unsafe vehicles. Most fines – at $200 a time – have been for failing to display valid warrants of fitness or registration stickers, although figures the agency gave the Herald under official information legislation show motorists have also received $160,000 in notices for worn or damaged tyres.
The figures show $24.4 million in unpaid fines, but Auckland Transport appears to have waived or forfeited about $16.6 million since 2010 by granting exemptions or withdrawing notices during court proceedings.
Although vehicle infringement notices issued in 2013-14 eased by 3500 to 114,000, parking tickets kept growing. The AA says the 319,500 issued last year – up from 288,000 in 2011-12 – point to systemic failure.
“In our view, Auckland Transport is focusing too much on enforcement, and not enough on helping people to comply,” said spokesman Barney Irvine.
So let’s get this straight, there’s been $100 million in fines over four years ($25m per year) and the results for the last two years are both below that average and show a the amount being collected from fines is declining. In other words the trend is heading in exactly the direction the Herald and the AA say they want. Far from complaining, the two organisations should be praising AT for the getting things moving in the right direction.
What the Herald and the AA should be more concerned about is why there’s $24.4 million in unpaid fines and why AT have waived or forfeited an additional $16.6 million. That $41 million from AT’s accounts could be enough to pay for a heap of other projects like bus (and rail) interchanges, new bus lanes, new cycle lanes etc. This is especially the case considering the council’s funding shortage.
They should also be commending AT for the enforcement they do – which from my observations could be a lot more. Cars parking too long prevents other road users – some of which will be AA members – from being able to find a car park when they might need one. Bus and transit lane fines work to deter people from using the lanes as a shortcut but that inevitably ends up delaying buses or higher occupancy cars. In the case of buses delays from ineffective bus lanes has a realistic impact on bus users (and potential users) and can also have an financial impact as more buses might need to be run to maintain the same the frequencies. That would almost definitely mean more subsidies were needed which I’m sure both the Herald and AA would complain about.
It wasn’t all negative though
Mr Irvine welcomed a 10-minute grace period before parking charges apply in Auckland’s CBD, but pleaded for more leniency for motorists miscalculating how long they need to leave their vehicles.
This is funny in a way as I’ve heard it was the AA who were the most upset when AT announced they would change the parking scheme in the CBD a few years ago that introduced the 10 minute grace period and no time restrictions providing you were prepared to pay – although to be fair that was from before Barney’s time. I don’t have the figures on me but I do remember hearing that the changes had been wildly successful and not only car park turnover increase (representing more people getting utility from it) but also that infringements dropped as the system was easier to understand.
Furthermore AT’s draft parking discussion document highlights a number potential future changes to parking across the region including rolling out the CBD scheme to more locations as well as better handling of other problem areas.
At the end of the day there is always going to need to be some sort of enforcement to ensure that people comply with the rules but of the aspects of these fines in particular is that they’re all voluntary. Don’t want a ticket for driving in the bus lane then don’t drive in it, don’t want a parking ticket then don’t park your car for too long. It’s simply really.
While we’re on the topic of parking, I was pleased to see AT had staff actively managing vehicles in Federal St the other day and saw it again in O’Connell St yesterday. It’s great that this is happening
Processing...
So us ratepayers are now $32 more in debt each as a result of fines being waived or forfeited. Shocking!
Source: 518,784 Auckland ratepayers according to http://ratepayersreport.co.nz/
So one way to look at this is that the NZ Herald thinks drivers in Auckland are unable to read or do simple math.
But seriously this type of article makes me both angry and sad as it epitomises the prevailing attitude in Auckland “Its OK if I do it but not the other person”
Its like people think they can park where they want and for as long as they want.
Well there is my rant for the morning
That’s pretty mild. I’m sure you can do better this afternoon. Of course, Friday afternoons are somewhat mellowing.
Yes, a reflection of the insane attitude of entitlement that seems to be part of the package of car ownership for many people. Just like the ‘right’ to speed (just a little bit!), not use indicators, etc.
I struggle to understand people’s agonised confusion over this stuff.
Get out of car, and check maximum parking time on sign or on meter. Check time on phone/watch/whatever and tell self “I need to make sure I am back before [X].”
If not sure you *are* going to be able to back before [X], move car to somewhere you can park for longer, or feed extra coin into meter just in case you are back slightly later.
Accept the fact that this is the cost of being able to park on a public road near a busy destination, without being held up by others who have been parking too long.
Put parking docket in window (if applicable), take deep breath and get on with your life.
If I wander up to Lorne Street with a stack of library books five days overdue, I am going to have to cough up some money. The librarian is probably not going to sympathise if I say I miscalculated the timing of 7 February and tell them that they are focused too much on enforcement and not enough on helping me to comply. It is my responsibility to make sure I can return my library books, or move my car, within the time that is allotted to me. If I overstay the parking time, or the library due date and get fined, I take a deep breath, realise I should have been better organised, and consider it a voluntary contribution to the cost of these services.
Some people obviously believe that they should always have a generous tolerance for every rule applicable to them, and become completely aggrieved if they are ever punished for breaking them. I wonder if they view other people’s run-ins with (say) Immigration or the Police in the same way.
Lets be clear – lumping normal parking and bus/transit lane fines together means the average fine is increased by quite some amount.
Parking fines for going over time (or not paying at all) are usually $12 and up, driving in a bus lane is a flat $150.
So on that basis 15 non paying/overtime parkers amounts to the same revenue for council as 1 person in the bus lane.
And thats fair, as that 1 bus lane driver can impact a bus of 40+ people.
If anything AT should step up enforcement on bus lanes and roll out more bus lanes to re-privilege those who are not driving.
As for the comment that ” just over $47 million for infringements carrying far higher penalties.”
That presumably would be for warrant of fitness or no valid registration or clearway breeches? Can’t think what else you’d get stung over $150 for.
And while fining old dungers with no warrant or rego is good, often those folks won’t pay their fines anyway (or even have the car in their name to ever be made to pay/lose their license).
But strangely the fine for parking in a bus lane is only $60, potentially impacting hundreds of buses, and thousands of passengers.
Surely if you parked in a bus lane, it’s evidence that you drove in the bus lane to get to the park, therefore you should get the $150 fine and the $60 fine.
If AT reduces enforcement as Barney asks, where do they start? A 20 minute grace period? Turning a blind eye? The system would break down without enforcement and I agree with the comment about simple math. Got a ticket? Too bad. I believe, though, that parking agencies are well aware of human behaviour and know they can count of people to cooperate in increasing revenue. Traffic and parking fines represent a pretty good return on the dollar.
Related: the speeding driver in today’s sideswipe (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sideswipe/news/article.cfm?c_id=702&objectid=11387032)
5 speeding tickets in 1 year is a pattern of behaviour. I’m not a sedate driver, but I’ve only managed one in 15 years (and that was that pesky variable speed downhill on the approach to Wellington, I missing the sign, honest! ;P)
I got a ticket in a similar place, however I managed to appeal it successfully as the camera van was operating less than 250m away from the speed change from 100 to 80kph. The Ngauranga speed camera is designed to catch out of towners :D. From what I know, the irish driver probably got used to driving within the tolerence, and the tolerence over in Ireland is likely to be much higher than our tolerence. In my opinion, five ‘low speeding’ tickets is not a pattern of behavior.
I’d love to know where he pulled the 130 kmph on Irish motorways figure too…
While I’ve seen people doing this – and much more – not getting caught/fined for it isn’t the same as being allowed to do it.
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/travel_and_recreation/roads_and_safety/road_traffic_speed_limits_in_ireland.html
That photo of federal st shows what a dark hole it is – who or what would want to linger there except a car?
Might be nice for 1 hour a day when the sun shines straight down the street, but thats not a recipe for long term successful activated space.
This is a dead still-born shared-space and SkyCity think its so great – certainly bodes ill for the Convention centre too but we know that already…
Do the crime,pay the fine. The bus lane one, make it more attractive for the police, give a good proportion directly to their social club. Personally would ramp it up and revenue goes to direct to PT infrastructure. So everyone time someone goes in, thankyou for helping this mode out.
How come the AA was asked for its views, but not the other insurance companies?
Because the AA is a motoring organization, who happen to have franchised their brand to an insurance company. Plenty of drivers belong to the AA but insure with another insurance company.
Why is the AA coming out in support of some of its members (and non members) who are parking to too long, or dringing in bus lanes or whatever, at the expense of others of its members who can’t find parks or are hled up in busses. If I was an AA member who obeyed the rules I’d be annoyed, but those are probably a silent majority. The article is banal and to be ignored.
If some drivers are ignorant of rules (road code) around parking and driving in special vehicle lanes (transit, bus, cycle) then surely NZTA’s responsibility is one of educating motorists and AT/Police’s responsibility is simply enforcement.
.
I agree wholeheartedly with this article.
If a parking spot says 90 minutes it’s 90 minutes. Unlike a speedometer there is no ambiguity with a wristwatch. If a car is parked for 90 minutes and 1 second the authorities are entitled to ticket it.
As for getting off fines my blood boils. These people must have assets (car perhaps?) so take recovery action against the individual and sell their assets (plus costs). How people have fines rescinded is beyond me.
It’s also nice to see an article on here that recognises the Council has funding issues. Congratulations on this piece Matt.
Am I right in reading that if we collected 100% of the fines levied, we could then eliminate a decent portion of the CRL costs? What’s the cost over/unders of chasing up these non-paid tickets?
If we already have wof, the fine of $200 on worn tyre is unfair.
People who passed wof assume the tyre is in good condition.
If the tyre is worn even they passed the last wof, most likely is the wheel alignment is not correct.
Not everybody is technically enough to always keep an eye on their tyres.
A fine of $200 for those people is very unfair.
Hi Kelvin,
From what I am aware, you must be able to keep your car up to WOF standards at all times. Therefore, if your tyres have between 1.6 and 2.0mm of tread, you should aim to replace those tyres within 2000km after the WOF. As a rule of thumb, you should replace your tyres every 30000-40000km.
Getting fined for having safety defect is fine in my opinion, however I think that the parking wardens should have to provide proof that the tyre is bald/illegal i.e. the parking warden has to write down that the tread is x mm. On the other hand, getting a fine from WCC the day after a WOF is definitely not on, especially since VTNZ said there was 3.5mm left on the tyres (which is 2.0mm above the legal requirement).
“On the other hand, getting a fine from WCC the day after a WOF is definitely not on”
That sucks, clearly somebody made a large error here, or the car was used for a lot of burn outs 😉
If WCC made the error the fine could be contested and the tire produced.
If VTNZ made the error It may be deemed negligence and they may be liable for damages. (thankfully just a fine, not a nasty crash)
WCC had replied with a letter which was naturally filled with bs. It said things like ‘we cannot prove it was the same tyre’ or something like that. Therefore, the friend of mine had to pay the fine. At least it fills up the council’s coffers though.
“A fine of $200 for those people is very unfair”
Colliding with another vehicle, pedestrian, cyclist or tree because you can’t stop on wet road due to unsufficent tread depth is far more unfair. A $500 fine seems a lot more appropriate. If someone is unable to determine their tread depth they should take their vehicle to a tyre shop to have it measured or get rid of their car.
$41m could probably remark the whole arterial network including bus and cycle lanes about 20 times if it didn’t work the first time. Without the green surfacing .Just saying that is shit loads to waive or leave as unpaid fines. They need debt collection outfits that deal with knee caps and take wheels off cars.
I wouldn’t get too worked up about amount of total fines as there are some people who have worked out they are better off to break the parking rules than paying for parking. For example I had a friend who would park in a free 30min car parks for a 50min class, instead of paying $4 for an hour of pay and display across the road. at the time the fine for overstaying time limit by up to 30min’s was $12, He could get caught 1 in 4 times to break even. However the chance of a parking warden visiting in the first 20mins, and then visiting again in before he left was really slim, so he was much better off.
In reality our fines are small enough people can treat them as an alternative parking fee stricture.