MetaChat - Contesting a Parking Ticket:

MetaChat is an informal place for MeFites to touch base and post, discuss and chatter about topics that may not belong on MetaFilter. Questions? Check the FAQ. Please note: This is important.

18 July 2011

Contesting a Parking Ticket: I think I need a bit of help phrasing something in my letter.→[More:]

The ticket was issued for parking during street cleaning (7am to 9am), but there is no time written on the ticket. Therefore, the ticket is not proof/documentation that the alleged violation occurred.

I'm trying to say that the time the ticket was issued is an integral fact, needed to determine whether or not a violation occurred, but everything sounds clunky to me.

This is my current wording:

I am contesting this violation on the grounds that the facts alleged in the parking or compliance violation notice do not support a finding that the specified regulation was violated.

The street cleaning regulation at [location] is for Mondays from 7:00 am to 9:00 am, weather permitting, beginning April 1st of each year. Although there is a field on the notice for the time of the violation to be documented, nothing was written in this field. Therefore, the notice does not indicate that my vehicle was parked at [location] between the hours of 7:00 am and 9:00 am.

By leaving off the time the notice was issued, the notice does not support a finding that the specified regulation was violated. I trust this information is sufficient to demonstrate that Violation Notice [ticket number] was issued in error.

What do you kids think?

post by: youngergirl44 at: 15:57 | 7 comments

Don't you know when your car was parked in the cleaning zone? :)

Your wording will likely do. I doubt the judge is going to want to hear a technical argument over a parking ticket.

posted by Ardiril 18 July | 16:12

Well, it's not for a hearing - Chicago offers a 'contest by mail' option. I've definitely had luck with technical discrepancies on tickets before with just writing a letter.

The wording "the facts alleged in the parking or compliance violation notice do not support a finding that the specified regulation was violated" is directly from the city's list of cases in which you can dispute the ticket. I'm just trying to write something that fits into that category.

Worst case, they say I have to pay anyway. It doesn't hurt to try. :)

posted by youngergirl44 18 July | 16:17

That's a horse of a different color. Put that statement in quotes and cite the list.

posted by Ardiril 18 July | 16:44

Maybe tone down the formality outside the quotes just a hair, too.

posted by Ardiril 18 July | 16:45

As you are inclined to do, I would quote the regulation, and then add something along the lines of "Because the field where the parking officer should have noted the time of the violation is blank, the bureau [or whatever you call it in Chicago] should find the ticket as written is defective and insufficient to sustain the alleged violation."

I'd leave off the part about error. This is extremely nitpicky, but saying the ticket was issued in error, as against it being facially defective is the difference between arguing a violation of substantive versus procedural due process. You might have actually been parked in a no-parking zone during street cleaning hours, but the city loses because of the issuing officer's sloppiness in properly filling out the form.

posted by Lassie 18 July | 17:00

Thanks for picking up on the last line about the ticket being issued in error, Lassie. I didn't like that either - it was mostly there because that's what I used in my last letter contesting a ticket (where they ticketed me for an expired meter, even though there are no meters on the street).

posted by youngergirl44 18 July | 17:07

I suspect that just saying "there's no time on the ticket." is sufficient and anything else is extra. They will recognize the ticket as "defective."

posted by Obscure Reference 18 July | 20:46

← Atomic Postcards || New sidebar art! →

HOME || REGISTER || LOGIN