Parking against traffic flow...beware

[1fast1]

 

 

Finally, you able to get back to your car and spotted the ticket at your car's wiper.

 

You grabbed the ticket, realised you needed to lau sai again, and rushed back in, only to realise no more toilet paper. The ticket came in very handy, so you're writing to express thanks to the LTA.

[Adrianli]

Or you prefer mediacorp Tiger Mom storyline :

 

Got four kids, guy went on date with tiger mom and these incidents happened while they are dating :

 

1) Eldest son kena strip naked by boss and he had to run home naked. Kena spotted by auntie and sister. So he had to go and help buy clothes for son.

 

2) Younger son kena held by ah beng for not paying gambling debt. So ah beng called him demand money. He went to meet them and pay partial gambling debt.

 

3) Younger daughter kena beaten by another gal over a guy she likes. BFF called him for help as she all out ready for revenge. He had to go and intervene.

 

4) Oldest daughter kena held at home by crazy dude. Gave miss call to him. So he went home to check and found the dude. Chased him out.

 

 

All happened in a single day.

[Adrianli]

 

You grabbed the ticket, realised you needed to lau sai again, and rushed back in, only to realise no more toilet paper. The ticket came in very handy, so you're writing to express thanks to the LTA.

 

I like ur ending.

 

[Xers007]

a follow-up.. just spotted a traffic warden riding out of my estate. Walking back, I saw plenty of cars parked against the traffic flow. None were booked. I guess this rule is not strictly enforced in private estates...

 

I guess the plenty of cars are not park in parking lots but illegally along the road which warden dont normally book them in private estate unless one is blocking the traffic or got resident complain, but pretty sure the warden will issue summons to those parked in a valid parking lot but against the flow of traffic.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Xers007

[Darryn]

same... Of course, they will issue one with the highest penalty. Cannot issue both.

 

 

 

Why not?

 

they are separate and distinct offenses.

 

Kinda like speeding and drunk driving.

[Darryn]

What's a good excuse for appeal against this? Just got one over the weekend. Frankly, I was not aware that this is an offence.

 

Where got excuse?

 

Just try the truth and apologise.

 

Dear Sir,

 

Referring to the offense notice ABCSHITFINE,

Please accept my sincerest apologies for breaching proper parking regulatuions.

On the day in question there was a goods van unloading that was partially blocking the lane.

 

Instead of doing a U-Turn, I felt it was safer to use the parking lot requiring me to go against the flow of traffic. Other traffic was very light and I took special care when entering and leaving the lot to check for approaching the traffic.

 

I was unaware that this was an offense. However, on reflection, I can see how my actions could have been dangerous and that there is good reason for this regulation.

 

You can be assured that I have learnt a lesson, and that this rather foolish action will not be repeated. As I have a clean record, and have never had a similar infraction, I seek you kind indulgence to waive the penalty in this instance.

 

Any assistance would be very greatly appreciated...

 

 

*******************************************************************

 

FYI -

My brother got a ticket for doing this twenty-mumble years ago in NZ

 

We already have RFID tagging... but only for season parking so the wardens can identify our car... gantries all still rely on the dopey IU, but it can identify IU numbers and recognize season parking... so...

 

Our Gantry parking suppose to start on 28 Feb...

 

Until now the system still not functioning...it worked for a week then broke down, they haven't been able to fix it...

 

Every day wifey and I have an adventure of anticipation to see if barrier up or down (yes - our life is HIGHLY exciting, why do you ask?)

 

[Jungus]

 

I guess the plenty of cars are not park in parking lots but illegally along the road which warden dont normally book them in private estate unless one is blocking the traffic or got resident complain, but pretty sure the warden will issue summons to those parked in a valid parking lot but against the flow of traffic.

I see.

 

thanks

[Damienic]

I kena for such offence before but appealed and they agreed to waive on goodwill basis for only once (stressed that any appeal for similar offence will not be entertained in future).

[coktky]

Tough luck. This rule is not commonly enforced.

No excuse though, you should know this rule.

 

Imagine when you get out of your lot, it is quite dangerous to other cars and yourself too.

 

This is enforced. i just received one. I do not know why this rule have to be there.

"quite dangerous to others and myself when get out of carpark lot?! " haha, then better dont drive close to t-junction la. hahaha.

[Mcf777]

This is enforced. i just received one. I do not know why this rule have to be there.

"quite dangerous to others and myself when get out of carpark lot?! " haha, then better dont drive close to t-junction la. hahaha.

 

Dont know?

Now you know liao. Good way to learn. Anyway, not expensive. 

 

Thank you for contributing to our Nation Fund

[coktky]

Dont know?

Now you know liao. Good way to learn. Anyway, not expensive.

 

Thank you for contributing to our Nation Fund

Hahaha...not willing to contribute...

 

This rule quite uniquely in Singapore...Tell me which others will have fine such a way...

[Vratenza]

1) It also has the implication that in order for you to have parked in direction against the flow of traffic, you would have driven against the flow of traffic while crossing the center lane divider.

 

2) while parked against the flow of traffic, your rear lamp cluster and reflectors are facing away from the flow of traffic in that lane, that will be dangerous as during the night, especially, lights from the front headlamps of the vehicles travelling in the lane will not be reflected off the red/yellow reflectors to make your car stand out visually as a stationary hazard.

 

This is enforced. i just received one. I do not know why this rule have to be there.

"quite dangerous to others and myself when get out of carpark lot?! " haha, then better dont drive close to t-junction la. hahaha.

 

[Volvobrick]

I ever kena knocked by someone parked against traffic, driving off without checking and hit right side of my car. 100% claimed from her without dispute.  More than 10K damages for slight dent and scratches (cos tor kor replaced 1 door and 1 rim!).

[coktky]

1) It also has the implication that in order for you to have parked in direction against the flow of traffic, you would have driven against the flow of traffic while crossing the center lane divider.

 

2) while parked against the flow of traffic, your rear lamp cluster and reflectors are facing away from the flow of traffic in that lane, that will be dangerous as during the night, especially, lights from the front headlamps of the vehicles travelling in the lane will not be reflected off the red/yellow reflectors to make your car stand out visually as a stationary hazard.

Alright. The second point seem reasonable. But again. Not a big issue if car parked inside the parking box probably. Running car won't hit that, unless the driver cannot drive straight line.

 

The first point sorry. I feel non sense. I turn right I cross the centre line. Don't you sometime need to sway a bit to opposite direction lane to avoid something on the road side? So does it consider driving again traffic ? You need to yes for both scenario, or no for both. Your pick. I will say no.

[Vratenza]

I am sorry you don't agree with my point. 

 

Your assumption is that you are able to slot into a parellel parking lot head in in a single suave move.

 

I don't know what size of car you drive or where you learn your driving., I am taught to parallel park on rear reverse in method as most cars front overhang and blind spot is usually more than the rear. That will entail you facing head on with the lane's traffic while you are attempting to park. Your headlight will dazzle the approaching traffic (i don't need to remind you why our RHD cars have headlamp directed off centre to the left). 

 

Anyway, not my business to convert you. You can continue to do what you believe adamantly in. 

 

 

Alright. The second point seem reasonable. But again. Not a big issue if car parked inside the parking box probably. Running car won't hit that, unless the driver cannot drive straight line.

The first point sorry. I feel non sense. I turn right I cross the centre line. Don't you sometime need to sway a bit to opposite direction lane to avoid something on the road side? So does it consider driving again traffic ? You need to yes for both scenario, or no for both. Your pick. I will say no.

 

[Mlee01]

Just received a ticket for parking against the flow of traffic. It is at a private residential estate, 2 lanes in opposite direction.

 

Parking allowed on one side of the road, this road always full of cars parked on that side, making this effective a one lane road. Because of this fact, any and every car that entered on the wrong side of the road would be driving against the flow of traffic, and have to give way to cars that came in on the right side of the road.

 

So if parking against the flow of traffic is an offence, does not travelling against the flow of traffic makes it a worst offence? A stationary car vs a moving car. But there is no other way as this road is effectively a single lane road, so every day cars skirt in and out to give way to the car that has the right of way.

 

The irony is this, consider back to back cars parked on one side of the road. When I park against the flow of traffic, the moment I leave to go to the other clear lane, I am driving in the flow of traffic. All cars that are parked in the flow of traffic commit immediate offence when they move out as they are then driving against the flow of traffic. Which offence is more serious?

 

Many a times, laws and rules are set as a catch-all condition and may not be suitable for all situations. 

 

I would be appealing against this ticket but using first offence as excuse and ask for leniency. I know it is fruitless reasoning with the authorities and there is a very remote chance they can add any level of discretion to the traffic warden on such cases.

 

I just want to bring this up again for discussion and see if anyone agrees with my views.

[Beehive3783]

Try applying your reasoning to a busy, 2 direction, 4 lane (2 lanes in each direction) road with parallel parking lots at the sides of both directions, and think if it is not endangering other road users by parking against the flow of traffic.

 

What do you have to first do before parking against the flow of traffic? Drive against traffic.

 

So, I do not agree with your reasoning.

 

Just received a ticket for parking against the flow of traffic. It is at a private residential estate, 2 lanes in opposite direction.

 

Parking allowed on one side of the road, this road always full of cars parked on that side, making this effective a one lane road. Because of this fact, any and every car that entered on the wrong side of the road would be driving against the flow of traffic, and have to give way to cars that came in on the right side of the road.

 

So if parking against the flow of traffic is an offence, does not travelling against the flow of traffic makes it a worst offence? A stationary car vs a moving car. But there is no other way as this road is effectively a single lane road, so every day cars skirt in and out to give way to the car that has the right of way.

 

The irony is this, consider back to back cars parked on one side of the road. When I park against the flow of traffic, the moment I leave to go to the other clear lane, I am driving in the flow of traffic. All cars that are parked in the flow of traffic commit immediate offence when they move out as they are then driving against the flow of traffic. Which offence is more serious?

 

Many a times, laws and rules are set as a catch-all condition and may not be suitable for all situations. 

 

I would be appealing against this ticket but using first offence as excuse and ask for leniency. I know it is fruitless reasoning with the authorities and there is a very remote chance they can add any level of discretion to the traffic warden on such cases.

 

I just want to bring this up again for discussion and see if anyone agrees with my views.

 

Edited September 14, 2018 by Beehive3783

[Mlee01]

Try applying your reasoning to a busy, 2 direction, 4 lane (2 lanes in each direction) road with parallel parking lots at the sides of both directions, and think if it is not endangering other road users by parking against the flow of traffic.

 

What do you have to first do before parking against the flow of traffic? Drive against traffic.

 

So, I do not agree with your reasoning.

 

I understand the danger if it is multi lane dual direction roads. I had never parked against the traffic flow in such situation, and would not even consider it.

 

Now try to apply this to an effectively single lane situation with one side full of parked cars. I am driving along the flow of traffic in the free lane before parking, and once more driving in the flow of traffic in the free lane after drive off. In between I am parked along the side against the flow of traffic.

 

Compare this to another car coming the opposite way. It is driving against the flow of traffic before parking, and once more driving against the flow of traffic after drive off. In between, it is parked along the side of the road in the flow of traffic.

 

What's your take on this now? Which if a bigger offence?