Stopping in No Parking Fire Lane? Illegal?
 

My parents just got a ticket for stopping in a fire lane in a mall. There is a sign that says "fire lane, no parking".

But the driver was in the driver seat and the engine was running the whole time, Does this still constitute as "parking"?
If not, is it a ticketable offence to idle in a fire lane with the engine running and the driver present?

If you're stopped more than x number of minutes (I think it's 3 in Vancouver, don't quote me on that, I could be wrong), it's considered parking. Even if you have someone in the car, and the engine is idling. How long was he stopped for?

he didn't count, but he said definitely no more than 5 minutes..

the parking guy never said anything or ask him to move...just sneak up from behind and stuck a ticket on his windshield.....and the ticket is $200+

I thought fire lanes are no stopping not no parking?

^ I think it's both, no stopping would imply the no parking. Since its a designated fire zone for emergencies I think your parents will have a hard time disputing it

There is absolutely no reference to "fire lane, emergency lane" anywhere in city bylaws, and that's going through all of the "lane" and "emergency" and "fire" bylaws. ,

There is only reference to stopping in front of firehalls, fire hydrants and fire doors. As well as conduct around a fire incident.

What exactly did the ticket state? Does it give the bylaw NO. that was cited?

By-law Fines and Towing Fees: Parking Operations and Enforcement

It would have to be specifically defined as "No Parking" or "No Stopping" given that there is no definition of "fire lane" within the bylaw.

---

I am assuming there was a no stopping sign in a defacto fire lane, in which case, a no stopping sign indicates....(yup, you guessed it) No Stopping :thumbsup:

Park Smart: Stopping vs. Parking - What's the Difference?

If it in fact was a "No Parking" sign (see differences in link above) then you do have a case, as you are allowed to unload in the area for 5 minutes.
I'd be going back to double check the space and take some pictures.

---

PPS: I just realized you never stated the city. Check your local bylaws then, primarily in accordance with the differentiation of "No Stopping / No Parking", time allowance for "No Parking" and if there is any specific mention of fire lane or emergency lane.

I thought Malls would use their own parking companies...? I don't think I've ever heard of the city giving out tickets in a mall.

I know in Vancouver that basically as soon as your tires stopped it's basically considered that you are parked. Having somebody in the car and car idling is not a loophole and doesn't really make any difference. Does it seem a bit harsh and could the PEO been nice enough to just say move? Absolutely, but really most of these Bylaws are black and white for the most part. If the driver was having some medical emergency and had to pull over that's another thing.

Think about it this way, I bet you a lot of people who pull over for a couple mins at a No Parking, No stopping, RPP, Resident Only etc are thinking in their mind ok shiet I'll just pull over really quickly I should be ok and when a ticket comes it's suddenly considered not fair. Just my 2 cents at least =\

Was your parent's parking their car right infront of a mall's entrance and idling his car there?

If so, then sorry....no sympathy what-so-ever. Hate people that idling their cars like that blocking other pedestrians trying to walk to/from the main entrance. Blocking other car traffics and flow. Idling their cars right there just so whoever he's picking up doesn't have to 10 metres to a parking spot and get wet from couple sprinkle of rain.

If you read my above post "No Parking" in Vancouver allows for five minutes of loading/unloading activity legitimately. So you are right, it's not a loophole, because it's completely in accordance to regulations

Has to be actively loading. His dad wasnt loading. I think the ticket is fair. Just pay it and kindly ask him to not do that next time.
Posted via RS Mobile

he was dropping off someone to pickup a take-out order...(usually it takes 2-3 minutes unless the restaurant is really busy) I am sure most of us have done the same

I think the sign is something like this http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...kQ3zBEzaYSQlaQ

And the ticket is a city bylaw ticket..not private
I have been to the same place many times, and the spot doesn't impede the mall traffics in anyway...plus there wasn't much traffic to begin with

no offence here....but I really wonder how many people here who talk like a saint actually acts half as decent in real-life

Oh trust me I pull the same shit all the time. I park in fire lanes in downtown alleys, pull over in no stopping to pick up/drop off people. However, when I got busted I just paid it no questions asked.

Bainne - I'm aware of the 5 min rule but based on the OP's post I was fairly confident the driver was just sitting there waiting to pick somebody up to which the rule doesn't apply to and thus not a loophole.

In a "No Parking Anytime" zone, vehicles are allowed to park to load or unload goods, or to take on or discharge passengers for up to 5 minutes. NOTE: Motorists displaying a valid permit for people with disabilities (SPARC placard) are allowed to park in "No Parking Anytime" zones for up to 30 minutes while actively loading and/or unloading passengers or materials.

The "No Parking" symbol is used in passenger, permit, resident only, loading and consular zones.

Motorists can PARK SMART by not using any zone with the No Stopping Anytime symbol. For a quick stop taking less than 5 minutes, motorists should look for the No Parking Anytime symbol.

2489 17.6A (a) park a vehicle, for no more than five minutes, while loading or unloading persons or materials;

One could construe it to mean that you must be actively loading or unloading goods or people, but I don't see that distinction anywhere in the bylaw relating to the 5 minute temporary stop. Only in regards to people with disabilities. Therefore, provided you are loading/unloading goods or people within that 5 minute window, it is a legitimate zone to do so in.

If you are paying tickets in a similar zone while loading or unloading people, then you are (not to be rude) but simply foolish, however is your prerogative I suppose.

I don't disagree with you that it may be simply common courtesy to go around the block instead of waiting, however, IMO, the OP has cause to contest the ticket and get a judiciaries opinion.

I'm not a saint, I park illegally, yet I accept when I'm punished for not being a saint.

The high fine might make me contest it, yet what are you going to tell the judge? "I was only there 3.5 mins" The parking enforcement officer probably has notes stating the vehicle was there more than 5 mins, or wasn't loading/unloading.

Essentially the only reason to fight this would be to hope the judge knocks down the fine, the likelihood of this ticket being thrown out is slim.

we all do it. we all idle the car at no parking spots as a 'loophole', but why dont we do that when we find a regular stall to park?

cause we know we shouldnt be parking at that no parking/fire lane sign. just tell your dad to man up and pay the ticket.

its not like he stopped the car there because there was a raccoon crossing his path and he got slapped with a ticket..now that would be a legitimate dispute

How is waiting 2-3 minutes, for a passenger to load, not a legitimate use of the space?

If indeed he was there for more than 5 minutes, or the driver himself, parked the car and went in to do their stuff, then that would be an improper use of space. As it stands, in my opinion, the OP's father and passanger satisfied the two conditions of the "No Parking" bylaw.

Less Than 5 Minutes in Area? Check
Loading/Unloading Passenger? Check

Simply because YOU view it as deviant, does not make it illegal/contrary to regulations.

You need a lesson in reading comprehension:
It doesn't matter what you or I think, it matters what's in the PEO's notes. yet I do have a hard time believing the OP's father was there only 2-3 mins while picking up food, especially after admitting it took longer than usual.

stop shoving words down on my throat please :fuckthatshit:
i think you are the one who needs a lesson in reading comprehensions here...

Even assuming he was really there for more than 5 mins, it is like getting a ticket for going 101km/h on a 100km/h highway
sure it is illegal by the book, but it is not reasonable in a moral sense
as I am sure the spirit of the laws here is to deter people from leaving their vehicles unchecked and blocking the fire lane in case of an emergency, and not punishing someone heavily for waiting for a passenger while in full control of the vehicles.

in this case, yes the ticket and $250 fines are justified legally, but I found it hilarious and hypocritic how some of you think it is deserved morally

:suspicious:

By your logic, if your were writing a test and you copied down someone's answer for one question, it's reasonable in a moral sense?

Are you serious?

are you serious? your example isn't even close
i have never been to any school where cheating in any form or degree is acceptable

yet on the road travelling 5-10% higher than the speed limit (when road condition permit) is illegal but socially acceptable.

My point was breaking the rules is doing just that. Regardless of what is socially acceptable, one should be subject to pains and punishments of breaking said rules.

As far as how socially acceptable cheating is, among the students, I would argue that it is quite socially acceptable.

I would also argue that there isn't any jurisdiction where any form of speeding/breaking the law is acceptable.

What Ferra is pointing out here is the distinction between deviance and illegal/criminal.

What is illegal, is not always deviant; ie. travelling under 10% above the speed limit. While technically illegal, it's generally viewed as socially acceptable.

And vice versa, what is deviant, is not always illegal; ie. your example of cheating on a test. Highly frowned upon socially, but not criminal in any way.

Your two examples aren't apples to oranges. If you are attempting to argue that cheating it IS socially acceptable, I have a couple hundred fellow classmates you should talk to.


Either way, I doubt Ferra has even bothered to read my responses, because he is so focused on people's perception of him rather than the facts of the law, he'll wind up paying it just because he gets convinced he's morally obliged to.