The motorists' lot
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
Sir,
I apologise for asking you once again to allow me space in your columns, but I must reply to the Town Clerk of Richmond, as his letter is nothing but a good old-fashioned red herring.
The point about the disc system is quite irrelevant as the appropriate disc was correctly exhibited, and this was not in fact disputed. I did see the notice under the “P” sign but it made no mention of taxis.
If there was a sign on a post marked “Taxis Only” it was nowhere near where I parked my car, nor has any previous mention been made of it. Perhaps it has since been erected. The only indications were rather worn notices on the road inside the white line which were obscured by other vehicles.
The description of the traffic warden did not originate from me, and it was a polite version that I gave. I suppose it is being helpful to go up to a motorist and thrust a ticket (already made out) at him demanding £2 without any explanation whatever until questioned. Of course she was very helpful to the police as her pre-arranged perversion in court proved.
In conclusion I would mention that I do not suffer from myopia. This is the first time I have had any difficulty with the highway authorities, including police, for 35 years, so it is unlikely that I would deliberately park in the wrong place, and if I had felt that I was in the wrong I would not have contested the issue. If I had the wherewithal I would certainly have appealed against the magistrate’s decision. As it is I do not withdraw one word of my previous letter.
[Name and address supplied.—Ed.]