Most the posts on here are related to Wilsons just wondering if anyone has experience with this company.
Overstayed by an hour and they are charging me $65, would it be better to pay, dispute or just chuck it?
Posted Feb 22, 2021, 5:30 AM UTC
Pertinent time to mention you can remove your vehicle from the public register meaning non-government agents can’t access your details (like Wilson’s and LPR). This doesn’t prevent them from towing or clamping your vehicle, and doesn’t give you free reign to abuse their services.
Yeah I’ve just done that, thank you!
you can remove your vehicle from the public register meaning non-government agents can’t access your details (like Wilson’s and LPR).
It doesn't, it just means they have to do it one by one rather than via a bulk batch like they usually do.
Individuals that do not want their name and address to be released to a person who has been granted an authorisation from Waka Kotahi without first having their privacy interest considered may ask for their details to be withheld. This is called 'opting-out'.
Opting-out means that a person with an authorisation must specifically request the individual's name and address from Waka Kotahi. Waka Kotahi will then weigh up the public interest in releasing the individual's details against their privacy.
"I want to dodge a parking company" doesn't really cut it as a suitable privacy interest.
Waka Kotahi will then weigh up the public interest
This part is important. It is definitely in the interest of the private company to obtain the details of the individual but is it in the public interest?
My own personal anecdote is not 100% proof of this being reliable but I was at a mall with a three hour parking limit. In this mall a movie theater was showing a three hour long movie. I returned to my vehicle after the movie and found a ticket for overstaying. Since you can't appeal the fine without providing your contact details (tricky, tricky!) I ignored it.
That film was Avengers: Endgame and I still haven't heard anything from them.
it in the public interest?
That's one of those legal terms which doesn't mean just what one might think.
https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/sites/default/files/2020-07/Public_interest_August_2019.pdf
Public interest does not mean the entire population has to be affected, or even a significant section of it ... The private interests of individuals can also reflect wider public interests. Just because a requester will gain personally from receiving the information does not necessarily mean there is not also a wider public interest to be served by release. As the authors of Freedom of Information in New Zealand
note: Damage to individual interests is damage to society as a whole. The need of a particular applicant for a particular item of information to rehabilitate his or her reputation or to pursue an occupation should not be dismissed because it pertains only to one person. Just as the OIA recognizes personal interests in secrecy through the medium of specific exemptions such as sections 6(d) and 9(2)(a), (b) and (ba) so it is capable of recognizing personal interests in disclosure through the less precise medium of the public interest.
There are many reasons why a company may choice not to pursue but that doesn't mean they can't.
Either NZTA won't release the opted-out individuals information for a $65 infringement OR Wilson choose not to pursue opted-out individuals. You are arguing the second point but I don't think you can conclusively disprove the first. Both are reasonable and the end result for the opted-out individual is the same, and consistent with the messaging that "opting out protects you from Wilson so long as you don't abuse it".
In a three year period only TWO requests for information on opted-out individuals were made and in both instances NZTA released that information. Only two. Fascinating eh?
You may be r/technicallycorrect but it also prevents them from attempting to enforce the tickets the issue because they have no authority to do so.
So, I dunno bro. You keep doing you.
You may be r/technicallycorrect but it also prevents them from attempting to enforce the tickets the issue because they have no authority to do so.
There's no 'technically' about it. What you posted implies that it would shield you from anyone finding our your details. I'm pointing out that it doesn't actually stop someone like Wilsons getting your details, it just adds an extra step to things. If they can still find your details how does that 'prevents them from attempting to enforce the tickets.'?
Yeah, they don’t have the authority to enforce a ticket they print. What they can do is get your details from your plate and send you collection notices. If your plate’s off the register they can’t do that.
This is common knowledge. Don’t know who ate your lunch today, but it wasn’t me so whatever.
Same shit, different smell. Treat them the same as Wilsons and you will be all g.
Dispute or pay, don't chuck it they'll transfer the debt to baycorp and fuck you
No they won't. They give it to a subsidiary and nothing happens other than a dumb letter.
I chuck mine and haven't paid a cent or heard shit.
Citation needed.
It's been a few years since I got one, but I ignored one a couple years ago and got a baycorp letter after about 6 months with a handling markup on it and a threat to keep adding to it if I didn't pay
Hitchens' Razor.
Fair enough, I wouldn't risk the hit to my credit rating when it gets to baycorp personally
Be ready to pay for it, so that if all else fails you're not too cut up about it.
If you are going the "opt out" route discussed in the comments here already DO NOT DISPUTE THE TICKET. Part of the dispute process will be identifying yourself as the owner of the vehicle which cancels out the opt-out.
Just like Wilson’s, LPR can suck my dick before they manage to get payment from me
Bloody oath
And even after the sucking don't pay.