Interesting read about chalking and rights to your private property

Dan

Dan

Well-known member
I, like many fellow autopians, probably hate when anyone touches your car. I found this article interesting because the courts found touching the car to mark the tires was in fact illegal.

According to the court, the parking enforcement officer — a local government employee — trespassed on Taylor’s car “because the City made intentional physical contact with Taylor’s vehicle.” The court found that the chalking was an “attempt to find something or to obtain information” from the car — albeit in a low-tech way — specifically to determine if the vehicle has “been parked in the same location for a certain period of time.”
Click to expand...


https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/24/chalking-unconstitutional/
 
I`d be livid, but I`d give some thought to how fighting it would compare with redoing the tire (well, tires since I`d have to do all four for uniformity). Think I`d just never park there again.
 
I just heard about this yesterday. I’m sure glad there’s nothing but parking lots to park in in my area so no need to chalk.
 
It`s been going on for a while now (forget when I first saw it, but I do remember it was yellow or white chalk), but not in my area.

Eh, it`s in the same category as fining people for putting coins in somebody else`s meter. While it`s ostensibly about fairness, to keep parking available for customers, IMO that`s just an excuse for another $-grab. Heh heh, I`m sure I`d feel differently if I had a shop in that area!

We went through something along these lines at the U, when the parking deck`s condition forced me to park at a meter all day and feed it between classes. I wasn`t "taking a space from another customer" in a retail area, so I didn`t feel guilty about it. Not sure I *would`ve* felt guilty anyhow...but I probably would`ve just moved the car to another block now and then, assuming I could find a space.
 
Wow I’m surprised they didn’t have special faculty hang tags and parking spots for you. My universities do.
 
Accumulator said:
I`d be livid, but I`d give some thought to how fighting it would compare with redoing the tire (well, tires since I`d have to do all four for uniformity). Think I`d just never park there again.
Click to expand...

I`d keep parking but load my tires down with so much tire grease that it would laugh at the chalk. Who cares about sling when you are fighting the man!
 
Bill D said:
Wow I’m surprised they didn’t have special faculty hang tags and parking spots for you. My universities do.
Click to expand...

They did, but the Faculty areas during our last few years weren`t the kind of places where we`d park our cars.

Dan said:
I`d keep parking but load my tires down with so much tire grease..
Click to expand...

Heh heh, that might indeed work! Not that I could live with the look, let alone sling...I wonder about Tire Coatings though, maybe those would do it.
 
I hear you. I’m so particular about where I park, I’ve been known to park *three* parking lots away from where my destination was. Parking at the university was an event to say the least!
 
The story I read said that they had only collected about $7000 per year from the meter maid doing this. Doesn`t even cover her salary.
 
I know this may not be a popular sentiment, but the fact that a trivial issue like this is brought to court is just another sign of the demise of our country. Another rule that people know they don`t have to comply with. The slope gets slipperier every day.
 
After giving this some thought, I`ve sorta changed my view and realized that I`m kinda sympathetic to those who want the Limited Parking Time enforced. I just don`t want chalk on my tires so they oughta find another way to enforce it.

My wife patronizes a downtown business whose service is essential to her and where nearby on-street parking is basically the only option. If she can`t find a spot she has to skip it and come back another day. It absolutely impacts her life, and costs the business in question $ (and yeah, the owner gripes about it and considers leaving Downtown). He`s a good guy, providing a good service that`s increasingly hard to find, and he helps keep the Downtown area going. If he goes out of business she`ll be driving to another city instead of making a short detour on her way to tutor, and our city will have another vacant storefront.

DAC17 said:
I know this may not be a popular sentiment, but the fact that a trivial issue like this is brought to court is just another sign of the demise of our country...
Click to expand...

Noting that people have decried the "demise of country/society/etc." since forever (it was old news when the Ancient Greeks griped about it), and that I consider the USA far too robust to really come crashing down...

How so? I think it`s good that a questionable practice is being run through the Court System and gauged by its constitutionality..isn`t that how it`s supposed to work? Questionable laws oughta be debated in court.

It`s a Constitutional Issue related to the 4th Amendment (although to Autopians it might just be about messed up tires), and the C/BoR is what I expect to keep this country afloat. I take potential violations of the BoR very seriously and want them debated by legal scholars.

Another rule that people know they don`t have to comply with. The slope gets slipperier every day.
Click to expand...

People oughta comply, those who won`t oughta pay the price. IF moving my car is/isn`t worth the fine to me, then that`s my choice and I accept the chance of a pricey fine. If I were a merchant in an area with limited parking, I bet I wouldn`t consider it trivial at all.

Heh heh, if every such ticket resulted in the car being Booted and a $500 fine, I bet people would start obeying it!

I agree that the whole "rules people don`t have to comply with" is a serious societal problem (IMO Prohibition negatively altered this country, perhaps forever).. but isn`t the answer to that to either enforce laws fairly or change them? If *everybody* has to obey a law, it might get more serious consideration.

I mean...it`s a hassle, but people oughta obey the "limited parking time rules". If that`s what`s posted, then that`s that; don`t like it, then go through the motions to get it changed. I just don`t want my tires messed up and/but I see the A4 issues; given today`s Tech they could just take a pic instead and avoid those. I see it as exactly the same as parking at an expired meter...would I do it if I lacked the change? Quite probably. And if that cost me a lot of $ due to a fine then that`s what I get for being a scofflaw.

The story I read said that they had only collected about $7000 per year from the meter maid doing this. Doesn`t even cover her salary.
Click to expand...

I see that as a feature, a sign that the law might be based on the right things, rather than just being a moneymaker. It`s supposed to be about Parking Space Turnover being beneficial to local merchants, *NOT* about making money. Laws are *NEVER* supposed to be about making money (yeah, I know.. :rolleyes: ) but rather about benefiting society by preventing harm to others (in this case, the merchants whose customers can`t find a place to park).

As always, I hope the above doesn`t come across as a contentious rant :o
 
I have only seen the chalking on the tread of the tire not the side walls. Not going to be an issue as far as a detailing freak is concerned as it will wear off on driving or moisture

They do it in my town’s downtown area during the week and 9-5 because people who work at offices there (which have slightly further away parking lots) will try to park in the businesses parking spots that are for customers and leave there car for 8 or more hours. So as a business owner you get quite upset that your customer can not find a spot or has to park way away to give you money. It is a real problem in some areas.

Now regarding the chalking. It’s a real low tech way to do it and realistically it has to be documented still electronically when you chalked the tire. Couldn’t it be a picture instead of the vehicle in the spot at a certain time. The person who owns the car could claim they left and came back to the same spot a little later renewing their time I suppose. But one could also spray the chalk off or drive back and forth to remove or reposition the chalk mark too

It’s one of those I’m not sure the best solution. Meters are an option but then you are forcing everyone that even wants to pop in a business real quick to pay. But I suppose a business owner could give them a quarter back after a deal is made for validation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Dan said:
Agreed, on the tread makes more sense.
Click to expand...

We chalk at work and sometimes don`t even touch the tire - we mark the front and back of the same tire so we know if the vehicle hasn`t been moved. We then take a picture. However, we only chalk for vehicles that haven`t been moved for days or longer. Our downtown/business area is handled with meters.
 
Accumulator: No "contentious rant" observed by me. I agree totally that "if you do the crime, you do the time". But the idea of people complaining about chalk on the tread of their tires seems a little over the top to me. And, not for nothing, why does every little thing have to be taken to court today? I`m telling anyone that will listen that, in twenty years, we will look back fondly at the "good old days". I worry for my grandchildren. I am very sorry to say this, but that`s how I see it.
 
DAC17 said:
But the idea of people complaining about chalk on the tread of their tires seems a little over the top to me. And, not for nothing, why does every little thing have to be taken to court today? I`m telling anyone that will listen that, in twenty years, we will look back fondly at the "good old days". I worry for my grandchildren. I am very sorry to say this, but that`s how I see it.
Click to expand...

It`s funny that overlooked the fact that for once a court upheld private property rights instead of some bull```` about a car parked in public is free to be manhandled, at least on the outside.

Now if the courts actually made tow companies accountable for the damage and theft that is common, I`d be inclined to say things are looking up, actually.
 
DAC17- With so much of what we do already being recorded and archived, I guess I don`t mind any further trips down that road be run through the Court System.

While chalk on the *tread* of my tire wouldn`t be a Detailing dilemma, somebody tracking my vehicle without cause is something I don`t want. Note that I will *NOT* have a car with OnStar/GPS/etc. for the same reason and no I benerally don`t carry a (turned-on) Cell Phone/etc. with me for the same reason.

I`d rather have a Court have to toss out some frivolous lawsuits now and then than have unwarranted observation or tracking become any more mainsteamed. So I want every potential invasion of my privacy run through the Courts, in hope that will at least slow it down.

Just another of those things where I might be all alone on my side of the fence, but an interesting discussion nonetheless :D

Eh, I guess I knee-jerk a bit about "everything ending up in court" ever since I read the details of the (in)famous "Hot Coffee Lawsuit" and found out that it was a genuinely serious injury that was well *worth* taking to court. People acted like it was no biggie, but it was; I would`ve sued the [crap] outta them too, and I bet anybody else would`ve too, if only to cover the medical bills.

And/but, I do think back to the days before everything got recorded/tracked/etc. as being "the good old days" in at least that regard! There`s too [darned] little privacy these days. So we at least agree on that part!

Dan- Heh heh..vehicles being manhandled...the risk of my vehicles getting impounded (gee, do people think a car will come through that in Autopian conditon?!?) was perhaps the primary reason why I quit, uhm....doing certain things...behind the wheel. Getting taken into custody is one thing, and plenty bad enough, but having my car [messed] with is another matter entirely.
 
Accumulator!! Don`t carry a c-phone with you?? Don`t have a GPS?? I KNEW there must be a reason why I like you. I will never disparage you spit shining your leaf springs again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top