It penalises poor people while the rich can treat it as a tax.



If you can afford to pay parking fines you can leave your car where you like.
Other people might not be able to pay rent if they are charged the same amount of money.

Some people can have a party and don't mind the ten thousand pound fine. (not just Rita)
Others would lose their houses.

Some regularly pay school fines for taking children out of school to go on cheaper holidays.
For others, the fine would cost more than the holiday so stick to the rules.

Fines are disproportionately harder for poor people.
Why isn't it based on income? It is not a proper deterrent if it only deters poor people, is it?

Honey wrote:



Why isn't it based on income? It is not a proper deterrent if it only deters poor people, is it?

It isn't meant to be a deterrent. It is a way local authorities make money because the Gov can't afford to pay for services anymore. So in that way it is a good thing. A flat-rate "poll tax" without most people noticing it, or creating a fuss.

Poorer people tend to be hit by it more because they are (on the whole...generalising) more likely to engage in anti social behaviour, like dropping cigarettes, parking over your driveway and fly-tipping (I bet a GP has never dumped a fridge in a lay by, ever).

As the poorer are also more likely to require local authority hand outs and services, this works out fairer all around in the end to everyone, and allows them the dignity of knowing they are paying their way just a tiny bit.