Search

“Entitled as”: Tesla driver mocked for creative parking

A Tesla driver's parking skills has sparked an online debate after pictures of the vehicle parked across two parking spots was posted on Facebook. The black Tesla Model Y was parked at the Orion Springfield shopping centre in Queensland, and most online commenters condemned the driver's actions. “Of course, it’s a Tesla owner. Entitled as mentality,” one wrote. “They should find somewhere else to charge it or go home," another commented. However, some commenters pointed out that the charging station could be the problem, and with an increase in drivers choosing electric vehicles, it sparked a few questions on the accessibility of the charging stations across the country. “Maybe that was the only way to reach the plug? EV owners should be allowed to fuel up just as we do," one commenter wrote. “The one at fault … is the silver car parked in the charging spot not on charge, so I guess they [the Tesla owner] had to park like that to charge up," another said. In another incident last April, another Tesla driver was criticised for parking their Model 3 – with an attached trailer – over the kerb next to the charging bay. However, the photo also highlighted the accessibility issues as current charging stations for EV's do not accomodate to oversized vehicles, so drivers may have to come up with other ways to charge. A spokesperson for Standards Australia said that a charger reform is currently being discussed by all relevant regulators. "There's a lot of work going on right now as our vehicle fleet becomes more electric. This includes consideration of charging infrastructure, its placement, and matters of safety and amenity," the spokesperson told Drive. "Standards Australia is working with governments, industry and the community to identify what standards are needed for charging infrastructure and how they can be embedded in our communities." Image: Drive/ Facebook

Legal

Woman fined after paid car park gets set up around her parked vehicle

Josephine Williams had been leaving her car in a gravel clearing at Westgate in Auckland, alongside other commuters to catch the bus into the city for months. The New Zealand woman was left with a "nasty surprise" when she returned from work on Monday to find a NZ $85 ($77) fine sitting on her windshield. "To my unfortunate surprise - and many others - I was greeted by an $85 parking ticket for a breach and a flyer from Wilson Parking saying paid parking had started that day," Williams told Stuff. "But what breach exactly was made? How was I supposed to know paid parking started that day when there was nothing at all displayed anywhere in the car park?" Williams claimed that the Wilson Parking car park had been set up around her already parked car, even providing dash cam footage that showed her pulling into the gravel clearing at 7.45am, with no paid parking signs or Wilson branding in sight. By 6pm, a large red and white Wilson sign had been put up at the entrance, with "12 hours for $4" written on it. "Wilson deliberately put their sign up sometime after 9am and then took it upon themselves to fine every single car that was already parked there from the morning," Williams said. "$85 is a lot of money - it would have been two weeks' worth of grocery shopping for me," she added. "I'm lucky that I know the law and my rights, but some other people might not. What about students or the elderly or people who don't know English well?" She estimated that there was usually around 50 and 100 cars in the gravel clearing. Wilson argued that the carpark was always there and they had just added more signage, but have since waived Williams' fine after she lodged a request to have it reviewed by Parking Enforcement Services. Wilson Parking also said that they had started to set up the car park and installed a "clear signage" on April 22. "It was not set up around parked cars on 29 April as suggested," a Wilson spokesperson said. "Several payments were made by customers via the Parkmate app from 22 April proving that signage on the site was clear and effective," they said. They added that on April 29 more signs were added to all entry points of the car park. "In acknowledgment of the increased signage added on the 29th at the entry we've made the decision to refund all payments made until 30 April and waive any breach notices issued up to this date." They also denied issuing any breach notices before the signs were put up. "Payment options were available and signed from 22 April - but no infringement notices were issued prior to the 29th." Images: Stuff

Legal

"Unfair" parking fines could soon be a thing of the past

In recent years, road users in one Australian state have found themselves at the receiving end of unwelcome surprises in their mailboxes. An experimental parking fine process, initiated with the aim of streamlining administrative procedures, has instead garnered significant backlash from unsuspecting motorists. However, relief seems to be on the horizon as the New South Wales Government steps in to rectify the situation. The issue revolves around the introduction of ticketless parking fines, a system that was implemented with the intention of simplifying the issuance of penalties for parking violations. Under this scheme, parking officers could send details of fines directly to Revenue NSW, which would then dispatch infringement notices either by post or through the Service NSW app. However, what was meant to be a simple and streamlined modernisation effort has led to a surge in revenue from fines and a subsequent erosion of trust in the system. Concerns about the fairness and transparency of ticketless fines have been mounting, prompting action from the NSW government. Reports indicate that Finance Minister Courtney Houssos has written to all 128 local councils in the state, urging them to halt further adoption of the ticketless parking fine system. Instead, councils have been instructed to revert to traditional ticketing methods and ensure that drivers are promptly made aware of fines at the time of the offence. The move comes in response to a range of issues highlighted by critics of the ticketless system. One major concern is the lack of immediate notification, which diminishes the deterrent effect of fines and makes it difficult for motorists to contest them effectively. Without receiving timely notification, drivers may struggle to gather evidence or address issues such as inadequate signage, hidden signs, or other circumstances that could warrant a review of the fine. Organisations like the National Roads and Motorists' Association (NRMA) have been vocal opponents of the ticketless scheme, labelling it as "unfair" and criticising its impact on transparency. According to NRMA spokesperson Peter Khoury, the system reduces the ability of drivers to contest fines, thereby undermining their rights and contributing to a loss of community trust in the administration of fines. The NSW government's intervention signals a recognition of these concerns and a commitment to restoring confidence in the fines system. By prioritising immediate notification for drivers, authorities aim to address the shortcomings of the ticketless parking fine process. The decision to reverse the experimental system comes amid staggering revenue figures, with nearly $140 million generated from ticketless fines in 2023 alone. While the financial gains may be substantial, they come at the expense of public trust and fairness, prompting a much-needed course correction. As Minister Houssos asserts, providing immediate notification to drivers is not only the right thing to do but also a crucial step towards rebuilding community trust. By ensuring that drivers are promptly informed of fines and have the opportunity to contest them, authorities can strike a balance between effective enforcement and procedural fairness in managing parking violations. As road users await the reinstatement of traditional ticketing methods, they can take solace in the prospect of a fairer and more transparent fines system in the future. Images: City of Sydney

Legal

"Pretty brutal": Peter Garrett slams Taylor Swift for price gouging tickets

Peter Garrett has taken aim at Taylor Swift, calling out her extrationate ticket prices for a place at the Eras Tour. The Midnight Oil frontman joined 107.1 SAFM’s Bec & Soda radio show on Friday when he was informed that he was co-host Mark “Soda” Soderstrom’s favourite artist, or in other words, “his Taylor Swift.” Garrett didn't take too kindly to the comparison, and launched into a rant about the price of Swift's concert tickets. “I’m not price gouging like Taylor, to be blunt,” he began. The radio hosts reminisced about attending a Midnight Oil concert in 1985 when tickets were just $15.90, compared to Swifts forking out hundreds of dollars for the highly anticipated Eras Tour. Tickets for Swift’s Australian tour ranged from $79.90 for G-reserve tickets to $379.90 for A-reserve ticket, while also offering fans multiple VIP packages, reaching an eye-watering $1249.90 for a single ticket. Some diehard fans were quick to complain about the lack of added value in the packages, which included premium seats with add-ons such as a tote bags, collectable pins, stickers and postcards. Garrett continued, “I wouldn’t begrudge anyone’s success, that’s the first thing to say." "She’s obviously touching a chord with masses of people, particularly people of a certain age group who have experienced growing up at a certain time, and what she’s singing and talking about is really ringing true with them.” However, he also said that “the dollar end of it having looked at it from a distance, having been in this business forever, is pretty brutal.” Garrett continued to share his disapproval of Swift's Australian domination, complaining about how five of her albums dominated the ARIA charts, booting Aussie artists off the ladder. “She is so pervasive, she has become such a phenomenon, that she is displacing artists left right and centre. In our ARIA top 100 chart – that’s the Australian record industry chart – I think at one point in the last week or two, we only had three Australian artists in that top 100,” Garrett said. “Not good enough! And that’s not me crying about it, I’ve had an incredible run. But I think about the younger artists coming through and it’s extremely hard for them now.” Image credits: Getty Images

Money & Banking

"Other cities will follow": Big trouble ahead for SUV owners

Paris residents have voted to charge SUVs triple the cost of parking compared to standard sized cars in a bid to tackle air pollution and improve safety. 54.6 per cent of residents voted to pass the plan, with the new parking tariffs expected to start in September. The price increase will apply to on-street parking for vehicles with combustion or hybrid engines weighing more than 1.6 tonnes and electric vehicles weighing over two tonnes. The change means that the vehicles will pay €18 (A$29.69) an hour for parking in the centre of Paris, up from €6 (A$9.90), and €12 (A$19.79) an hour in the rest of the city, up from €4 (A$6.60). "Parisians have made a clear choice … other cities will follow,” Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo said. Experts are onboard with the move and believe the Australia should do the same thing. Urban access consultant and author of the book Rethinking Parking David Mepham said that the move could help improve safety as: “SUVs are actually some of the most unsafe vehicles on the road for pedestrians with a fatality rate that is significantly higher than other vehicles.” “The injury and fatality rate should be a concern in highly pedestrianised areas such as city centres.” In 2022 alone, SUV and light commercial vehicles made up 76.8 per cent of car sales, coming in eighth on the top 10 vehicle sales according to the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries. With spaces in the cities limited, Mepham added: “If you’ve got a larger car you should expect to pay more for that, you should pay for what you use.” Standards Australia has recently proposed to increase the size of off-street parking spaces by 20 centimetres in Australia, from 5.4 metres to 5.6 metres, which would make it easier for larger vehicles to park, but would limit car spaces. Executive director of the Australia Institute, Richard Dennis also said that SUV owners need to face the consequences of owning a larger vehicle. “If we want to drive much bigger cars, are we going to widen all of our city streets, are we going to have less car parking spaces?” he said. “Because if we want to drive these cars we need to own the consequences.” Marion Terrill, an independent transport expert, also agreed that higher parking fees for large vehicles are “absolutely reasonable.” “If you want more of it you can pay more, it’s the same principle as paying for parking at all," she said. Image: Getty

Travel Trouble

"It's just not fair": Driver slams council for misleading parking fine

A furious motorist has taken aim at a Sydney council's parking solution that resulted in an "outrageous" and "unjustified" fine. Ben drives to the Campbelltown train station in South West Sydney every day for his workday commute, and has recently been forced to find alternative parking plans due to a major disruption. A multi-deck carpark is being built near the station to accommodate the influx of traffic, but while the site is under construction, a makeshift parking lot has been set up. While the new car park will add 500 parking bays when completed, residents have claimed the council has drastically reduced the number of spaces in the meantime. Ben told <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/sydney-parking-rules-drivers-outrage-over-tiny-detail-in-parking-fine/4cfe4d45-c311-4587-b68a-fc1d017675fc" target="_blank" rel="noopener">9news.com.au</a> parking had become "a nightmare" since the temporary lot opened, leaving many motorists with no option but to park along the fence line. It's this act that saw Ben receive a $129 parking fine in the mail. He was outraged when he was issued a fine on February 9th for "not stand vehicle in a marked parking space" when he had no other parking option. "They've advertised that the temporary car park is the same amount of spaces lost during the construction, which is severely incorrect," he said. "I can only assume they are fining loads of drivers as that space along the fence line is always full of cars parked the same as mine was." Along with the fine itself, ticket inspectors supplied Ben a photo of a wordy and confusing sign located near the entrance to the lot, which only added to his frustration with the local council. He said while there were no marked bays along the fence line, signage was not clear enough to indicate to drivers they weren't allowed to park there. "I mean it's just not fair. It's a temporary gravel parking lot," he said. "They've created this mess and now they are targeting innocent commuters fighting to just leave their car somewhere to catch public transport into work." A spokesperson for Campbelltown City Council told Nine News they understood the construction of the new car park would "create some disruption". "A temporary 113-space parking lot has been opened adjacent to the existing parking lot in order to offset some of the parking loss," they said. The council was "actively monitoring and reviewing the current parking and signage arrangements as well as community feedback, to identify any further improvements that could be made and inform any additional community notification required". "While this review takes place, vehicles will only be fined where a safety risk to both other vehicles and/or pedestrians is identified," the spokesperson said. Image credits: Nine News

Legal

Spin cycle disaster: man puts winning Lotto ticket through the wash

In a harrowing tale that's sure to wring out a chuckle or two, a man in his late 20s from Belmont, Western Australia, narrowly escaped laundering his way out of a $2.8 million windfall – after nearly sacrificing his winning lottery ticket to the treacherous depths of his washing machine. It all started innocently enough at the Here's Luck Lottery Centre in Belmont Forum, where our hero – who very sensibly prefers to remain incognito – purchased what would turn out to be a life-changing ticket for the Saturday Lotto. Little did he know, his unassuming trousers would soon become the epicentre of a near-catastrophe. In a classic case of absentmindedness, our hero forgot to take his ticket out of his pants pocket before succumbing to the siren song of laundry day. "I forgot to take the ticket out of my trousers and put it in the washing machine," confessed the forgetful winner. "After five minutes I realised and stopped the washing machine to grab the ticket, fortunately, it was safe." Indeed, it was a race against the spin cycle as the man scrambled to rescue his potential fortune from a soapy demise. "I couldn’t think, I couldn’t sleep, I am still processing the win," he admitted with palpable relief. But our protagonist emerged victorious from this sudsy saga, managing to salvage his ticket just in the nick of time. With a sigh of relief, he made his way to Lotterywest HQ to claim his well-deserved prize. Lotterywest spokesman James Mooney chimed in, highlighting the importance of registering tickets to avoid potential mishaps of this magnitude. "For this player, it all came out of the wash okay, but it’s a reminder for players to register their ticket to prevent what could be a multimillion-dollar mistake," he wisely advised. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

Dad cops furious note from "egotistical Karen" for parking in parent's bay

A Perth dad has been left hurt after he was targeted by an "egotistical Karen" for parking in a parent's bay, while his wife was inside a shopping centre changing their seven-month-old baby. "Don't park here again, you selfish prick!" the note read. His wife took to Facebook on behalf of her hurt husband to question why someone would go out of their way to criticise him for parking in a space designated for parents. "My husband was putting a baby gate in the boot while I was in the forum changing our seven-month-old baby," she defended her partner, who parked at the Mandurah Forum. "He came back into the forum looking for me [and] when we returned, someone had put this note on our windscreen. "How about next time you be sure before insulting an innocent husband and father, you hero." The woman said that the note left her husband "hurt and almost feeling guilty" and she argued that he had every right to be there as a parent. Her post attracted over 300 interactions with many agreeing with the mum, and saying that the "Karen" should've gotten their facts straight before taking action. "There is no law for who can park in parents with prams spaces they are just convenience but anyone can park there and use," one man wrote. A few others shared the same sentiment and said that "it's not illegal to park in those bays" regardless of whether or not you have a baby. Some parents even shared their own experiences and why it is important to not judge someone based on looks alone. "This has happened to me also. I had a baby and a toddler and my husband took them inside the Mandurah forum while I unloaded our car," the person began. "A couple with a baby parked next to me and the man kept yelling at me that it was only for parents with prams, even though I told him I had young kids and a pram. But he didn't believe me and yelled loudly to move my car." One mum added that she doesn't see the need for parents with prams spaces altogether. "As a mum of just a five-year-old, I personally don’t see the need for parent spaces. They are not any bigger, just more convenient. Kids need exercise and prams have wheels, not hard to walk," she wrote. "I personally think they should be seniors bays instead, they are less mobile and struggle to walk long distances. Give them the spots." Images: Facebook

Legal

Woman sparks debate after copping $116 fine for "absurd" rule

Shakira Coldwell, 21, has sparked debate online after copping a $116 parking fine for an "absurd" rule she claims she didn't even know existed. The Aussie woman took to TikTok to share her confusion, and asked if anyone else was aware of the rule. “Was I the only one that didn’t know you can get a parking fine for parking nose in, like the front of your car goes in first instead of backing into a car park?” she asked. She then asked whether the rule was only enforced in Noosa, saying that she was "pretty sure" you could park in any way as long as you stay between the lines. Coldwell then shared a photo of how she parked her car when she received the fine and said that she was “clearly” within the parking lines but hadn’t backed into her space like the car next to her. “Does that not just seem a bit absurd, a bit bizarre?” she said. She also said that she was only just made aware of the fine, as she had been travelling, which means that she may be copping even bigger fees as her payment was now overdue. “I’ve asked a couple of people about this and they literally had no idea that rule even existed. Like, I’m within the lines, it doesn’t matter how I’m parked,” she continued. According to the Brisbane City Council website, failing to park as indicated by an angle parking sign will result in a $116 fine, but Coldwell claims that she didn't see any signs. “So I am a bit confused. Is this just Noosa rule or does everyone know this because I literally did not know this was a rule. And low key $116 for a parking fine that's a bit absurd, given I was within the lines,” she said. Many commenters were quick to inform her that it was actually a common parking rule that wasn't restricted to Noosa. “As someone who lives in Noosa I can 100% guarantee there was a sign saying you had to back in,” one person wrote. “Being within the lines literally has nothing to do with it lol,” another said. A few others said that parking the wrong way in angled spots can make it “dangerous” when backing out into traffic, with one commenter claiming “everyone knows this”. However, a few others were just as baffled as the 21-year-old. “I’d be challenging that. I have never heard of it and there should definitely be signs so if you can go and check the signage,” one said. “Never heard of this before I wouldn’t pay it tell them where to go,” another wrote. According to the <a href="https://www.noosa.qld.gov.au/community/local-laws/parking-regulations" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Noosa Council website</a>, rear-in angle parking is enforced in certain areas to “ensure a safer parking experience for everyone in the area," and to prevent cars from crossing into oncoming traffic as they try to exit the parking bay. Images: TikTok

Legal

“This doesn’t make sense": Mum fined for parking in own driveway

A Gold Coast mum couldn't believe her eyes when she found an almost $200 fine in her mail for parking in her own driveway. “I got a lovely fine from Gold Coast City Council for parking in my own driveway,” Megan Pass told 7News. “This doesn’t make sense. “Everybody I’ve shared this with is going, ‘What the hell?’” The council claims that part of her driveway is located on council land so she was breaking the law by parking on it. The mother-of-three said that she has lived in the house for seven years and parked her car there every day and has never been fined before. The <a href="https://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/Planning-building/Development-applications/Development-application-types/Driveways-vehicular-crossings" target="_blank" rel="noopener">council website </a>states that there is an important difference between someone's driveway, which "ends at the property boundary", and a vehicular crossing, which is the section of the driveway between the boundary and the road. The local law prevents people from parking over council land for more than two minutes, so Ms. Pass got fined $193. People took to social media to share their thoughts on Ms Pass' situation. “What a joke - revenue raising at its best,” one user tweeted. While another said: “Yip I got one of those fines lol. Just paid it. Don’t have time spare to go court to be told… you broke the law… pay the fine." “Will the mayor mow the footpath once a week and water it? That bloke’s a goose,” a third added. Images: 7News

Legal

"Surely this is a prank": Council slammed for ridiculous parking restriction

Melbourne City Council has been slammed online for offering free parking, but only for a measly 15 minutes. The new initiative, which was shared in a video to the City of Melbourne Instagram account, details how parking fees will be waived for drivers needing to run a quick errand in the CBD, as long as they return to their vehicle within 15 minutes. Drivers can park in a “green signed” parking space such as a ‘2P Meter’, and start a 15-minute session on the Easy-Park app to claim the offer. The council said they introduced the initiative for those who want to “run an errand, support a local business and take in city vibes”. <blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/reel/C0lApxrt35h/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"> </div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;"> <div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: 8px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: auto;"> <div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"> </div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/C0lApxrt35h/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by City Of Melbourne (@cityofmelbourne)</a> </div> </blockquote> The initiative, however, has been rinsed online, with many people pointing out that 15 minutes is not enough time to do anything, especially in the CBD. “Surely this is a prank?” one person questioned. “As if you can take in the vibes in 15min. And based where the carpark spots are, you’d barely make it to the shop or restaurant and back in 15,” said another. “15 mins? Such overwhelming generosity,” another commented. “How can you support any business in 15 minutes time? By sprinting to a shop and run back to the car only to find a ticket on the dashboard?,” wrote another person. Despite the negative feedback, City of Melbourne said more than 90,000 people had taken up the free parking offer since it was first introduced in the central city in July. "Drivers are embracing the flexibility of our new free 15-minute parking system, which is opening up the city by giving more drivers access to free parking outside more businesses and services,” Lord Mayor Sally Capp said in a statement in November. “Early data shows our parking improvements are working exactly as intended – keeping spaces turning over outside city businesses, while making it easier to find a park.” Image credits: Instagram

Travel Trouble

"Hats off to whoever did this": Hilarious act of revenge on parking spot thief

In the cutthroat world of Sydney parking, one fed-up property owner has taken matters into their own hands – or rather, their own clingfilm. A red Fiat, blissfully parked in what turned out to be somebody's private parking spot in the Upper North Shore suburb of Wahroonga, became the canvas for a sticky masterpiece of vehicular revenge. A vigilant passerby, no doubt amused by the spectacle, snapped a photo of the clingfilm-covered car and generously shared it on a community Facebook page. The caption, dripping with sarcasm, read, "And you thought people parking boats on Mosman streets was bad. Look what happens in Wahroonga if you park in the wrong place!" The clingfilm artist didn't stop at just wrapping the car; they took it a step further by scribbling a stern message on the plastic: "Not a public park. Read, you moron. Private property." Talk about a clingy reminder that parking etiquette is serious business in Australian capital cities. While some Sydneysiders chuckled at this clingfilm caper, others questioned the creativity behind the furious act. "Why the hell would you do that to someone's car? Would a note not have achieved the same result? Seems an overreaction," pondered one rational soul, evidently unfamiliar with the concept of "sticky situations". Another concerned citizen chimed in, "Well deserved. Though it's a dreadful waste of plastic." Clearly torn between environmental consciousness and a deep-seated desire for vehicular justice, this commentator encapsulated the internal struggle faced by many Sydney residents. On the flip side, some applauded the clingfilm connoisseur for taking a bold stance against parking transgressors. "Fair enough. We have it happen to us all the time, and I'm at the point of doing this considering I can't park on the street, so I need my parking spot at my own place. Lucky they put gladwrap on the car first and not write straight on the car... hats off to whoever did this," confessed a sympathetic comrade in the battle for parking supremacy. Clearly, as this red Fiat sits wrapped up like a vehicular burrito, Sydney residents have found themselves divided over the ethics of clingfilm activism. Is it a genius way to teach parking manners, or just a sticky situation waiting to be unwrapped? Only time will tell if clingfilm justice becomes the hottest trend in Sydney's ongoing parking wars. Images: Facebook

Legal

"Suck it up": Tourist's parking mistake divides Aussies

A puzzled tourist's question about a $116 parking fine he received at a beach in Noosa, Queensland has divided Aussies, with many telling him to cough up the cash. The motorist shared a photo of his white SUV sitting between two other parked cars under a tree, but what he missed was the faint yellow line behind the nature strip. Confused, he took to a local Facebook group to ask why he was slapped with a fine for “stopping in a no stopping zone” in late October as he believed that he “parked off the road in one of the car parks they offer for free”. “Can I still be charged if I’m parked not impeding traffic or even on the road?” the driver asked. “Is there any way I can go back to them and contest this? I don’t remember seeing any signs that said no stopping near the island.” Residents of the popular tourist town were quick to criticise the driver. “Really. There are yellow lines and parked in a garden bed. It’s not a car park,” one wrote. “You’re lucky you only got non stopping zone ticket. Just because you park in car park doesn’t mean you can park anywhere in there," another added. “You are in a garden … suck it up,” a third commented. While many pointed out that where he had parked “is not a car space," one commenter explained that “yellow line means no parking all over Australia” and the council is “well within their rights”. The driver didn't take the criticism to heart, and quipped :“So due to the faint yellow line that means you can’t park there? Gotta love Noosa, good to know that the $116 will go towards repainting the line — not. "So is there anything I can do or just pay it?” While many criticised his poor judgement, a few others sympathised with the tourist, saying that they also copped a fine in the same spot. “I've gotten the same fine for parking a scooter there too. Not much you can do. There are signs and a yellow line…” one wrote. “It’s a s**t rule but they’ve been getting people like this for years,” another added. A third added that he could contest the fine “as the yellow line is not very well maintained”. While a few others commented that in general there aren't enough car parks to accommodate the number of visitors. "It’s not even full school holidays for all schools yet and yesterday was shocking to find a car park.” According to the local council, it is illegal for a driver to park their car on a nature strip, footpath or in a parkland anywhere in the shire. Images: Facebook

Legal

"What am I missing?" Driver confused over hefty parking fine

A woman has been left shocked over a $300 parking fine, for an offence she had no idea she was committing. The confused motorist was puzzled when she received a $305 fine in the mail, and decided to take to Facebook to ask her community if they could "help [her] understand the fine". The woman, from Sydney's inner west, posted photos of her parking job to a local Facebook page, which show her blue hatchback parked curbside outside a house, with no apparent signal nearby. "I got fined $305 and lost some demerits points. They said I parked parallel close to the dividing line/strip," she explained. "I don't see anything wrong with the pics. What am I missing?" she questioned alongside photos of offence. According to parking rules in New South Wales, drivers "must not park within 3m of any double dividing lines" and those caught doing so can be fined. In the photos, the double lines appear close to the woman's car on a seemingly narrow road. One person explained the rule on in the comments of her Facebook post, writing, "It's possibly because there is not enough room for cars to pass your car without partly crossing their car across the double middle lines — it's illegal for them to do that." So you can't park in a place where there isn't enough space between the double middle lines and your car for other cars to pass." The parking rule surprised many who admitted they "had no idea" the rule existed, with some concluding you "see it all the time". "Sorry you got those fines. Wow. You learn something new every day," said one driver. "I had no idea this was a road rule until now! I'm sorry you copped such a huge fine," said another, to which the driver concluded it an "expensive lesson learnt". Image credits: Facebook

Legal

Free tickets up for grabs to Barry Humphries' state memorial

Australians will have the chance to pay their respects to the late Barry Humphries, with limited free tickets to his state memorial available to the public. Humphries died on April 22nd this year at the age of 89, and will be remembered for his legendary comedic characters such as Dame Edna Everage and Sir Les Patterson. His state memorial will be held at the Sydney Opera House at 11am on Friday December 15th, for those who wish to pay their respects to the entertainment giant. "The State Memorial will bring together dignitaries, family, friends and fans of Mr Humphries from across Australia and around the world to celebrate his extraordinary career and achievements," the NSW government said online. <div> Limited free tickets have also been made available to the public through the <a title="Sydney Opera House website" href="https://www.sydneyoperahouse.com/state-memorial-barry-humphries-ac-cbe" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sydney Opera House website,</a> with fans able to snag a ticket from 2pm AEDT on Friday November 17th. Each person hoping to get a ticket will be allowed two tickets per customer to give everyone a chance to farewell one of Australia's best-loved entertainers. For those who miss out on a ticket, the memorial will be streamed online and broadcast on ABC, providing an opportunity for audiences everywhere to share in the celebration of Mr Humphries' life. Image credits: Getty Images </div>

Caring

Driver's shock after copping $2.2 million speeding ticket

In a shocking turn of events, a man in the US state of Georgia has found himself facing a $2.2 million ($US1.4m) traffic ticket after getting caught speeding on a freeway. Yes, you read that right - $2.2 million! It sounds like a punchline from a comedy show, but it happened in real life. Connor Cato was cruising through the city of Savannah on September 2, probably enjoying the wind in his hair, when the Georgia State Patrol nabbed him going a zippy 145km/h (90miles/h) in an 88km/h (55mile/h) zone. Now, we've all been there, right? In a rush, late for a meeting, or maybe just trying to win a real-life game of Mario Kart. But poor Mr Cato got WAY more than he bargained for. When the officer handed him a ticket, he must have been bracing himself for a hefty fine. But what he got was more jaw-dropping than a surprise birthday party from a circus troupe. The ticket had a price tag of $2.2 million! In disbelief, Cato decided to call the court, assuming it was a typo. But, to his amazement, the court clerk insisted that the amount was correct. She even had the audacity to tell him, "You either pay the amount on the ticket or you come to court on December 21 at 1:30pm." Thankfully, Cato's dire financial situation turned out to be a mere illusion. The $2.2 million was just what's known as a "placeholder" generated by e-citation software used in Savannah. This software, used by the local Recorder's Court, goes all Mission Impossible on super speeders – those who exceed the speed limit by more than 56km/h (35miles/h). It seems that the software programmers have a taste for drama, as they used the largest number possible to create this fine that sounds more like a ransom demand from a Bond villain. In reality, a judge will set the real fine, which cannot exceed $2,000 ($US1,000), plus state-mandated costs, at Cato's mandatory court appearance. So, our dear speed demon can breathe a sigh of relief; he won't be selling his house, car, and perhaps an organ or two to pay off that outrageous ticket. The city of Savannah has been using this placeholder system since 2017 and has promised to work on adjusting the language to avoid any further confusion. In the end, this story is a reminder that sometimes technology can have a wicked sense of humour. Images: Shutterstock / WSAV TV

Legal

"She's my heartbeat": Man's touching move after mum buys him $730k winning lottery ticket

A man from South Australia has vowed to shower his mother in gifts after she bought him a winning lottery ticket for his birthday. The man held one of the seven winning division one tickets, seeing him rake in a hefty prize of $738,668.19. The winning ticket was purchased by the man's mother, at the George Avenue Deli in Whyalla Norrie, north of Adelaide, with the family in disbelief at the extraordinary win. "My mum bought me this ticket for my birthday last week,” the man said. “I rang her yesterday after calling The Lott and she didn’t believe me at all.” The man said that while he is thrilled with the win, it still doesn't seem real. “Honestly, I’ve been holding off getting excited until the money is in my account,” he said. The grateful winner has promised to repay his mother for all she’s done for him by spoiling her “rotten” with his winnings. “She’s my heartbeat, she’s everything to me,” he said. “I wouldn’t have had a great birthday if it wasn’t for her, so I look forward to giving back to her.” The owner of George Avenue Deli, Lorna-Jane Anderson, said learning of the winning entry had been “wonderful news”. “There’s no doubt the local community will be happy to hear another Whyalla Norrie customer has won big with a ticket purchased at our outlet,” she said. “We’ve sold many major lottery prizes in the past two years and in fact, almost a year ago we sold a top prize-winning Instant Scratch-Its ticket worth $100,000." “We’re glad to hear the mystery winner has come forward to claim their prize and we wish him all the best with the win.” Image credits: The Lott

Money & Banking

"Ignore it": The one parking ticket Aussies can chuck in the bin

Western Australian driver, Connor Wright, has gone viral after sharing his advice on how to handle penalty notices issued by private parking companies. The TikTok, which now has over 1.5 million views, started off with Wright recalling the moment he walked back to his car to find a ticket issued by Parking Enforcement Services (PES), a division of Wilson Parking. Wright then proceeds to rip up the ticket and told others to "make sure to read the fine print on these bad boys". "If you read at the back, it says important information: 'This is not a parking fine'," he said. "Useless, throw it in the bin, don't pay that sh*t." Many have commented how they "wish they knew this earlier". The ticket itself is a 'breach notice' which starts at a $65 penalty from Wilson and is only issued when a person drives into private car park, for example in a shopping centre, and break the terms and conditions issued by the private entity. "What they try and do is recover the debt for the loss incurred, effectively like a breach of contract, but they're not fines — only a statutory body has the power to issue a fine." Sydney Criminal Lawyers James Clements told Yahoo News Australia. Clements also called the penalty a "bullying tactic" to "effectively try scaring people into paying them," but it is difficult to enforce it due to government "crackdowns." However parking fines from bodies like councils, some universities and hospitals should be paid. Clements advises that when you receive the breach notice you should "ignore it" or "write back and say, 'I dispute this and do not intend to pay'." "What you don't want to do is write to them and say that you disclose you were the driver." Drivers are also encouraged to read signs and the terms and conditions when entering a private car park. Images: TikTok

Legal

Beyond Barbie and Oppenheimer, how do cinemas make money? And do we pay too much for movie tickets?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> I’ve got two questions about blockbuster movies like Barbie and Oppenheimer. <ol> <li> Why aren’t the cinemas charging more for them, given they’re so popular? </li> <li> Why are they the same price, given Oppenheimer is an hour longer? </li> </ol> The opening weekend <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/culture/movies/how-australian-cinemas-and-audiences-handled-the-barbenheimer-juggernaut-20230724-p5dqso.html">for both films</a> saw an avalanche of Australians returning to the cinema. Extra staff had to be put on (although probably not enough) to manage queues, turn away pink-clad fans who couldn’t get in, and clean up mountains of popcorn trampled underfoot. An obvious solution to such a rush of demand is to push up prices. Airlines do it when they are getting low on seats. When more people want to get a ride share, Uber makes them pay with “<a href="https://www.uber.com/au/en/drive/driver-app/how-surge-works/">surge pricing</a>”. Even books are sold at different prices, depending on the demand, their length, their quality and how long they’ve been on the shelves. But not movie tickets, which are nearly always the same price, no matter the movie. Why? And how much has the cost of a trip to the movies risen over the past 20 years? <h2>Why not charge more for blockbusters?</h2> In suburban Melbourne, Hoyts is charging $24.50 for the two-hour Barbie – the same as it is charging for the three-hour Oppenheimer, even though it could fit in far fewer showings of Oppenheimer in a day. It’s also the same price as it is charging for much less popular movies, such as Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny. It’s also how things are in the United States, where James Surowiecki, author of <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/175380/the-wisdom-of-crowds-by-james-surowiecki/">The Wisdom of Crowds</a> blames convention and says "it costs you as much to see a total dog that’s limping its way through its last week of release as it does to see a hugely popular film on opening night." Australian economists Nicolas de Roos of The University of Sydney and Jordi McKenzie of Macquarie University quote Surowiecki in their <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167718714000174">2014 study</a> of whether cinema operators could make more by cutting the price of older and less popular films and raising the price of blockbusters. By examining what happened to demand on <a href="https://www.eventcinemas.com.au/Promotions/HalfPriceTuesdays#cinemas=59">cheap Tuesdays</a>, and developing a model taking into account advertising, reviews and the weather, they discovered Australian cinemas could make a lot more by <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167718714000174">varying their prices</a> by the movie shown. We turn out to be highly price sensitive. So why don’t cinemas do that? <h2>‘There’s a queue, it must be good’</h2> It’s the sort of thing that puzzled <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/1992/becker/biographical/">Gary Becker</a>, an economic detective of sorts who won the Nobel Prize for Economics in the early 1990s. A few years earlier, he turned his attention to <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2937660">restaurants</a> and why one particular seafood restaurant in Palo Alto, California, had long queues every night but didn’t raise its prices. Across the road was a restaurant that charged slightly more, sold food that was about as good, and was mostly empty. His conclusion, which he used a lot of maths to illustrate, was there are some goods for which a consumer’s demand depends on the demand of other consumers. Queues for restaurants (or in 2023, long queues and sold out sessions, as crowds were turned away from Barbie) are all signals other consumers want to get in. This would make queues especially valuable to the providers of such goods, even if the queues meant they didn’t get as much as they could from the customers who got in. The “buzz” such queues create produces a supply of future customers persuaded that what was on offer must be worth trying. Importantly, Becker’s maths showed that getting things right was fragile. It was much easier for a restaurant to go from being “in” to “out” than the other way around. Once a queue had created a buzz, it was wise not to mess with it. <h2>Cashing in from the snack bar</h2> There are other reasons for cinemas to charge a standard ticket price, rather than vary it movie by movie. One is that it is hard to tell ahead of time which movies are going to soar and which are going to bomb, even if you spend a fortune on advertising as the <a href="https://variety.com/2023/film/box-office/barbie-marketing-campaign-explained-warner-bros-1235677922/">makers of Barbie did</a>. In the words of an insider, “<a href="https://variety.com/2018/film/opinion/william-goldman-dies-appreciation-1203030781/">nobody knows anything</a>.” Another is the way cinemas make their money. They have to pay the distributor a share of what they get from ticket sales (typically <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167718714000174">35-40%</a>). But they don’t have to pay a share of what they make from high-margin snacks. This means it can make sense for some cinemas to charge less than what the market will bear – because they’ll sell more snacks – even if it means less money for the distributor. <h2>Rising prices, despite some falling costs</h2> But cinemas still charge a lot. From 2002 to 2022, Australian cinemas jacked up their average (not their highest) prices <a href="https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fact-finders/cinema/industry-trends/box-office/ticket-prices">from $9.13 to $16.26</a> – an increase of 78%. In the same 20 year period, overall prices in Australia, as measured by the <a href="https://theconversation.com/whats-in-the-cpi-and-what-does-it-actually-measure-165162">consumer price index</a>, climbed 65% – less than the rise in movie ticket prices. <hr /> <iframe id="E2kxi" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/E2kxi/5/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> A 2015 study found Australian cinemas charge more <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306227560_Counting_the_cost_the_impact_of_cinema_ticket_prices_in_Australia">than cinemas in the US</a>. Yet some of the cinemas’ costs have gone down. They used to have to employ projectionists to lace up and change reels of film. Digital delivery means much less handling. A now-dated <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/publications/developments-in-the-cinema-distribution-exhibition-industry">1990s report</a> to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission found the two majors, Hoyts and Greater Union/Village, charged near identical prices except where they were faced with competition from a nearby independent, in which case they discounted. Whether “<a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/The%20Cinema%20Industry.pdf">by design or circumstance</a>”, the two cinema chains rarely competed with each other, clustering their multiplexes in different geographical locations. <h2>Longer films no longer displace shorter films</h2> I think it might be the multiplex that answers my second question: why cinemas don’t charge more for movies that are longer (and movies are <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/culture/movies/bigger-than-ben-hur-why-movies-are-getting-longer-and-longer-20220322-p5a6ty.html">getting longer</a>). In the days of single screens, a cinema that showed a long movie might only fit in (say) four showings a day instead of six. So it would lose out unless it charged more. But these days, multiplexes show many, many films on many screens, some of them simultaneously, meaning long films needn’t displace short films. Although we have <a href="https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fact-finders/cinema/industry-trends/screens-and-theatres">fewer cinema seats</a> than we had a decade ago (and at least until the advent of Barbie, we’ve been <a href="https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fact-finders/cinema/industry-trends/screens-and-theatres">going less often</a>) we now have <a href="https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fact-finders/cinema/industry-trends/screens-and-theatres">far more screens</a>. Long movies no longer stop the multiplexes from playing standard ones. And because cinemas like to keep things simple, you pay the same price, no matter which movie you chose. <img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/211121/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, Visiting Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/beyond-barbie-and-oppenheimer-how-do-cinemas-make-money-and-do-we-pay-too-much-for-movie-tickets-211121">original article</a>.

Movies

Police lie in wait for Kyle Sandilands after on-air boasts

Well, well, well, it seems like Kyle Sandilands has become quite the sensation among the law enforcement agencies. This Tuesday morning was no ordinary day for the radio star, as he drove into KIIS FM's studios only to find himself caught in a wild ambush by the cops. Yes, you read that right! In a video that was later shared on The Kyle and Jackie O Show's Instagram account, viewers were shown several police officers patiently waiting for Sandilands to arrive at the ungodly hour of 5:30 am. As Kyle stepped out of his luxurious $250,000 Cadillac Escalade Platinum 4WD, the officers approached him, ready to take action. But wait – it turns out this encounter wasn't your typical traffic stop. In fact, it was all about Kyle's on-air shenanigans! The station's employees spilled the beans, revealing that the police had a little chat with them while they eagerly waited for Kyle's arrival. Turns out, the boys in blue just wanted to have a friendly discussion with the father-of-one about his knack for making outrageous comments on the radio. "The highway patrol dude[s], they've come out and they've said, 'Listen, we've heard you on the air saying you think the coppers are after you," said Kyle. "And they've come out to tell me they're not after me." Kyle, being the smooth talker that he is, managed to talk himself out of any real trouble, with the audio recording from the station capturing his finesse in action. But here's the kicker: he didn't entirely believe their explanation. In fact, he expressed concern about his dwindling points on his driver's license, mentioning that he only had four left. However, the encounter did not end in tears or sirens blaring. In a surprising turn of events, Kyle decided to call one officer's fiancée, who happened to be a fan of the show, just to tell her that she had landed herself "a good one" in her law enforcement beau. Smooth move, Kyle, smooth move! Now, let's rewind to 2021 when Sandilands confessed to accumulating a whopping $16,000 worth of fines in just one year. He practically treats parking fines like they're going out of style. During a lively conversation with his manager and pal, Bruno Bouchet, on The Kyle and Jackie O Show, Kyle spilled the beans on his parking escapades. Apparently, he has witnessed firsthand the magical art of getting away with parking violations. According to Bruno, there are a few parking rangers who are loyal fans of the show and would rather not deal with the hassle of booking Kyle. But Kyle takes his parking rebellion to the next level. He boldly declared, "I never buy a ticket, I say f**k the local council, I'm not paying you $4, screw yourself!" The numbers don't lie, and neither does Jackie O's shocked expression. Let's break down the fines, shall we? 18 fines for "parking continuously longer than indicated" racked up a bill of $2,088. Kyle's blatant disregard for stop signs earned him 25 violations, totalling $5,675. And if that wasn't enough, stopping in a loading zone like it's his personal VIP parking spot resulted in a staggering 42 charges, adding up to $8,148. The grand total for the year? A jaw-dropping $15,911! Naturally, Jackie couldn't hide her disbelief and told Kyle that it was a "waste of money." But Kyle had an explanation (or maybe an excuse?) up his sleeve. He admitted that sometimes he mistakes the ticket fines for Domino's flyers on his car window. Ah, the struggles of a wealthy and famous man! In the grand scheme of things, $16,000 is pocket change for Kyle, who reportedly rakes in a mind-boggling $5 million per year for hosting The Kyle and Jackie O Show. Well, there you have it, folks, a true rebel fighting against the system, one parking ticket at a time. Images: KIIS FM

Legal

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

“Entitled as”: Tesla driver mocked for creative parking

Woman fined after paid car park gets set up around her parked vehicle

"Unfair" parking fines could soon be a thing of the past

"Pretty brutal": Peter Garrett slams Taylor Swift for price gouging tickets

"Other cities will follow": Big trouble ahead for SUV owners

"It's just not fair": Driver slams council for misleading parking fine

Spin cycle disaster: man puts winning Lotto ticket through the wash

Dad cops furious note from "egotistical Karen" for parking in parent's bay

Woman sparks debate after copping $116 fine for "absurd" rule

“This doesn’t make sense": Mum fined for parking in own driveway

"Surely this is a prank": Council slammed for ridiculous parking restriction

"Hats off to whoever did this": Hilarious act of revenge on parking spot thief

"Suck it up": Tourist's parking mistake divides Aussies

"What am I missing?" Driver confused over hefty parking fine

Free tickets up for grabs to Barry Humphries' state memorial

Driver's shock after copping $2.2 million speeding ticket

"She's my heartbeat": Man's touching move after mum buys him $730k winning lottery ticket

"Ignore it": The one parking ticket Aussies can chuck in the bin

Beyond Barbie and Oppenheimer, how do cinemas make money? And do we pay too much for movie tickets?

Police lie in wait for Kyle Sandilands after on-air boasts

Our Partners

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

“Entitled as”: Tesla driver mocked for creative parking

Woman fined after paid car park gets set up around her parked vehicle

"Unfair" parking fines could soon be a thing of the past

"Pretty brutal": Peter Garrett slams Taylor Swift for price gouging tickets

"Other cities will follow": Big trouble ahead for SUV owners

"It's just not fair": Driver slams council for misleading parking fine

Spin cycle disaster: man puts winning Lotto ticket through the wash

Dad cops furious note from "egotistical Karen" for parking in parent's bay

Woman sparks debate after copping $116 fine for "absurd" rule

“This doesn’t make sense": Mum fined for parking in own driveway

"Surely this is a prank": Council slammed for ridiculous parking restriction

"Hats off to whoever did this": Hilarious act of revenge on parking spot thief

"Suck it up": Tourist's parking mistake divides Aussies

"What am I missing?" Driver confused over hefty parking fine

Free tickets up for grabs to Barry Humphries' state memorial

Driver's shock after copping $2.2 million speeding ticket

"She's my heartbeat": Man's touching move after mum buys him $730k winning lottery ticket

"Ignore it": The one parking ticket Aussies can chuck in the bin

Beyond Barbie and Oppenheimer, how do cinemas make money? And do we pay too much for movie tickets?

Police lie in wait for Kyle Sandilands after on-air boasts

Our Partners

Join Over60