Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.
November 14
Foreign parking fines
So, I got a parking ticket slapped on the windscreen of my car just a couple of hours before I left Hungary during a recent holiday. Now 8 weeks later, a letter drops on my doormat demanding a vastly inflated (4x) payment. Should I bother pointing out the lack of obvious signs or ticket machines in the car park that would have indicated the need to pay?
Don't slap this guy with accusation of seeking legal advice which we cannot do...I think we can legitimately answer this question on what authorities are likely to be sympathetic to...Of course we may want him to waive his rights to sue or subject him to a binding arbitration clause--152.3.240.22 (talk) 00:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on how things normally work in Hungary. If there is a system where you need a parking permit to part anywhere displaying a particular logo, or similar, (which is highly possible) then it would have been very easy for you not to know that rule, however that wouldn't be a defence (ignorance of the law almost never is). --Tango (talk) 01:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All I saw was the white "P" on a square blue background which is pretty much standard throughout Europe, including Hungary, to indicate a car parking area. There was just no indication of a need to pay. Elsewhere in Hungary, I saw prominent signs on the same pole as the "P" with parking tariffs and hours of operation and machines to issue tickets nearby. I was therefore quite surprised to find a ticket on my car. Astronaut (talk) 01:45, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly there's not one law for residents and another for visitors. Residents would probably have known it was a no-parking zone just through familiarity. In my home town of Vienna the parking signs are pretty obscure sometimes and (of course) all spelled out in German. If you don't read the language you've got no hope. In other words, I think you're just going to have to suck it up and pay the fine. --Richardrjtalk email06:08, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Richard and Ron have missed the point. I'm not suggesting I should be immune from the law in Hungary just because I'm a foreign visitor. I think that the signage should have been present, like I saw elsewhere in Hungary. The blue sign with the "P" was obvious, but it did not have the accompanying sign detailing tariffs and hours as seen elsewhere. In my own country, parking that you must pay for is clearly marked, because a lack of signs is often a reasonable case for the fine being waived. I am wondering if the same is true in Hungary. Astronaut (talk) 16:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why don´t you contact the Hungarian embassy in London and explain the matter? They have what I assume to be a helpful website. I have to assume, because it is all in Hungarian. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So let me understand. You were visiting Hungary and shortly before you left the country, you got a parking ticket. Several weeks later you got a notice in the mail requesting you to pay the ticket (presumably at your house in another country?). What is to stop you from telling the people who sent you the ticket to shove it where the sun don't shine? I do not think that they have any legal hold over you outside their country anymore. Of course, I am in the US and don't know how that EU thing works, so I might be wrong on that. Googlemeister (talk) 16:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is not good advice both A) to confirm to the foreign authority that they have correctly located the car owner, and B) to send a message that is provocative and almost guarantees that the fine will be pursued. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This suggests there's a EU (I presume) wide agreement allowing fines to be enforced. [2]. Whether this includes parking fines I'm not sure [3]. I agree with Cuddlyable3 that if you want to ignore the fine that's one thing. To purposely piss off the authorities is another and likely a bad idea. Even if they don't have the option to pursue you, what about if you ever want to visit Hungary again? (You may not know, but who know's what will happen in the future?) Nil Einne (talk) 20:11, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The notice mailed to me came from the UK office of a european parking fine collection agency. I'm tempted to ignore it, but I imagine they won't give up easily (I'm still getting letters from debt collection agencies about the person who used to live in my house before I bought it 10 years ago - but that's another story) and I suspect the fine will just keep on rising the longer I leave it. I'm not worried about extradition, but being tried in-absentia and fined a huge amount should I choose to visit Hungary again, is more serious and something I would rather avoid!
I just think the ticket was issued unfairly and think that I might have reasonable grounds to contest the fine. But being ignorant of Hungarian law I'm unsure if I will just be putting off the inevitable and end up paying a much higher fine. So there's no Hungarian residents on this ref-desk? Astronaut (talk) 21:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In terms of contesting the fine, my first thought is how sure are you there was insignificant signage? From your question and earlier replies, it's not clear to me when you realised you got fined. If it was while in the car park, I presume you had a good look around so can be resonable sure. However if it was only afterwards then I guess you're only going by memory that you didn't see any signs, but there's always a risk they were fairly prominent you just didn't notice them. Unless the area is known to be a problem one I don't know whether just telling them you didn't see any signs is likely to be very effective. If you are able to tell them you had a very good look around and there were no signs or anything suggesting you had to pay. Even better if you took photos of the area to prove your point. In any case, there's still a fair chance you won't succeed but I would presume challenging (perhaps querying is a better word since a proper challenge may require a court case) it won't immediately raise the cost I would presume if you've been in contact with them and are challenging they would at least tell you if you don't pay by whatever date the cost will go up (unless they've already told you). Nil Einne (talk) 08:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Spooks or, as it's known in the US, MI-5
In the television series Spooks, when they segue from one scene to another, they often put the location of the new scene at the bottom of the screen. It's usually something like "London, E10". (I'm going from memory, so my apologies if the number is wrong) What is the "E10" part?
And secondly, when the characters go into their office area, they have to go through some sort of revolving door type thing. What does that do? Is it some sort of electronics scanner or bomb detector? Dismas|(talk)03:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Abbey Road is in NW8E10 is a London postal district - as well as being postcodes, these districts are used for general orientation in London. The revolving door type thing (which I seem to remember is called a "pod") is a magic everything scanner, I remember one recent storyline where Ros (or was it the other one?) was given some sort of super-duper listening device which could get through it. FiggyBee (talk) 03:31, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I've only just started watching the series, so I haven't gotten to any episodes that might explain the pods. In case anyone is wondering, I love it so far. The DVDs are interesting too since the main menu isn't printed on the screen but actually spoken. Dismas|(talk)04:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC seem to have moved to spoken navigation on DVDs, for accessibility. That is, you get a spoken and written instruction at the beginning, giving you the option of audio navigation if you want it. I'm a little surprised that this would be the default without the clear option of a visual menu, since that limits access for the deaf or hard of hearing. 86.149.189.52 (talk) 13:22, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The revolving door is probably a turnstyle that limits access to one person at a time. Presumably each person presents some form of ID card to get through, and the turnstyle stops a second person from entering on the first person's card, ie preventing the common scenario with a normal door that one person swipes a card and a group of people enter (in which case the access control system doesn't that the other people are in the building). Mitch Ames (talk) 13:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't think of any BBC series that are that "popular" over here. At least I don't know of anyone that I have met who follows anything on that channel. So I wouldn't think the the "Americans are bad guys" aspect would come into play. —Akrabbimtalk18:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about Americans not following anything on that channel. Just ask any sci-fi fan if they follow Dr. Who. As far as the popularity of Spooks here in the US, I will agree that's it's not that popular insofar as at most it might have a cult status at the most. Until it showed up at the house, I had never heard of it. My father-in-law, who likes the BBC channel, suggested it to my wife who put it on our Netflix queue. I think I'm a bit different than most American viewers. I don't have cable or satellite. I also don't have an antenna to get local broadcast stations. I rely on Netflix for my "television" watching. I also don't fit the mold of the normal American in that I like Dr. Who, Top Gear, and now Spooks. A Venn diagram of the three genres wouldn't have a lot audience cross-over. Dismas|(talk)18:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whereas in the category of "fandom" rather than "norms", you're pretty typical. You just need to find a community of fen to hang out with and you'll find a lot of people who've seen the same sort of thing as you: chances are you'll enjoy some of the other things they like, and vice versa. Just a little disambiguation: the BBC is the not same thing as the channel BBC America, although many of the programmes shown on BBC America were originally made or funded by the BBC. 86.142.231.220 (talk) 20:09, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm American and I like many BBC series (like The IT Crowd, for instance). We've watched the entire Spooks/MI-5 series, although it's mainly to see who will be killed each episode due to MI-5's habitual incompetence. So I enjoy it in much the same way as you enjoy watching a bad movie, as in the concept behind MST3K. We'll even make bets at how incompetent they will be: "I say the send the untrained operative out into the field without any backup whatsoever", "No, even they wouldn't be THAT incompetent", "Sure they would !" (and indeed, they were). StuRat (talk) 04:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I know: Spooks is populated with profoundly stupid spies. And you've provided a perfect example of how the BBC (corporation) is not the same as BBC America (a channel in America): The IT Crowd was not produced by the BBC, nor was it funded by the BBC, nor was it shown on the BBC (any of their four TV channels) in the UK. To someone in the UK, it is a Channel 4 programme or, if they give it more thought, a talkbackThames programme, or a Graham Linehan programme. 86.142.231.220 (talk) 17:42, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and regarding the spoken menu, I don't think it's for accessability at all. Before you get to the menu, it shows a spy in traditional black clothing with a black ski mask sneaking into an office building. There's a voice over which is supposed to be a mission briefing type thing. He arrives at a desk and the briefing turns into a description of what you see on the desk. The voice over basically tells you what those things on the desk do, e.g. "The stack of DVDs to the left have the program files, you can access biographical data of the targets in the rolodex to the left of that, use the telephone to adjust audio settings..." There are no visual menus. Only this voice over and a pointer on the screen which you move around to each item on the desk. The first time I went through it, my wife was talking to me as the menu was loading and I had to stop her by saying, "Wait, I think this is the menu. I'm missing what all this does." It's an interesting twist on the usual menus but doesn't help the deaf or hard of hearing at all. Dismas|(talk)01:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. While fun, that sounds like it goes against current BBC practice for their DVDs over here. I wonder if the region 2 DVDs do the same thing? 86.142.231.220 (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Spoken menus are designed to be accessible to blind people. Although if there was no visual option at all, it would be inaccessible to deaf and hard of hearing people, so that does seem odd. --70.129.142.174 (talk) 04:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Pods do have scanners in them, they once set off the alarms and automatically locked when Jools Siviter was in them, something which amused Tom greatly ("Jolly Japes in the playground Tom!"). As I recall it's series 1 episode 5, Traitor's Gate. EDIT: My error, it was Series 1 Episode 4, The Rose Bed Memoirs. 130.88.171.213 (talk) 12:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Answering to the popularity of BBC programes in the USA, I am an American. I did enjoy the first two series of MI-5 (Spooks). However, I was positively blown away by Life on Mars, especially the final episode which was truly remarkable. I also enjoyed Ashes to Ashes.Chief41074 (talk) 19:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Edy's "Frozen Dairy Dessert"
Edy's ice cream where I live (Northeast US) is labeled as "Frozen Dairy Dessert" rather than ice cream. Anyone know why this is? The ingredient list seems the same to me as "real" ice creams. Some obscure legal reason? (If anybody knows, this should be added to the article.) Staecker (talk) 14:07, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that Ice cream#United States states "American federal labeling standards require ice cream to contain a minimum of 10% milk fat (about 7 grams (g) of fat per 1/2 cup [120 mL] serving) and 20% total milk solids by weight". The use of skimmed milk would mean there would be a reduced level of milk fat in the end product, thus making and classification as an ice cream doubtful (yet not impossible). Nanonic (talk) 14:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed here in South Africa that "ice cream" is used for the product when made with animal fat, whereas "frozen dessert" is used for the (almost identical) product made using vegetable fat. To get around this conundrum some sneaky marketers simply carry on using the term "ice cream" but then put an asterisk after it and the words "with vegetable fat" in the fine print below. Zunaid·FOREVER12:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be an ironic case where the healthier product, with less animal fat, is labeled as if it's somehow an inferior product. If I had it my way, traditional ice cream would be called "high animal fat ice cream", and the healthier stuff would just be called "ice cream". StuRat (talk) 15:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Less animal fat" is not necessarily a good thing. For example, the partially hydrogenated vegetable oils widely used in fast food frying are much worse for you than the beef tallow they replaced. FiggyBee (talk) 15:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If it was up to me, the ersatz version made with vegetable oil would be labelled "frozen industrial vegetable extract with added colourings, flavourings and texture-modifiers" and the real stuff would be called "ice cream". DuncanHill (talk) 19:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My headphone has developed a crack across the top (photo) and will probably break in half soon if I don't fix it. I've tried using epoxy but it just pulls away when stress is applied (ie. putting it on my head) as it doesn't bond to the plastic very well. What other methods/glue can I use to fix this? --antilivedT | C | G23:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd consider gussets: thin plastic or metal rectangles on the outside and (especially) inside of the strap. Glue them on and, for security, drill a couple of holes and put in machine screws and nuts. You'll obviously have to peel the padding back for access. The problem with gluing without gussets is that there's a lot of strain concentrated in a small area. Just make the atrea bigger. PhGustaf (talk) 00:19, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When superglue dries, it becomes solid plastic. Perhaps a resin, such as GC resin, would work -- it's used in dentistry and, although it's red in color, did a great job holding my light for 4 years so far. DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)03:14, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You need something with a decent tensile strength. Have you tried something as simple as duck tape? As a wise man once said, "if you can't duck it, fuck it"... --Jayron3205:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Replacing it with something better would indeed be the best approach. If the editor is short on cash for these increasingly-expensive items, the duct tape answer is a pretty good one. Should make it last awhile. Or any kind of strong tape, really. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 04:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's a pair of Sennheiser wireless headphones so I'm a bit reluctant replacing it if I can fix it. The plastic is PP and apparently all the commonly available glues don't stick to it. Tape definitely won't work since the stress will simply rip the tape off. In the end I welded it with a soldering iron. It's not very pretty but it works. Thanks for the help guys. --antilivedT | C | G03:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
