By Ann O’Shea

Ann O’Shea is a journalist, lawyer, retired New York State judge, and 50-plus-year resident of the Upper West Side.

The Parking ticket stuck on the windshield of my car — parked on the “good side” across the street from my home on West 87th Street — charged me with displaying a “counterfeit” inspection sticker in violation of §4-08(j)(7) of the NYC Traffic Rules. Section 4-08(j)(7) prohibits the display of an inspection sticker that is “mutilated, imitation, or counterfeit.” The charge was preposterous. I would have no reason – or ability — to find or fabricate a counterfeit inspection sticker.

I got the ticket on October 8, 2022. On October 15, 2022, began my Kafkaesque journey through the obtuse, irrational process of challenging a parking ticket. I pleaded “not guilty” on the website of the Department of Finance (DOF), which is the agency that processes parking tickets, and uploaded a copy of the Vehicle Inspection Report, which confirmed the issuance, in November 2021, of a valid inspection sticker by a registered and certified vehicle inspection station. The DOF confirmed online that it had received my plea and evidence. I waited for the decision, checking my email and my snail mail every day.

I never received a decision. Instead, on January 7, 2023,  I received a “Notice of Open Violation,” dated January 4, 2023, which accused in bold letters, “You have not responded to the violation(s) issued to a vehicle registered in your name. You must respond by the due date. You must pay in full or DISPUTE THE VIOLATIONS.” The “due date” stated in the Notice of Open Violation was January 30, 2023.

I responded in a letter dated January 8, 2023, that I had, in fact, responded to the ticket online on October 15, 2022. I attached copies of the DOF acknowledgement of receipt of my not guilty plea, my Vehicle Inspection Report, and the original ticket, all of which I sent Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested. I eventually received an acknowledgement of receipt of my letter and documents. I still had not received a decision on my “not guilty” plea.

On February 1, 2023, I received, not a decision on my challenge to the ticket, but a letter dated January 30, 2023, informing me that “a hearing was held on 10-27-22,” where I was “found guilty,” and, as “no application for an appeal had been submitted within the time allotted,” payment of the $65 fine was due immediately.  I rechecked my email; there was no decision or any other communication from the DOF.

On February 5, 2023, I drafted yet another response, to which I attached copies of the ticket, the Vehicle Inspection Report, the DOF’s acknowledgement of receipt of my online plea, the Notice of Open Violation, and my January 8th response. I also submitted a DOF Appeal Application form and requested an appointment with the “Parking Advocate.” I was given a choice of dates and times for a meeting with the Parking Advocate; I chose Valentine’s Day, February 14, 2023, at 10:30 AM. I received an online confirmation – and two subsequent “Friendly Reminders” — of my February 14th appointment with the Parking Advocate.

On Valentine’s Day, I appeared at 66 John Street for my appointment with the Parking Advocate. I checked in at 10:00 AM and was told by the Clerk that I would be called when it was my turn. By 11:15, when I had not been called, I asked another Clerk when I would be called. She replied, “you know, I haven’t seen the Parking Advocate today. Let me check his office.” She returned and informed me that the Parking Advocate’s office was locked up, and he did not appear to be there, saying, “I don’t know why he’s not here. He’s supposed to be here on Tuesdays.” I left copies of my February 5, 2023 response for delivery to the DOF Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioner, and the General Counsel.

Later that afternoon, I received a call from the assistant to the Deputy Commissioner. It was at this point that the strange turned bizarre. The Assistant asked me if I had replaced my windshield sometime before getting the ticket. As it so happened, I had, earlier in the summer, as my windshield was cracked and the crack was growing. “Aha!” the Assistant exclaimed. “That explains it!” According to the Assistant, NYC Inspection Stickers are treated with a special, secret chemical, which renders the sticker “void”  when it is exposed to the air.

The technician at  the Safelite windshield shop had told me that they would try to remove my inspection and registration stickers from the old windshield and reattach them to the new one, but he warned that if the stickers were damaged in the process, I would have to replace them. He did not tell me that once exposed to the air, my inspection sticker would magically be voided. When I retrieved my car, the inspection and registration stickers were neatly attached to the new windshield with no apparent damage or change.

Nonetheless, the Assistant’s assertion that NYC’s secret alchemy would render my inspection sticker “void,” without the law or rules giving notice to car owners of this trap, seemed incredible. I am a lawyer and checked the New York City Traffic Rules once again. Nothing there to warn car owners of the secret alchemy. I checked the regulations of  the New York State DMV. Nothing there either. However, the State DMV website, in response to a FAQ, instructs car owners that, if your inspection sticker comes off, just “attach it to the windshield again with clear tape or a small amount of clear adhesive.” Apparently, New York State, which regulates car inspections, does not subscribe to the same secret chemical magic that New York City does.

The DOF Assistant arranged an extension of my time to appeal the guilty decision that I had never received.  I did receive a notice that my appeal hearing was scheduled for March 16, 2023, at 12:30 PM at 66 John Street. I appeared on the appointed date and at the appointed time before a panel of three appeal “judges,” who demanded that I tell them what mistake in the facts or the law the original judge had made. I told them that I did not know because I had never received a copy of the decision. That did not faze the appellate panel in the least. One of them printed out the decision and handed it to me. I was given 30 seconds to read the decision. It stated that my Vehicle Inspection Report was “unpersuasive” and that my inspection sticker was “void.” Only because the Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner had informed me of the secret chemical process that magically rendered an inspection sticker “void” when exposed to the air did I understand how that could be.

The appellate “judges” demanded an immediate answer. I argued that there was nothing in the law that would notify a citizen that his or her inspection sticker would be rendered void if exposed to the air, that the NYS website provided contradictory information, that I did not observe anything indicating the inspection sticker was voided, and that my inspection sticker was not “mutilated, imitation or counterfeit,” in violation of §4-08(j)(7), but was, in fact, the same inspection sticker that had been attached to my old windshield.

On March 22, 2023, the Appeal Panel affirmed the guilty verdict. While I could go to court to challenge the decision, I would have to pay a $350 filing fee to do so.