Anthony Mizzi, in his letter Residential Parking Schemes (May 19), wrote: "I fail to understand why local wardens, especially those that are Valletta based, still enjoy coming out of their hideouts and with perverse pleasure, give out parking tickets to vehicles parked in spaces reserved for residents."

He rightly refers to a judgment by Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco (942/2004) where a particular local council was deemed to be acting ultra vires when it imposed a residential parking scheme as this was effectively discriminating between citizens who live in different parts of the island. Fines imposed for such interventions should be waived.

I wrote exactly in the same terms in my letter Residents' Parking (April 11) and went further by mentioning a car parked near my home.

What attracted my attention was a badge with the car's details issued by a local council which meant that while the driver left the car parked near my home from early morning to late evening as he/she had every right to do, I was not allowed to go and do the same in the street/home town of this driver!

I asked if this is deemed correct, fair and just.

Incredibly, these restrictions are not only still in place, but have been increasing everywhere, meaning that local councils are completely ignoring a judgment by a court.

Since Mr Mizzi referred to Valletta-based wardens, may I conclude by mentioning that in November 2007, I went in a friend's car to Valletta and he parked on top of the entrance to the city. On our return we found a ticket because we were parked in an area reserved for Valletta residents. My friend was rather frustrated and I offered to draft a letter for him mentioning four points:

First, the area is poorly lit and none of us four noticed the sign or the faded lines; second, I queried whether Valletta belonged to Valletta residents only; third, I quoted the judgment by the court mentioned above; and fourth, I quoted what I mentioned in my fourth paragraph above.

In the acknowledgement he received to the contestation, it was stated that "matters are on hold", which to my way of seeing things proves me right. Effectively it means: "Yes, you are right and we have no intention of doing anything about it."