I read in The Argus (April 15) about a man called Robert Young who was fined because a traffic warden concluded, from the position of his wheel valves, that his car had remained in the same place for longer than was permitted.

If you have reported the case correctly, Brighton and Hove City Council claimed that Mr Young's nearside wheel valves were at 9am (front) and 4pm (rear) on two occasions spanning a period of over four hours, namely at 11.10am and 4.18pm on the day in question. This gives rise to two queries.

Firstly, if the two checks were made at 11.10am and 4.18pm, how does the council make that a "period of more than four hours"? Either it should have said "more than five hours" or it has got one of the times wrong. Which?

Secondly, as regards the alleged valve positions, when quoting positions by reference to an imaginary clockface, the terms "am" and "pm" have no relevance.

Their inclusion is meaningless and indicates confusion on the part of the author. To my mind, it casts doubt on the reliability of the information the council claims to have received.

garbled information reportedly provided by the council, it has the right to discountthe possibility of the car having being moved and subsequently stopped with its nearside wheels in the same position and to "deem that the vehicle did not move" during the period in question.

What a good thing we have some council elections coming up soon. Perhaps a new council can do something to improve the efficiency of its servants.

-JVW Bidwell, Hove