PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Parking on ZigZag?, Parking on ZigZag?
cyjn198
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 10:49
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,928



Hi all,
I have been parking outside my house for 7 years and had no problem.
Recently I received 2 parking tickets sharp at 8am.
The contravention code is 02, but I parked on the pavement and is adjacent to the Zigzag.
Is this ticket still valid? Do I have a chance to challenge?

https://ibb.co/hCW0fJ
https://ibb.co/jWd2ud
https://ibb.co/ewXj7y
https://ibb.co/fmzLfJ
https://ibb.co/k6HvEd
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image


Attached Image
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 10:49
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 10:52
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Show us where this is on Google Street View.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cyjn198
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 11:57
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,928



Thank you for the reply.
It's where the crossing is but it is not parked on the tactile pavement
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nextdoor
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 12:09
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 529
Joined: 20 Jan 2017
Member No.: 89,788




QUOTE
It's where the crossing is but it is not parked on the tactile pavement


Not a lot of help. Bristol Road is about 2 miles long
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 13:47
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (nextdoor @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 13:09) *
QUOTE
It's where the crossing is but it is not parked on the tactile pavement


Not a lot of help. Bristol Road is about 2 miles long


Lot longer then that biggrin.gif
But I reckon on the left here
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.4586951,-...3312!8i6656

There is little doubt in my mind that the traffic order waiting restriction will include the area bounded by the crossing controlled area (ZZs)
Equally little doubt that Birmingham will tell you that it will even if it doesn't.
But there are no yellow lines (cannot be within controlled area) so could claim insufficient signage.
Whether an adjudicator would agree is open to question.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 14:36
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



The definition of the controlled area is here

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/go...-chapter-05.pdf

Para 15.27 page 94. The cited regs have been replaced by TSRGD 2016 but AIUI this has not changed.

The pavement is not part of the controlled area


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cyjn198
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 15:37
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,928



I made an informal challenge that the pavement is not controlled area and Birmingham Council replied to say that it continues to the pavement if the liens are on the road?
I also looked into the contravention code that parking on zigzag line should be 99c not 02?
Is that correct?
If I would take the challenge which route should I go down?

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 14:47) *
QUOTE (nextdoor @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 13:09) *
QUOTE
It's where the crossing is but it is not parked on the tactile pavement


Not a lot of help. Bristol Road is about 2 miles long


Lot longer then that biggrin.gif
But I reckon on the left here
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.4586951,-...3312!8i6656

There is little doubt in my mind that the traffic order waiting restriction will include the area bounded by the crossing controlled area (ZZs)
Equally little doubt that Birmingham will tell you that it will even if it doesn't.
But there are no yellow lines (cannot be within controlled area) so could claim insufficient signage.
Whether an adjudicator would agree is open to question.



Yes that is exactly where it is.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 20:37
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



No contravention. There needs to be yellow lines for an 02 contravention


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 20:42
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 21:37) *
No contravention. There needs to be yellow lines for an 02 contravention

+1


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 21:17
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 21:37) *
No contravention. There needs to be yellow lines for an 02 contravention



We have seen similar where driver had parked inboard of a bus stand (solid yellow line) and adjudicator still upheld the PCN (01 or 02 forget which) as yellow lines continue even if not present.
Be wary
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DastardlyDick
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 22:42
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,860
Joined: 12 May 2012
Member No.: 54,871



QUOTE (cyjn198 @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 16:37) *
I made an informal challenge that the pavement is not controlled area and Birmingham Council replied to say that it continues to the pavement if the liens are on the road?
I also looked into the contravention code that parking on zigzag line should be 99c not 02?
Is that correct?
If I would take the challenge which route should I go down?

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 14:47) *
QUOTE (nextdoor @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 13:09) *
QUOTE
It's where the crossing is but it is not parked on the tactile pavement


Not a lot of help. Bristol Road is about 2 miles long


Lot longer then that biggrin.gif
But I reckon on the left here
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.4586951,-...3312!8i6656

There is little doubt in my mind that the traffic order waiting restriction will include the area bounded by the crossing controlled area (ZZs)
Equally little doubt that Birmingham will tell you that it will even if it doesn't.
But there are no yellow lines (cannot be within controlled area) so could claim insufficient signage.
Whether an adjudicator would agree is open to question.



Yes that is exactly where it is.

If you have made an informal challenge, where is the Council's reply, we need to see it.
Now you have to wait for the Notice to Owner (NtO) and make a formal representation.

This post has been edited by DastardlyDick: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 22:44
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cyjn198
post Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 09:55
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,928



Here is their reply.

https://ibb.co/iFsqhy
https://ibb.co/gZn1pd
https://ibb.co/k4Ru9d

This post has been edited by cyjn198: Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 10:13
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 16:04
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Well for one thing the legislation does not require the council to send a Notice to Owner. They also wrongly state that informal representations will not be considered except if formal representations are received after the NtO is served. Wait for the NtO and we'll take it from there.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 18:02
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,919
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



The legislation for the zig-zags is different to that for yellow lines. Buried deep in the TSRGD is the restriction for zig-zags, but essentially the "No Stopping" restriction they convey is that lying between the two sets of zig-zags visible in the photos, the pavement is outside those hence is not subject to the zig-zag restriction. The difference is that zig-zags apply to the carriageway, and yellow lines to the road. If they want to restrict you parking there they must put in yellow lines, or ban footway parking. There have been a few previous case on here where this was the issue and the adjudicator allowed the appeals, (no doubt between gritted teeth), but the law is the law, and he must apply it.

Of course in reality, if you continue to park there they'll just issue PCN after PCN, and wear you down with the effort of appealing. There are no penalties on them for doing so, and one adjudication does not affect another.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cyjn198
post Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 09:20
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,928



QUOTE (Incandescent @ Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 19:02) *
The legislation for the zig-zags is different to that for yellow lines. Buried deep in the TSRGD is the restriction for zig-zags, but essentially the "No Stopping" restriction they convey is that lying between the two sets of zig-zags visible in the photos, the pavement is outside those hence is not subject to the zig-zag restriction. The difference is that zig-zags apply to the carriageway, and yellow lines to the road. If they want to restrict you parking there they must put in yellow lines, or ban footway parking. There have been a few previous case on here where this was the issue and the adjudicator allowed the appeals, (no doubt between gritted teeth), but the law is the law, and he must apply it.

Of course in reality, if you continue to park there they'll just issue PCN after PCN, and wear you down with the effort of appealing. There are no penalties on them for doing so, and one adjudication does not affect another.


So for contravention code 02, the No Stopping sign does not apply because is zigzag and I parked on pavement and not the carriageway? Where can I read about the zigzag is different from yellow lins and the difference between carriage and road?
I have been parking somewhere else now to avoid getting more tickets.

This post has been edited by cyjn198: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 09:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 10:02
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



Zig zags only have relevance because the legislation does not allow any other road markings to be used in conjunction.
So they cannot paint the yellow lines.
This comes down to whether or not an adjudicator believes that there is sufficient signage to show that the yellow line restriction is clearly marked.
Plus legitimate expectation as you have been parking here for how long without issue.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 10:45
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 11:02) *
Zig zags only have relevance because the legislation does not allow any other road markings to be used in conjunction.
So they cannot paint the yellow lines.
This comes down to whether or not an adjudicator believes that there is sufficient signage to show that the yellow line restriction is clearly marked.
Plus legitimate expectation as you have been parking here for how long without issue.


an adjudicator could easily find that the pavement is still controlled based on the signs in proximity, though against that is the fact that the SYL is terminated with the T marking I second DD make the point that no yellow lines and that you and others have parked in the same manner for years. GSV time line supports this


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 11:26
Post #18


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9,710
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



Under the 2002 TSRGDs the "controlled area" was the carriageway just like under the (revoked) Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997 so the pavement was included.

The TSRGDs 2016 says:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/14/made

"the prohibition that the driver of a vehicle must not cause the vehicle or any part of that vehicle to stop in the controlled area"

So this is a “Parallel controlled area” as per:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/1/made

IMO the OP can get a PCN for parking in that fashion.

However I agree that the wrong contravention has been given and, that according to the above, a Code 99 is the correct one.

I think PMB had a case where a bus lane was interrupted by zig zags which might apply.

Mick

This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 11:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 11:38
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 12:26) *
Under the 2002 TSRGDs the "controlled area" was the carriageway just like under the (revoked) Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997 so the pavement was included.

The TSRGDs 2016 says:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/14/made

"the prohibition that the driver of a vehicle must not cause the vehicle or any part of that vehicle to stop in the controlled area"

So this is a “Parallel controlled area” as per:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/1/made

IMO the OP can get a PCN for parking in that fashion.

However I agree that the wrong contravention has been given and, that according to the above, a Code 99 is the correct one.

I think PMB had a case where a bus lane was interrupted by zig zags which might apply.

Mick


not the interpretation i would make. The starting premise is carriageway, to me it defines the area of carriageway bounded by the zig zags not any area outwith them


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 12:28
Post #20


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9,710
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



@PMB

I see where you are coming from but I don't think we need to argue that point unless the consensus is that the OP is safe to park in that manner. Then I would contend that the definition of a "road" is to be found in Sect.192 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. It is defined as a “highway and any other road to which the public has access”.

Anyway, does your bus route/zigzags case have any relevance to this one?

Mick

This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 12:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 05:05
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here