PCN Calvert Avenue - Confusing signage |
PCN Calvert Avenue - Confusing signage |
Thu, 18 Nov 2021 - 18:22
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 122 Joined: 4 May 2018 Member No.: 97,816 |
Hi all,
Received a parking charge notice, for beeing parked on Calvert Avenue. I looked up on the forum, and I found an exact similar case here : http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=136165 I reacted exactly the same, and felt exactly the same as the OP when I saw the PCN on my windscreen and realizing what the sign really meant. Furious is actually the word. As I drove out after my 30mn stop, I saw at least 3 parking wardens and they were very busy at work. This is in all likelyhood a very juicy spot for them. Every single sign in the UK will mention something like "Day to Day" and below "Hour to Hour".I immediately saw "Thursday to Monday" and then the times, but the to was conveniently positionned on the next line. They will argue "English is read line by line, not vertically" and I will agree, this is a mistake. But in my opinion it's a mistake that is way too easy to make, I believe those signs to be deliberately confusing and it looked like business was booming. I will appeal. It like likely that the council will refuse however, regardless of how big or thin my chances are. I do think there is things on my favour, will all the contradictions found from the Traffic and Signs Manual. That beeing said, I was wondering, given the fact that the tribunal will consider my first appeal as well, if I should start with : - the penalty did not occur: and state that I parked in the correct time, to force them to explain what the sign means. - the penalty exceeded the amount...: and directly mention the flaws in the signage, the TSM... I easily found a couple of elements in the TSM, mentionning those cases. Such as : QUOTE 13.17.5. The time periods shown on the signs indicating when certain parking controls apply can be varied as appropriate. However, as the signs can be quite complex and hence large, it is recommended that the time periods and conditions shown apply for each day of the week that 170 CONTROL OF ON‑STREET PARKING the parking place is operational (e.g. Monday to Saturday or every day of the week). To have different conditions applying on different days will result in complicated signs and might confuse drivers. Where different conditions do apply, it might be necessary to use separate signs, for example where parking conditions on Sundays differ from those for the other days of the week. chapter 3, page 169 And a couple of others regarding time itself. In the post that I shared above, there was no follow up, not sure if the OP appealed and if yes which grounds, or what was the outcome. PASTMYBEST mentionned a similar case where the sign was judged innapropriate. I looked at the londontribunals website but it's pretty hard to find cases as it's impossible to apply filters on wording. Any idea where I could look around for those ? The PCN : The sign : Thank you in advance |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 18 Nov 2021 - 18:22
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Fri, 10 Jun 2022 - 10:18
Post
#41
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
We generally recommend a telephone hearing rather than a decision on the papers, if you call them up they can change it for you.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 1 Aug 2022 - 16:42
Post
#42
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 122 Joined: 4 May 2018 Member No.: 97,816 |
Hi all,
Just updating this post after receiving the decision for that case. Had totally forgotten about it, wanted to change it to a phone hearing but it totally slipped my mind! Anyway, the appeal was refused, long story short I had argued that the sign was unlawful, as not compliant with the "Permitted expression of times" in Schedule 18 of the TSRGD. The judge responded : "I am satisfied that Schedule 18 gives a wide discretion. I am also satisfied that the signage in the present case was substantially compliant.". This decision was motivated by the fact that, Schedule 18 uses the word "may" : [...]sets out a number of ways in which a time or times may be expressed[...] It's a shame that both the TSM and the TSRGD don't have to be followed for the signs to be lawful, it defies the purpose of having such documents, and gives councils an opening to find loopholes where they can. It's disapointing to say the least but, that's his decision and I will accept it. I hope that one fine lawyer in the future will manage to cancel one of those PCN's in the future, in order to stop the bloodbath in the area, as I mentionned earlier not sure if those signs are still standing, but when I got that PCN the fines were raining, with many wardens in the neibourhood. Once again thank you all with the guidance, I hope it can help someone else with a similar situation in the future. This post has been edited by estevenin: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 - 16:43 |
|
|
Tue, 2 Aug 2022 - 08:22
Post
#43
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Unfortunately it's not uncommon for even the most solid of appeals to be refused when decided on the papers.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 11:35 |