PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Parked on Kerb - Correct Contravention Code
Buggslondon
post Tue, 14 Nov 2017 - 22:50
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 29 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,309



Hi,

My Mum parked on a kerb and got the attached ticket. She made an innocent mistake and having researched it, we now know that you may not park on a kerb in a London Borough unless expressly permitted to do so.

However, the contravention code 24 has been used and I wonder if I can appeal on a technicality. Having gone through the full list of codes, I can't find one that seems to correspond to this offence but having said that, code 24 seems incorrect as there were no marked bays to park outside of. It was a standard kerb with no other markings.

Thoughts?

Many thanks.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 14 Nov 2017 - 22:50
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
DancingDad
post Tue, 14 Nov 2017 - 23:00
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,864
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



Got a streetview location ?

My suspicion is that this is a place where footway parking is allowed but only in marked bays.
But need to check what signs are in place.

Or the CEO has messed up, which does happen but let's check first.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Buggslondon
post Tue, 14 Nov 2017 - 23:09
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 29 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,309



Hi,

Here is the location: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5636413,0...3312!8i6656
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Tue, 14 Nov 2017 - 23:14
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,864
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



They having a laugh?
Here is the sign
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5632492,0...3312!8i6656
But canna see one marked bay along the whole stretch.... they seem to appear by school someway along.
Haven't found an end sign and if coming from other direction, no signage at all

This post has been edited by DancingDad: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 - 23:19
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Buggslondon
post Tue, 14 Nov 2017 - 23:54
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 29 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,309



Thanks,

Having looked at previous adjudications for that street, the adjudicators have considered that the signage is irrelevant because parking on kerbs is not permitted in London Boroughs, therefore, if there is no sign, you stay off the kerb.

This was just a case of a disabled person (displaying their badge) trying to find some legal and considerate parking because the local car park was full. However, I don't think the authority or the tribunals have any time for compassion.

I would welcome any thoughts on any other grounds for appeal?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 14 Nov 2017 - 23:56
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,063
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Buggslondon @ Tue, 14 Nov 2017 - 23:54) *
Thanks,

Having looked at previous adjudications for that street, the adjudicators have considered that the signage is irrelevant because parking on kerbs is not permitted in London Boroughs, therefore, if there is no sign, you stay off the kerb.

?
DD just showed you the sign.


--------------------
17/10/11.

Sme f yu may have nticed I dn't currently have a letter ' ' n my keybard!!!!

S if I appear t be talking mre gibberish than nrmal then that's the answer - the missing 'o' --<<<< Aha, clever eh!? (reserve on-screen keyboard)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Buggslondon
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 09:42
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 29 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,309



Hi, yes sorry if I wasn't clear.

DD pointed to the signage being inadequate in that it isn't visible from both directions and that there are no boxes near the sign. This is a good observation and is a reasonable argument, however the adjudications in previous cases suggest that if I was to run that argument as an appeal or at tribunal, they would say it is irrelevant because there is no obligation for there to be any signage in a London Borough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 09:53
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,063
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Buggslondon @ Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 09:42) *
Hi, yes sorry if I wasn't clear.

DD pointed to the signage being inadequate in that it isn't visible from both directions and that there are no boxes near the sign. This is a good observation and is a reasonable argument, however the adjudications in previous cases suggest that if I was to run that argument as an appeal or at tribunal, they would say it is irrelevant because there is no obligation for there to be any signage in a London Borough.

It sounds like you may be misinterpreting decisions.
Any case numbers?


--------------------
17/10/11.

Sme f yu may have nticed I dn't currently have a letter ' ' n my keybard!!!!

S if I appear t be talking mre gibberish than nrmal then that's the answer - the missing 'o' --<<<< Aha, clever eh!? (reserve on-screen keyboard)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:05
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,199
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Buggslondon @ Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 09:42) *
Hi, yes sorry if I wasn't clear.

DD pointed to the signage being inadequate in that it isn't visible from both directions and that there are no boxes near the sign. This is a good observation and is a reasonable argument, however the adjudications in previous cases suggest that if I was to run that argument as an appeal or at tribunal, they would say it is irrelevant because there is no obligation for there to be any signage in a London Borough.


No you are getting confused.

The penalty you have been given is for not parking correctly in a marked bay. BUT the council have mislead you, because there are no bays
The footway parking to this extent is a red herring You are defending against a charge of not parking correctly within a bay that does not exist because there are none.
the council cannot effectively ban parking by signing in this manner it is unclear and against the law


Although Parking on the footway is banned in London, The council can did-apply this ban. If they do so they need to place signs ( THIS HAS BEEN DONE as per DD's GSV)

But forget about footway parking cases at LT you are not charged with one. Any reference to it in any challenge would be peripheral


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Buggslondon
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:07
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 29 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,309



Hi again, below are the case numbers and reasons for refusal

2080724744

It is not disputed, and the DVD recording shows, that the vehicle was parked on the footway. I have noted the Appellant's representations and explanation of why the vehicle was so parked. However, the position in law is that parking on the footway is prohibited throughout London except where there are signs showing that it is permitted, which was not the case here. No signs are required indicating the prohibition. I find that the contravention occurred. I refuse this appeal.

2090576723

The DVD evidence shows clearly enough that the vehicle was parked other than with all its wheels on the carriageway. Parking a vehicle other than on the carriageway is unlawful throughout London (save at those locations where the Local Authority has exercised its powers to permit it and signed the exemption accordingly) . The prohibition is imposed by statute ( s15 Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 as amended), not by local regulations, and no signs are therefore required. As in many other areas of activity motorists are presumed to know the law, and are bound by it whether they are aware of it or not. It is irrelevant in law that no actual obstruction was caused to pedestrians, who are in any event legally entitled to access to the entire footway, not merely that part of it which a motorist may consider sufficient for their needs. It is never a defence to footway parking to say that had the vehicle been parked entirely on the carriageway danger or obstruction might have been caused. If this is the case at a particular location the vehicle must simply be parked safely elsewhere. There is no requirement l law that warning signs be erected as a precondition of enforcement. Motorists are requires to comply with the law whether or not they are aware that contraventions may be the subject of enforcement. Although it appears that the Appellant was not aware of it at the time, the vehicle was plainly in contravention and there is no doubt at all the PCN was correctly issued.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:12
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,865
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:05) *
the council have mislead you, because there are no bays



We have to be cautious as GSV is from July 2016, although the OP says there are no bays - a trip to take a few pics there would confirm.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Buggslondon
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:13
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 29 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,309



Hi PASTMYBEST,

Sorry, I was posting my message when you wrote yours.

Just so I am clear then, what code should they have used for a contravention of parking on the kerb?

Thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:14
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,824
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



OP, pl stop doing this research, you're not good at it!

We still do not have the facts, so can we have them please. Not dated GSV, but current photos. You might need to walk the course.

Post the PCN;
If the exact location is not specified, then you must post this;
You then need to walk along the footway from that point and against the traffic flow (forget in which direction the car is facing, you must walk against the traffic flow) until you find a footway parking sign. Note the location and photograph;
Then walk towards and past the location until you find the next footway parking sign. Note the location and photograph.(take wide enough photos so that we can see in which direction the signs are facing)

And then we can see.

It is not unlawful to park on the footway in London if the council have disapplied the prohibition. A motorist may rely on the presence of traffic signs stating that parking on the footway is permitted and this is a defence which must succeed providing the motorist complied with its conditions. A successful defence could also be made if the meaning of a sign was ambiguous. The only difference between this restriction and the vast majority of others is that with this restriction the absence of a sign means that the restriction applies whereas with others its absence means a restriction does not apply e.g. parking places etc.

But we are woefully short of facts.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:25
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,199
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Buggslondon @ Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:07) *
Hi again, below are the case numbers and reasons for refusal

2080724744

It is not disputed, and the DVD recording shows, that the vehicle was parked on the footway. I have noted the Appellant's representations and explanation of why the vehicle was so parked. However, the position in law is that parking on the footway is prohibited throughout London except where there are signs showing that it is permitted, which was not the case here. No signs are required indicating the prohibition. I find that the contravention occurred. I refuse this appeal.

2090576723

The DVD evidence shows clearly enough that the vehicle was parked other than with all its wheels on the carriageway. Parking a vehicle other than on the carriageway is unlawful throughout London (save at those locations where the Local Authority has exercised its powers to permit it and signed the exemption accordingly) . The prohibition is imposed by statute ( s15 Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 as amended), not by local regulations, and no signs are therefore required. As in many other areas of activity motorists are presumed to know the law, and are bound by it whether they are aware of it or not. It is irrelevant in law that no actual obstruction was caused to pedestrians, who are in any event legally entitled to access to the entire footway, not merely that part of it which a motorist may consider sufficient for their needs. It is never a defence to footway parking to say that had the vehicle been parked entirely on the carriageway danger or obstruction might have been caused. If this is the case at a particular location the vehicle must simply be parked safely elsewhere. There is no requirement l law that warning signs be erected as a precondition of enforcement. Motorists are requires to comply with the law whether or not they are aware that contraventions may be the subject of enforcement. Although it appears that the Appellant was not aware of it at the time, the vehicle was plainly in contravention and there is no doubt at all the PCN was correctly issued.


They are knocking on a bit, but forget footway parking. The adjudicator made an error anyway, probably because the cases were not well presented

Have a look at these two cases , They concern faded bay markings. You cannot get more faded than non existent


2160277695 2160237726
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Buggslondon
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:26
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 29 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,309



Ouch, that told me!

I can confirm that the GSV represents current state. The only sign is the one show by Dancing Dad. The PCN has been posted but just stated Front Lane, no further specifics. The parking spot was as per my initial GSV posting.

Many thanks for all the help.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:28
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,199
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Buggslondon @ Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:13) *
Hi PASTMYBEST,

Sorry, I was posting my message when you wrote yours.

Just so I am clear then, what code should they have used for a contravention of parking on the kerb?

Thanks


code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway

Your PCN code 24 Not parked correctly within the markings of the bay or space
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:34
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,063
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:12) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:05) *
the council have mislead you, because there are no bays



We have to be cautious as GSV is from July 2016, although the OP says there are no bays - a trip to take a few pics there would confirm.

+1
I tried the 2017 satellite yesterday but it doesn't have the resolution and proximity it used to.

This post has been edited by Neil B: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:37


--------------------
17/10/11.

Sme f yu may have nticed I dn't currently have a letter ' ' n my keybard!!!!

S if I appear t be talking mre gibberish than nrmal then that's the answer - the missing 'o' --<<<< Aha, clever eh!? (reserve on-screen keyboard)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Buggslondon
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:40
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 29 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,309



Great,

It sounds like I need to contest on the grounds that there was no bay present to have parked outside of. I will also request their photographic evidence.

I expect them to say that they have ticketed me for parking on the kerb. Can they then issue us with an amended notice with the correct contravention code to scupper my defence or argue that the ticket remains enforcable regardless of the code used because an offence was committed?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:42
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,063
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Here's a thought.
Both the sign and use of 24 imply, or rather confirm there is a resolution to disapply.

Or, taking 24 alone, there is either a resolution (if 2or4 up bays intended OR wrong sign used)
OR a TMO for fully on-carriageway bays ?

Thoughts?


--------------------
17/10/11.

Sme f yu may have nticed I dn't currently have a letter ' ' n my keybard!!!!

S if I appear t be talking mre gibberish than nrmal then that's the answer - the missing 'o' --<<<< Aha, clever eh!? (reserve on-screen keyboard)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:53
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,199
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Buggslondon @ Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 10:40) *
Great,

It sounds like I need to contest on the grounds that there was no bay present to have parked outside of. I will also request their photographic evidence.

I expect them to say that they have ticketed me for parking on the kerb. Can they then issue us with an amended notice with the correct contravention code to scupper my defence or argue that the ticket remains enforcable regardless of the code used because an offence was committed?


@ Stamfordman and Neil. Cautious yes but the OP confirms GSV shows current state and you can go back to 2008. the sign is there and no bays.

Op first post the PCN as requested (both sides) use an external hosting site flicker is well recommended. Also check online in the pay a PCN section of the council website. Once you enter PCN and reg details there is often the CEO photos.

The law requires that a PCN tells you why the CEO believes the penalty is due. They say not in bay markings. so that's it they cannot say arr but nor can they re issue another PCN
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: Tuesday, 20th February 2018 - 17:41
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.