PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN - SYL recenly changed to DYL
qp6782
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 10:24
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 20 Jul 2019
Member No.: 104,871



Please see the below information regarding a PCN issued recently.

This is a relatively new road (approx 5 years old) and the single yellow line has recently been changed to double yellow lines throughout.

On originally parking there in 2018 I took great care to ensure that I was parking legally, by checking signs, etc.

In 2018, the single yellow line indicated that parking was allowed. The road is not wide enough for a car to park. So it seemed to me that it was intended that cars should be parked on the left hand side of the road.

This is because a) the kerb is very low (usually to allow driving over), b) the area in which I parked is car width (much wider than a typical pavement), c) the actual pavement is to the left of the area in which the car was parked (its very unusual to have two pavements beside a road), d) there were a large number of cars parked there.

In short it looks like a parking bay seen in many modern residential areas.

Whilst usually travelling by train, on a handful of occasions the car has been parked here.

Since that initial assessment, the single yellow line has been changed to a double yellow line. On parking on the day of the PCN, it was not at all obvious that a change had been made. Several cars were parked there as normal.

I wrote a appeal which started "The reasons for appeal are i) the parking restrictions are ambiguous due to the design and layout of the road; ii) the council has changed the parking restrictions and has failed to meet its obligation to make reasonable effort to notify affected parties; iii) mitigating circumstances."

It then went into great detail, but effectively the detail for i), ii) and iii) above is as follows:
i) is explained above (low kerb, etc.);
ii) the council was aware that the area was used for parking at the weekend and it is obvious that people who park there are members of a group that use the school at the weekend. The council did not notify this group. The group had previously notified members by email “There is no parking facility within the school, however, you can park in the residential area around the school.”. This notification was sent at the time when single yellow lines were used. Had the council notified the group, the group could have updated members by email.
iii) Mitigating circumstances: reason for parking here was to attend an exam on this day - it was important to arrive at the exam on time. Hence travel by train was not possible.

Thanks for your help with this.

Front:


Back:



----------------------------------------------------------

This is where the car was parked. Note the very low kerb, original single yellow line (this is now a double yellow line) and the actual pavement has 2 pedestrians walking on it.

Google street view



----------------------------------------------------------

A picture showing cars parked in a similar way, before the double yellow lines.





----------------------------------------------------------

Page 1 and 2:


Page 3:


Page 4:





The response to my informal appeal did not address all of the issues I raised.

As we are not local, we would could not have been made aware of the change by notices in the street, local newspaper or a local residents meeting. It was obvious that the people parking in this area were attending a group at the local school and the council did not contact this group.

Its also appears to be deliberately misleading for council in Scotland to write the following: "The Highway Code Rule 244 states that you must not park on the pavement" They have missed two key words here: "in London".


To help with the appeal I'm considering asking for information regarding why a low kerb was used, details about the decision to use a single yellow line, details about the decision to change to a double yellow line, any communication between the council and the group regarding parking.


I'm awaiting the Notice to Owner.


Again thanks for any help with this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 12)
Advertisement
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 10:24
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 10:32
Post #2


Member


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



The double yellow is irrelevant except 24/7 - single yellow has same effect during its restriction time.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 10:56
Post #3


Member


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



I can't find a road called Bainfield PLACE on GSV only Bainfield DRIVE. If you were driving my car I would get a Notice to owner if you did not pay, how would I be able to see what you did from the location given?


--------------------
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 Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 11:16
Post #4


Member


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



+1
That's the only viable ground of appeal---wrong location.

The number of unimportant issues raised by the OP is worrying and none of them amounts to mitigation but good old fashioned BUMF.

If the location ground is not accepted the best the OP can hope for is that the Council reoffer the discount in any rejection letter.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
baroudeur
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 11:19
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 938
Joined: 24 Sep 2014
Member No.: 73,212



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 11:32) *
The double yellow is irrelevant except 24/7 - single yellow has same effect during its restriction time.


huh.gif

The double yellow is relevant 24/7 - single yellow has same effect during its restriction time

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 12:19
Post #6


Member


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



QUOTE (baroudeur @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 12:19) *
QUOTE (stamfordman @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 11:32) *
The double yellow is irrelevant except 24/7 - single yellow has same effect during its restriction time.


huh.gif

The double yellow is relevant 24/7 - single yellow has same effect during its restriction time


I didn't phase it well- of course I meant that the change to double yellows does not alter the restriction other than to apply 24/7.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Chijiki
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 12:40
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 93
Joined: 1 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,546



QUOTE (qp6782)
Its also appears to be deliberately misleading for council in Scotland to write the following: "The Highway Code Rule 244 states that you must not park on the pavement" They have missed two key words here: "in London".



qp6782, Don't get carried away with this point of yours.
Highway Code rule 244 should be read in full :-
“You MUST NOT park partially or wholly on the pavement in London, and should not do so elsewhere unless signs permit it. Parking on the pavement can obstruct and seriously inconvenience pedestrians, people in wheelchairs or with visual impairments and people with prams or pushchairs.”

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
qp6782
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 18:04
Post #8


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 20 Jul 2019
Member No.: 104,871



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 11:56) *
I can't find a road called Bainfield PLACE on GSV only Bainfield DRIVE. If you were driving my car I would get a Notice to owner if you did not pay, how would I be able to see what you did from the location given?


Thank you. Unfortunately, I believe GSV is incorrect and the PCN is correct. I'll respond to the other points below.

QUOTE (baroudeur @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 12:19) *
QUOTE (stamfordman @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 11:32) *
The double yellow is irrelevant except 24/7 - single yellow has same effect during its restriction time.


huh.gif

The double yellow is relevant 24/7 - single yellow has same effect during its restriction time


The reason I believe the change to double yellow lines is relevant is that my car has only been parked there at weekends. I am trying to demonstrate that the change to double yellow lines is the reason why parking here has changed from not prohibited to prohibited. I'll explain more in response to the should have/must have post.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 18:33
Post #9


Member


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



QUOTE (qp6782 @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 19:04) *
The reason I believe the change to double yellow lines is relevant is that my car has only been parked there at weekends. I am trying to demonstrate that the change to double yellow lines is the reason why parking here has changed from not prohibited to prohibited. I'll explain more in response to the should have/must have post.

To be honest if you were parked on double yellow lines and you accept that, that would seem to be the end of the matter unless the council make some procedural error. What else you might believe is irrelevant.


--------------------
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
qp6782
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 18:34
Post #10


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 20 Jul 2019
Member No.: 104,871



QUOTE (Chijiki @ Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 13:40) *
QUOTE (qp6782)
Its also appears to be deliberately misleading for council in Scotland to write the following: "The Highway Code Rule 244 states that you must not park on the pavement" They have missed two key words here: "in London".



qp6782, Don't get carried away with this point of yours.
Highway Code rule 244 should be read in full :-
“You MUST NOT park partially or wholly on the pavement in London, and should not do so elsewhere unless signs permit it. Parking on the pavement can obstruct and seriously inconvenience pedestrians, people in wheelchairs or with visual impairments and people with prams or pushchairs.”


My thinking here is twofold:

Firstly if the wording is "must not" (and assuming this area is a pavement for the time being), then parking here would have always been prohibited, regardless of SYL/DYL. But if the wording is "should not" then parking here would have been allowed at the weekend because "should not" implies that you can park on a pavement if there is nowhere else to park without causing an obstruction (for example to emergency vehicles). This is the case here.
Secondly, is there any expectation that the appeal process should be fair? By including a misleading reference like this could imply that the council staff are not suitably trained. Further, it is very important that I do not lie during my appeal, so are there similar rules that the council should not be misleading?

As my car had been parked there several times with a SYL there was no expectation that the rules might be changed.

An additional consideration is that to avoid ending up in this situation, the council has to follow rules to notify people who may be affected by the change. Had the council been very thorough in this duty I would have been notified and the car would not have been parked there after the change to DYL. This is what I can find: "the authority shall – .... take such other steps as they may consider appropriate for ensuring that adequate publicity about the order is given to persons likely to be affected by its provisions and, without prejudice to the generality of this sub-paragraph, such other steps may include...." in The Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 1999. The full detail is here. The council were aware that this change would affect people parking here at the weekend and it would have been very easy for them to identify the group using the school right next to this road. My point here is that adequate publicity was not given.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 19:09
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,270
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Your 'should/must' issue is not valid.

As they explained, the whole of the road is restricted by the DY; hence 'must not'.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 20:47
Post #12


Member


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



Op seems not to be aware of the difference between single and double yellow lines. I cannot see how one could possibly miss what the lines were when parking. Maybe because it had always been single yellows so the presence of double yellows, and their significance, was missed. Either way I can't see any win here at all unless the PCN contains fatal errors of content.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
qp6782
post Sat, 20 Jul 2019 - 22:18
Post #13


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 20 Jul 2019
Member No.: 104,871



Thank you everybody for all of your help. Though not the outcome I was hoping for, I have taken all of the comments on board.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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 - 15:30
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