Ticket for 4 mins late Options

[mothepro]

Hi All,

My wife received a PCN. She was at a physiotherapist at an appointment for back trouble.

The appointment finished at 16:00 and she came out right away. She saw two CEO's zooming off on some motorscooter type of thing and a PCN on her car. According to her watch it was just gone 16:00 but the PCN said 16:03 and the photo shows the PCN on the car at 16:04. Apparently she was observed from 16:02-16:03 and PCN issued at 16:03.

I / we have no idea whether the time of the observation and PCN showing as issued is accurate or if her watch is. However even if her watch was out by a few minutes, wouldn't it be a little hasty for a PCN to be issued? Parking was allowed prior to 16:00 so when she parked there for the duration of her appointment she was not doing anything wrong. To be given a PCN for possibly being a few minutes late seems a little over the top. In particular, having 2 CEO's attend on motorscooters swiftly zooming in and out seems to be looking for excuses to issue tickets.

I also note that the sign regarding no parking is deficient. Is this an angle that can be noted on an appeal?

Many thanks for any input you can assist me with

Mo

[Advertisement]

[stamfordman]

Show us where this is on google Street View.

You have an NTO. Did you challenge the PCN and if so post your challange and their rejection. And the PCN.

I would have thought in that bay no PCN could be issued until 16:11 pm owing to the 10 mins grace law.

[mothepro]

Below is the link to google.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5626073,-...&authuser=0

I did challenge the PCN which I attaching a copy of however I cannot find where I put their response... There was nothing substantial in it to my recollection other than they have noted the comments and vehicle was in contravention etc etc.

Thanks!

Mo

[stamfordman]

Need to see the rejection if you can find it - you can ask for a copy of it.

Why didn't you ask here first as you've been on the board before? Or have you already started a thread on this?

The signage in the bay is very odd - I don't think the intention is for free parking between 11 am and 4 pm.

basically you were on a single yellow that came into force at 16:00 - nothing to do with the bay it seems.

barnet has a policy of zero observation time for an 02 code so it looks like this PCN was correctly served but it's misleading in my view.

This post has been edited by stamfordman: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 - 19:09

[cp8759]

The signage in the bay is very odd - I don't think the intention is for free parking between 11 am and 4 pm.

I disagree, a 10am-11am restriction is normally used to prevent commuter parking, but where the council want to allow free parking at other times.

The meaning of the sign, IMO, is clear: The place in question is a designated parking place where anyone may park outside of the "Resident Permit Holders Only" hours, except when the single yellow line is in force.

Therefore the vehicle was lawfully parked in a designated parking place prior to 4pm. Under general regulation 4(3) "No penalty charge is payable for the contravention where the vehicle has been left beyond the permitted parking period for a period not exceeding 10 minutes", therefore the council had no authority to issue a PCN before 4:10:01 at the earliest. The premature issue of a PCN is a procedural impropriety which means the PCN must be cancelled.

The council will likely refuse to accept this (they hate this rule), but it has won repeatedly at adjudication.

[DancingDad]

Plus 1
10 minute applies.
What is the bottom white panel doing and why are the yellow/white panels upside down, yellow must be on top.

[stamfordman]

My initial reaction was it is indeed a 10 min case as you see but then I had second thoughts - thinking that the yellow line takes precedence over a marked bay that's only operational for one hour.

It's a dog's dinner of a bay and sign though but given that there are all day P&D bays opposite I reckon it's a council cock-up.

May be a bit clearer if OP can post the rejection.

[PASTMYBEST]

Plus 1
10 minute applies.
What is the bottom white panel doing and why are the yellow/white panels upside down, yellow must be on top.

+2 Its a free parking bay out side the permit restriction but still a bay. If it walks like a duck and all that. agree also re the signs Yellow got to be at the top

[cp8759]

We seem to have a consensus. @mothepro, get your wife to send this:
------------
Dear Sir or Madam,

The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 provide, under regulation 4, that:

"Imposition of penalty charges
4. (1) Subject to the provisions of these Regulations a penalty charge is payable with respect to a vehicle where there has been committed in relation to that vehicle—
(a)a parking contravention within paragraph 2 of Schedule 7 to the 2004 Act (contraventions relating to parking places in Greater London);
(b)a parking contravention within paragraph 3 of that Schedule (other parking contraventions in Greater London) in a civil enforcement area in Greater London; or
©a parking contravention within paragraph 4 of that Schedule (parking contraventions outside Greater London) in a civil enforcement area outside Greater London.

(2) Paragraph (3) applies in relation to a contravention mentioned in subparagraph (a) to © of paragraph (1) where a vehicle is stationary in a designated parking place and the vehicle has been left beyond the permitted parking period.

(3) No penalty charge is payable for the contravention where the vehicle has been left beyond the permitted parking period for a period not exceeding 10 minutes.

(4) In this regulation—

(a)“designated parking place” means a parking place established by virtue of an order made under section 1, 6, 9, 32(1)(b), 35 or 45 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984(3);
(b)“permitted parking period” means—
(i)a period of parking that has been paid for as authorised by or under any order made relating to the designated parking place; or
(ii)a period of parking for which no charge is payable as authorised by or under any order made relating to the designated parking place. "

The vehicle had been lawfully parked in a designated parking place prior to 4pm, this being a parking place in which no charge is payable; the permitted parking period ended at 4pm. By virtue of regulation 4(3) above, no penalty charge is payable any earlier than 4:10:01 pm providing the vehicle had been lawfully parked prior to 4 pm. The PCN was issued at 4:04 PM. In light of this I trust the PCN will be cancelled.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 - 21:00

[Mr Mustard]

Hello Mo, I am a High Barnet resident who attends the parking tribunal almost every week (won 2/2 yesterday) & I challenge more PCN in Barnet than probably any other person (I have beaten 64 PCN out of 77 Barnet PCNs in 2018)

I agree with the 10 minute argument, and with the sign order argument (no white may be placed above a yellow panel which is in the same column - page 84 of the Traffic Signs Regulations & General Directions 2016 'TSRGD') and there is a third argument which stems from the definition of a controlled parking zone on page 22 of the TSRGD which, in my words, says 'all roads within a cpz will have either a marked bay or yellow lines' and your bay has both. This is an untested argument at the tribunal and I would expect to win on the 10 minute point if you asked me to represent your wife at the tribunal (I assume Barnet will reject your formal representations but am prepared to be pleasantly surprised).

The representations in response to the Notice to Owner have to be done by the person named on it, or at least in their name. If they weren't, put them in again.

[stamfordman]

Seem the refusal just in on this case is similar?

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...40&start=40




This post has been edited by stamfordman: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 - 09:13

[PASTMYBEST]

Seem the refusal just in on this case is similar?

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...40&start=40

The adjudicator erred in law, and a review should be applied for. Its not the deregulation act that applies and the grace period is available even for a free to park bay

Amendment
2.—(1) The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007(1) are amended as follows.
(2) In regulation 4 (imposition of penalty charges)—
(a)
re-number the existing provision as (1);
(b)
at the end insert—
“(2) Paragraph (3) applies in relation to a contravention mentioned in subparagraph (a) to © of paragraph (1) where a vehicle is stationary in a designated parking place and the vehicle has been left beyond the permitted parking period.
(3) No penalty charge is payable for the contravention where the vehicle has been left beyond the permitted parking period for a period not exceeding 10 minutes.
(4) In this regulation—
(a)
“designated parking place” means a parking place established by virtue of an order made under section 1, 6, 9, 32(1)(b), 35 or 45 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984(2);
(b)
“permitted parking period” means—
(i)
a period of parking that has been paid for as authorised by or under any order made relating to the designated parking place; or
(ii)
a period of parking for which no charge is payable as authorised by or under any order made relating to the designated parking place.”

[stamfordman]

Its not the deregulation act that applies and the grace period is available even for a free to park bay

“designated parking place” means a parking place established by virtue of an order made under section 1, 6, 9, 32(1)(b), 35 or 45 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984(2);

The point I'm unclear about is if the bay in the case in this thread (not the one in the refusal) is a designated parking place at all times, or only during the hour of residents' parking.

[hcandersen]

Is it a designated parking place? (Implicitly at the time of the contravention), we believe so.

Is the contravention ‘..mentioned in subparagraph (a) to
© of paragraph (1) ....?’

This is the one which even adjudicators overlook: the 10-minute rule is NOT limited to parking place contraventions only but any of the following:


(a)a parking contravention within paragraph 2 of Schedule 7 to the 2004 Act (contraventions relating to parking places in Greater London);
(b)a parking contravention within paragraph 3 of that Schedule (other parking contraventions in Greater London) in a civil enforcement area in Greater London; or
©a parking contravention within paragraph 4 of that Schedule (parking contraventions outside Greater London) in a civil enforcement area outside Greater London.

My emphasis.

..and as per others, the sign is incorrect, ‘yellow-panelled’ signs go on top.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 - 12:20

[mothepro]

Hi All,

Thank you very much for your support and offers of assistance. I have drafted the appeal as recommended and sent it.

Many thanks

Mo

Need to see the rejection if you can find it - you can ask for a copy of it.

Why didn't you ask here first as you've been on the board before? Or have you already started a thread on this?

The signage in the bay is very odd - I don't think the intention is for free parking between 11 am and 4 pm.

basically you were on a single yellow that came into force at 16:00 - nothing to do with the bay it seems.

barnet has a policy of zero observation time for an 02 code so it looks like this PCN was correctly served but it's misleading in my view.

Hi Stamfordman.

Thank you for your replies.

I suffered an eye injury that kept me out of things for a while and in particular limited my computer usage to the bare minimum.

I am having difficulty locating paperwork from that period which is why I haven't posted the rejection.

I have submitted an appeal based on the recommended wording on this thread, lets see if that gets anywhere.

Many thanks

Mo

Hello Mo, I am a High Barnet resident who attends the parking tribunal almost every week (won 2/2 yesterday) & I challenge more PCN in Barnet than probably any other person (I have beaten 64 PCN out of 77 Barnet PCNs in 2018)

I agree with the 10 minute argument, and with the sign order argument (no white may be placed above a yellow panel which is in the same column - page 84 of the Traffic Signs Regulations & General Directions 2016 'TSRGD') and there is a third argument which stems from the definition of a controlled parking zone on page 22 of the TSRGD which, in my words, says 'all roads within a cpz will have either a marked bay or yellow lines' and your bay has both. This is an untested argument at the tribunal and I would expect to win on the 10 minute point if you asked me to represent your wife at the tribunal (I assume Barnet will reject your formal representations but am prepared to be pleasantly surprised).

The representations in response to the Notice to Owner have to be done by the person named on it, or at least in their name. If they weren't, put them in again.

Thank you very much!

I hope the appeal works but if not i will hopefully be in touch.

Many thanks

mo

[Mr Mustard]

The council have decided to Do Not Contest the Appeal.

I started the Appeal on line for the OP and these were the Grounds

1 The sign is non-compliant. The yellow plate must be the uppermost plate. There is not a 'loading' restriction due to most of the word being missing.

2 It is not possible to issue a PCN to a vehicle parked within a bay until 10 minutes after the expiry of the free permitted parking period which expired at 4pm and was free by default of any other provision under the TMO. This is a designated parking place by virtue of the bay markings. This is in accordance with The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General (Amendment) Regulations 2015.

3 This location is within the C1 CPZ. It is not permitted, within the definition of a CPZ in TSRGD 2016, for a section of road to contain both a bay and a single yellow line, the requirement is for one or the other.

(an extract of the TSRGD definitions was provided)

[stamfordman]

Shame it didn't go to tribunal - would have been good to have got that 10 min rule on board but I expect one of the other grounds would have done it.