PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Disabled resident bay used by blue badge holder PCN received, Disabled resident bay used by blue badge holder PCN received
mum25
post Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 07:12
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,622



Dear helpful community,


I would be grateful if I could get your opinion on my PCN, letter that I composed using information on the forum . and the subsequent rejection received from Brent Council. In my opinion they have not addressed all of the points raised which makes me think that they may be winging it. I would be grateful to anyone who can assist.

To summarise the event:

Took dad out for an outing, he is a blue badge holder which allows him to park in residents only areas, the spot we parked states disabled and 037 ONLY but to be fair the road marking are not perfectly clear, the street sign has a white patch taped over the P that is in a blue square. Honestly, I figured, if the blue badge allows him to park in residents only areas, then he would be allowed to park in a disabled bay in a residents only area. The badge was on display with the clock.

The contravention stipulated is code 165 Parked in a permit space without displaying a valid permit.

My letter was as follows:

RE: PCN ..........

On the 23rd March 2019, I took my father who has been unwell for an outing, the first in months for him.

As he is a Blue badge holder I looked for somewhere close to the retail park and noted a disabled bay near to the park that was free.

I parked in a bay and displayed my fathers Blue badge in the required manner and supported him to the retail park. Upon my return, I found the above-mentioned PCN attached to my car.

I had parked in what I believed was a lawful manner, not on a yellow line or in a paid parking bay, but in a bay apparently marked as for use by a disabled person in a residents parking area that allows blue badge holders to park.

I had no idea why this PCN was issued and thought it an error on your parking attendant’s part.

I would make the following observations:

My father holds a blue badge issued by a council

From my understanding a Blue badge entitles him, whilst being carried as a passenger, or if someone is collecting or dropping him off, to park in any disabled space, permit holders bay (resident, business or visitor’s), paid for parking space or yellow lines (where no loading restrictions are in place), and any disabled person's allocated parking bay that is not in a residential parking zone (RPZ) and does not have a maximum stay time.

The PCN states I was parked in a permit space without displaying a valid permit. Since it is a residents area and my father has a blue badge I parked in good faith that I had parked my car in a correct space.

If the signage had either not had the blue letter P (indicating disabled parking) or had explained that blue badge holders were not entitled to park there I would have parked either in one of the space further up or the parking spaces that are paid for or a space with yellow lines.

I would, therefore, ask you to use your discretion and cancel this PCN, as recognition that this was not a deliberate attempt to illegally park or flout the rules, but a genuine error bought on by my confusion over the signage.

I contend that the bay in which I parked is not enforceable and therefore the PCN is invalid. My rationale is as follows:-

1. Disabled Residents Permit --Not Valid.

By substituting an acceptable Blue Badge the Council has introduced a disabled permit, which is illegal. It does not have approval from the Secretary of State to use such a permit as per Sect 2(2)(a)(1) of The Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2013.

Therefore the contravention "Parked in a permit space or zone without clearly displaying a valid permit" can never apply if the only permit used is illegitimate.

2. The Sign is Not Valid

I would draw the Council's attention to the following case, which has similar characteristics to my own but also outline the duties of the Council ---- PATAS No. 2120294790. In particular the need for Secretary of State approval for signage is important.

The Council received this approval on 23 June 2004 under reference GT/46/2/139. However this approval is quite specific in that it applies only in respect of the parking place being reserved to a unique permit holder and not, as the authority believe or state, to a generic grouping of holders of a 'disabled resident parking permit'. Therefore the sign must exhibit the number of a specific permit which rather goes against the Mandatory and Advisory Bay policy which the Council outline in London Borough of Lewisham Parking Policy October 2014.

The sign has white paper taped over it it is unclear whether the council has applied this as beneath the sign the wording is still visible.

3. Invalid Bay Markings

The approval above requires the bay to be marked to diagram 1028.3. You will note that its dimensions don't meet the minimum standard of 6.6m X 2.7m and therefore it does not conform to the TSRGD requirements.a

The contravention given is unenforceable in respect of this bay and since this means there is no legal restriction a Blue Badge is perfectly acceptable where the road marking denotes "Disabled".

The sign and road markings are not compatible.

The council should either have:
A sign with a white 'P' on a blue background and a 'type or types of user may be included and, where the user is a type of permit holder, a permit identifier may be included', but no road marking 'Disabled', or

A sign with 'P' as above, the blue wheelchair icon and the legend “Disabled badge holder” and a permit identifier'. The road marking 'Disabled' is required and 'where the bay is reserved for an individual disabled badge holder, an alphanumeric identifier, with or without the word “ONLY” may be added after “DISABLED”.' AND the bay must meet minimum dimensions - which from what I can see this one does not.

In short, a 'Disabled' road marking must be accompanied by a wheelchair icon, otherwise it's a simple permit parking place.

The council have placed the Disabled road marking which led me to believe that, as the marking MAY ONLY be used when the bay is for the use of disabled badge holders and as my mother holds such a badge I was permitted to park. The contravention of 'Parked in a permit ...' cannot be used in conjunction with the road markings which are in place. The council's misuse of the combination of road markings and traffic sign is not permitted and is confusing. Therefore I feel the PCN must be cancelled and I am prepared to go to appeal regarding the matter.

According to the applicable regs** the use of the road markings 'Disabled..etc' may only be used in conjunction with a wheelchair icon in the traffic sign. There is no such icon in this case, why have the council chosen to use a non-prescribed combination of traffic sign and road marking, have they obtained the Secretary of State's authorisation and, if so, please may you have a copy.

** The applicable regulations are found in the Schedules to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 as follows:

1. Schedule 4, Part 4 Sign Table, Item 4; Part 5 Sign Table, Item 4;
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/4/made

2. Schedule 7, Part 4 Sign Table, Item 6 and Part 5 Sign Table, Item 1.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/7/made

Yours faithfully
mum25

Their reply received 29/03/19 is copied below:

NOTICE OF REJECTION OF INFORMAL CHALLENGE
Thank you for writing to us regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
Your informal challenge has been considered by this office in accordance with the requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. After a careful consideration of the grounds you have made and all other related circumstances we have decided not to cancel your PCN.
The reason for the rejection may be summarised as follows:
There is a sign where you parked that explains that the bay you parked in is for Brent permit holder 037 only.
You were issued a PCN for parking without Brent permit number 037 that was both valid and clearly displayed. Even if you have the permit, you have to display it so that a civil enforcement officer can see all its details.
This rule applies to disabled badge holders too; it is not a situation where you may use your disabled badge.
I have enclosed the photographs taken at the time the contravention occurred for your information.

The letter then goes on to say if you pay within 14 days it will be a reduced amount, they will not consider any other informal challenge.

The photograph they provided shows the blue badge clearly displayed and the street sign with the white patch over it as per the goolemap image.

The street view is on google maps at:

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.556282,-0.2...6384!8i8192

The street view sign still remains the same , with the patch over the P, I would say the marking on the road is slightly more blurred but the same.

Thank you to anyone who is reading and can provide advice, I have 14 days or will have to pay £130. I would be grateful to you.

Best wishes
mum25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
6 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 07:12
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 08:29
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 24,631
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



Where are the docs?

Cannot open the link.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mum25
post Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 09:19
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,622



Im hoping that you can open this link, not sure why half of the addressed got clipped
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.556282,-0.2...6384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.556282,-0.2...6384!8i8192

Thank you HCanderson, I think it works now, I was parked where the road marking is, with google maps you can see the street sign too with the square tape over it.

This post has been edited by mum25: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 09:20
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 09:24
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 24,631
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



Going on the GSV which shows a permit bay traffic sign and disabled road marking:

This is not a lawful combination of signs and markings.

You were therefore misled because either the sign or the marking were evidently incorrect, therefore the issue must be resolved in your favour at adjudication.

I parked having seen the Disabled road marking. I was in the process of collecting my uncle from ****(you were collecting and not visiting, I hope). I therefore displayed his BB and clock.

The authority claim that this bay was restricted to a unique permit holder, but the road marking prevents them from imposing such a restriction. The PCN must be cancelled.

If the authority do not cancel then they are obliged to provide evidence in support of their contention that this combination is permitted by reference to specific Schedules within the TSRGD 2016. A bland statement that the signs and markings comply with regulatory requirements would not suffice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mum25
post Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 09:52
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,622




Thank you for your reply,

Does this mean that I must appeal to the tribunal now, I say this because they have rejected what they call my informal appeal and their letter goes on to say their policy is only to consider one informal appeal (copied below). So as I understand it, I must now wait for the NTO and use the form that comes with it to state the same thing again but this time it will go to the tribunal.


Please read and understand the following important information.
The discounted rate of (£65.00) will be accepted if payment is received within 14 days from the date of this letter, thereafter the full rate of (£130.00). will be due.
If the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) has not been paid within 28 days from the date of the PCN being issued the Council will serve a Notice to Owner (NTO) to the DVLA registered keeper/owner/hirer of the vehicle. The form offers you the chance to make a formal representation or pay the full charge of (£130.00).
The Council’s policy is to only consider one informal challenge. Therefore, should further correspondence be received before a NTO has been served, it may remain unanswered.
Any payment received will be accepted and the case will be closed, at which point you will no longer have the right to appeal further.


Just wondering, why would they reject the appeal unless they know they comply with the Schedules within the TSRGD 2016?

Is there a chance that at appeal the tribunal could still allow me to still pay the reduced fine, just in case the council have complied and have all the evidence that they need, but surely they should have provided me with it at this stage so I can make an informed decision as to wether I should proceed to tribunal or pay the reduced fine now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 10:01
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,193
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



The next stage is Notice to Owner
The appeal to adjudicators.

As HCA says, the signage is misleading and indeed not authorised within Traffic Sign Regulations.
Along with that Brent allow disabled parking within permit bays, I would have said a good shout.

They cannot limit consideration to one challenge BTW, legislation says they must consider any made before an NTO is served.
Tempting to test that but would add it as a Procedural Impropriety should you decide to wait for the NTO.

This post has been edited by DancingDad: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 10:06
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 10:11
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,694
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



Take a look at this:-

https://www.brent.gov.uk/services-for-resid...-parking-place/

I like the following but don't think we can swing it "Even when requested by a householder the DPPP is still available for any blue badge holder to use"

So going further down that page we have dedicated bays which don't need a BB on display just a permit (this is a Code 16 Contravention).

When the NTO arrives I would hit them with the following and see what transpires:-

The Council does not accept that a Blue Badge is acceptable in this bay. In order to use this “dedicated disabled bay” the Council has issued permits to residents whom the Council regards as exclusive and valid users of the bay. The Councils own instructions to these users indicates that it is not necessary to display a Blue Badge just the Council permit. Such a disabled permit is illegal. The Council does not have approval from the Secretary of State to use such a permit as per Sect 2(2)(a)(1) of The Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2013.

Therefore the contravention "Parked in a permit space or zone without clearly displaying a valid permit" can never apply if the only permit used is illegitimate.

Mick

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mum25
post Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 18:34
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,622



Thank you all for assisting me in this matter, I hate the thought of the formal appeal anything like that scares me, but their letter states that any further informal challenge may remain unanswered. So the only option remains to await the NTO. Mad Mick,V I will add your paragraph into my letter, Dancing Dad I will also the bit about Procedural Impropriety.

HCAnderson, I took my dad out for the day and thought I was OK to park where i had, will this affect the appeal that I wrote in that I was not just picking him up as you mentioned?

Thank you all so grateful

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 23:28
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,465
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (mum25 @ Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 18:34) *
Mad Mick,V I will add your paragraph into my letter, Dancing Dad I will also the bit about Procedural Impropriety.

You need to show us what you write before sending it.
We'll help tweak it.

This post has been edited by Neil B: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 - 23:29


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sun, 31 Mar 2019 - 08:54
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 24,631
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



OP, as long as the holder of the BB was being transported,that's fine.

Pl don't concern yourself with distinctions between formal and informal.

And you may be surprised to know that just because the authority say that something is the case, it might not actually be correct.

I've had 25+ years with the multi-headed monster called local government and I can tell you that the officers who deal with challenges and reps are pretty low in the pecking order/food chain and their ability and knowledge often leave a lot to be desired. It shouldn't be the case, but it is.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mum25
post Sun, 31 Mar 2019 - 14:37
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,622



Thanks all for the reassurance, I just imagine it to be with a judge, the big council and li'l ol' me!

I was planning on just using the same appeal as was in my first post for any official one but thinking of adding the paragraph from MadMickM which summarises the argument and adding the fact they will not consider any further informal appeal being procedural impropriety. Is that one too long or does it have errors?

Thanks
mum25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 1 Apr 2019 - 01:30
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,659
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



There is no judge, the next stage is making formal representations to the council. The council will either cancel the penalty or issue a notice of rejection, at which point you can appeal to the London Tribunals.

The appeal to the tribunal can be made on the papers, meaning you ask the adjudicator to decide on the basis of the paperwork that is submitted. Even if you decide to go for a personal hearing, it's all pretty informal and the council will almost certainty not turn up (they seldom do), London Tribunals has a video about the process here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue...p;v=RsLQCsyR1EY

For now, just wait for the Notice to Owner.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mum25
post Mon, 1 Apr 2019 - 18:20
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,622



Thanks cp8759, will do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mum25
post Sun, 5 May 2019 - 07:33
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,622



Dear Helpful Community,

The notice to keeper arrived. I have drafted a reply much like the informal appeal I submitted to the council. I also did write to them a second time as I felt they had not addressed the points raised, it is long so apologies.

R PCN: X

On 23/02/19,I took my father who has been unwell for an outing, the first in months for him.

As he is a Blue badge holder I looked for somewhere close to the retail park and noted a disabled bay near to the park that was free.

I parked in a bay and displayed my fathers Blue badge in the required manner and supported him to the retail park. Upon my return, I found the above-mentioned PCN attached to my car.

I had parked in what I believed was a lawful manner, not on a yellow line or in a paid parking bay, but in a bay apparently marked as for use by a disabled person in a residents parking area that allows blue badge holders to park.

I had no idea why this PCN was issued and thought it an error on your parking attendant’s part.

I would make the following observations:

My father holds a blue badge issued by another council, from my understanding a Blue badge entitles him, whilst being carried as a passenger, or if someone is collecting or dropping him off, to park in any disabled space, permit holders bay (resident, business or visitor’s), paid for parking space or yellow lines (where no loading restrictions are in place), and any disabled person's allocated parking bay that is not in a residential parking zone (RPZ) and does not have a maximum stay time.

The PCN states I was parked in a permit space without displaying a valid permit. Since it is a residents area and my father has a blue badge I parked in good faith that I had parked my car in a correct space.

If the signage had either not had the blue letter P (indicating disabled parking) or had explained that blue badge holders were not entitled to park there I would have parked either in one of the space further up or the parking spaces that are paid for or a space with yellow lines.

I would, therefore, ask you to use your discretion and cancel this PCN, as recognition that this was not a deliberate attempt to illegally park or flout the rules, but a genuine error bought on by my confusion over the signage.

I contend that the bay in which I parked is not enforceable and therefore the PCN is invalid. My rationale is as follows:-

1. Disabled Residents Permit --Not Valid.

By substituting an acceptable Blue Badge the Council has introduced a disabled permit, which is illegal. It does not have approval from the Secretary of State to use such a permit as per Sect 2(2)(a)(1) of The Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2013.

Therefore the contravention "Parked in a permit space or zone without clearly displaying a valid permit" can never apply if the only permit used is illegitimate.

2. The Sign is Not Valid

I would draw the Council's attention to the following case, which has similar characteristics to my own but also outline the duties of the Council ---- PATAS No. 2120294790. In particular the need for Secretary of State approval for signage is important.

The Council received this approval on 23 June 2004 under reference GT/46/2/139. However this approval is quite specific in that it applies only in respect of the parking place being reserved to a unique permit holder and not, as the authority believe or state, to a generic grouping of holders of a 'disabled resident parking permit'. Therefore the sign must exhibit the number of a specific permit which rather goes against the Mandatory and Advisory Bay policy which the Council outline in London Borough of Lewisham Parking Policy October 2014.

The sign has white paper taped over it it is unclear whether the council has applied this as beneath the sign the wording is still visible.

3. Invalid Bay Markings

The approval above requires the bay to be marked to diagram 1028.3. You will note that its dimensions don't meet the minimum standard of 6.6m X 2.7m and therefore it does not conform to the TSRGD requirements.a

Given the catalogue of errors made by the Council one must conclude that enforcement of the PCN is unsustainable and that any further rejection must be regarded as vexatious. The contravention given is unenforceable in respect of this bay and since this means there is no legal restriction a Blue Badge is perfectly acceptable where the road marking denotes "Disabled".

The sign and road markings are not compatible.

The council should either have:
A sign with a white 'P' on a blue background and a 'type or types of user may be included and, where the user is a type of permit holder, a permit identifier may be included', but no road marking 'Disabled', or

A sign with 'P' as above, the blue wheelchair icon and the legend “Disabled badge holder” and a permit identifier'. The road marking 'Disabled' is required and 'where the bay is reserved for an individual disabled badge holder, an alphanumeric identifier, with or without the word “ONLY” may be added after “DISABLED”.' AND the bay must meet minimum dimensions - which from what I can see this one does not.

In short, a 'Disabled' road marking must be accompanied by a wheelchair icon, otherwise it's a simple permit parking place.

The council have placed the Disabled road marking which led me to believe that, as the marking MAY ONLY be used when the bay is for the use of disabled badge holders and as my father holds such a badge I was permitted to park. The contravention of 'Parked in a permit ...' cannot be used in conjunction with the road markings which are in place. The council's misuse of the combination of road markings and traffic sign is not permitted and is confusing. Therefore I feel the PCN must be cancelled and I am prepared to go to appeal regarding the matter.

According to the applicable regs** the use of the road markings 'Disabled..etc' may only be used in conjunction with a wheelchair icon in the traffic sign. There is no such icon in this case, why have the council chosen to use a non-prescribed combination of traffic sign and road marking, have they obtained the Secretary of State's authorisation and, if so, please may you have a copy.

** The applicable regulations are found in the Schedules to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 as follows:

1. Schedule 4, Part 4 Sign Table, Item 4; Part 5 Sign Table, Item 4;
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/4/made

2. Schedule 7, Part 4 Sign Table, Item 6 and Part 5 Sign Table, Item 1.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/7/made

The Council does not accept that a Blue Badge is acceptable in this bay. In order to use this “dedicated disabled bay” the Council has issued permits to residents whom the Council regards as exclusive and valid users of the bay. The Councils own instructions to these users indicates that it is not necessary to display a Blue Badge just the Council permit. Such a disabled permit is illegal. The Council does not have approval from the Secretary of State to use such a permit as per Sect 2(2)(a)(1) of The Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2013.

Therefore the contravention "Parked in a permit space or zone without clearly displaying a valid permit" can never apply if the only permit used is illegitimate.

The council has only allowed one informal challenge and not responded in full to my appeal, legislation says they must consider any made before an NTO is served. This would appear to be a Procedural Impropriety.

Your sincerely
mum25

About a week later following their reply to my informal appeal I wrote:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I made an appeal on 23/02/19 that you have rejected on 28/02/19. I am writing to you to request a full explanation as to why you have rejected my appeal.

Please could you therefore address all the points raised in my appeal so that I may make an informed decision as to whether I wish to await the NTO and proceed to formal appeal or pay the reduced fine.

A blue badge was on display.

The Council does not accept that a Blue Badge is acceptable in this bay. In order to use this “dedicated disabled bay” the Council has issued permits to residents whom the Council regards as exclusive and valid users of the bay. The Councils own instructions to these users indicates that it is not necessary to display a Blue Badge just the Council permit. Such a disabled permit is illegal. The Council does not have approval from the Secretary of State to use such a permit as per Sect 2(2)(a)(1) of The Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2013.

Therefore the contravention "Parked in a permit space or zone without clearly displaying a valid permit" can never apply if the only permit used is illegitimate.

The street sign has white tape over it, it is not clear who has done this or what it means.

It is unfair for you to not respond in full to the points raised and this will be raised a procedural impropriety in the event that a formal appeal is initiated.

Yours faithfully

The only reply I received to my second letter was that they felt they had replied to the points raised.

I do hope someone has time to reply and I am grateful to you all for making time for us struggling in the parking legislation minefields.

Thank you
mum25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mum25
post Sun, 5 May 2019 - 10:41
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,622



I know it's a long post, but I would be grateful if anybody could advise.

To summarise I parked in a disabled bay in a residents area, normally blue badge holders can park in residents only areas but this bay is reserved for a particular resident and I received a ticket for parking in it.

I have now received the notice to keeper and really just need someone to mark my work. Just want to submit the appeal in good time.

I'm hoping the previous advisors may be able to help: Hcanderson, cp8759, NeilB, Mad Mick V, Dancing Dad but will take advice from anybody out there who is kind enough and has the time.

Best wishes
mum25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 5 May 2019 - 18:43
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,659
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



You need to do two things:

1) Post up all the documents, starting with the PCN, the Notice to Owner and the rejection letter.

2) Re-post your draft appeal broken down into paragraphs. At the moment it looks like unstructured ramblings and while much of it might have merit, it's not easy to follow.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mum25
post Mon, 6 May 2019 - 11:41
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,622



Please find attached my PCN and the google map coordinates.

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.556282,-0.2...6384!8i8192



I wrote an informal appeal as follows:
Re PCN Number:

On the March 2019, I took my father who has been unwell for an outing, the first in months for him, as he is a Blue badge holder I looked for somewhere close to the retail park and noted a disabled bay near to the park that was available. I parked in a bay and displayed my fathers Blue badge in the required manner and supported him to the retail park. Upon my return, I found the above-mentioned PCN attached to my car.

I had parked in what I believed was a lawful manner, not on a yellow line or in a paid parking bay, but in a bay apparently marked as for use by a disabled person in a residents parking area that allows blue badge holders to park. I had no idea why this PCN was issued and thought it an error on your parking attendant’s part.

My father holds a blue badge, from my understanding a Blue badge entitles him, whilst being carried as a passenger, or if someone is collecting or dropping him off, to park in any disabled space, permit holders bay (resident, business or visitor’s), paid for parking space or yellow lines (where no loading restrictions are in place), and any disabled person's allocated parking bay that is not in a residential parking zone (RPZ) and does not have a maximum stay time.

The PCN states I was parked in a permit space without displaying a valid permit. Since it is a residents’ area and my father has a blue badge I parked in good faith that I had parked my car in a correct space. If the signage had either not had the blue letter P (indicating disabled parking) or had explained that blue badge holders were not entitled to park there I would have parked either in one of the space further up or the parking spaces that are paid for or a space with yellow lines.

I would, therefore, ask you to use your discretion and cancel this PCN, as recognition that this was not a deliberate attempt to illegally park or flout the rules, but a genuine error bought on by my confusion over the signage.

Having looked further into the regulations I contend that the bay in which I parked is not enforceable and therefore the PCN is invalid for the following reasons:

1. Disabled Residents Permit --Not Valid.

By substituting an acceptable Blue Badge the Council has introduced a disabled permit, which is illegal. It does not have approval from the Secretary of State to use such a permit as per Sect 2(2)(a)(1) of The Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2013.
Therefore the contravention "Parked in a permit space or zone without clearly displaying a valid permit" can never apply if the only permit used is illegitimate.

2. The Sign is Not Valid

I would draw the Council's attention to the following case, which has similar characteristics to my own but also outline the duties of the Council ---- PATAS No. 2120294790. In particular the need for Secretary of State approval for signage is important.

The Council received this approval on 23 June 2004 under reference GT/46/2/139. However this approval is quite specific in that it applies only in respect of the parking place being reserved to a unique permit holder and not, as the authority believe or state, to a generic grouping of holders of a 'disabled resident parking permit'. Therefore the sign must exhibit the number of a specific permit which rather goes against the Mandatory and Advisory Bay policy which the Council outline in London Borough of Lewisham Parking Policy October 2014. Furthermore, the sign had white paper taped over it, it is unclear whether the council has applied this throwing more confusion into who can and cannot park there.

3. Invalid Bay Markings

The approval above requires the bay to be marked to diagram 1028.3. You will note that its dimensions don't meet the minimum standard of 6.6m X 2.7m and therefore it does not conform to the TSRGD requirements.

The contravention given is unenforceable in respect of this bay and since this means there is no legal restriction, a Blue Badge is perfectly acceptable where the road marking denotes "Disabled".

4. The sign and road markings are not compatible.

The council should either have: A sign with a white 'P' on a blue background and a 'type or types of user may be included and, where the user is a type of permit holder, a permit identifier may be included', but no road marking 'Disabled', or, a sign with 'P' as above, the blue wheelchair icon and the legend “Disabled badge holder” and a permit identifier'. The road marking 'Disabled' is required and 'where the bay is reserved for an individual disabled badge holder, an alphanumeric identifier, with or without the word “ONLY” may be added after “DISABLED”.' and the bay must meet minimum dimensions - which from what I can see this one does not.

In short, a 'Disabled' road marking must be accompanied by a wheelchair icon, otherwise it's a simple permit parking place. The council have placed the Disabled road marking which led me to believe that, as the marking MAY ONLY be used when the bay is for the use of disabled badge holders and as my father holds such a badge I was permitted to park. The contravention of 'Parked in a permit ' cannot be used in conjunction with the road markings which are in place. The council's misuse of the combination of road markings and traffic sign is not permitted and is confusing. Therefore I feel the PCN must be cancelled.

According to the applicable regulations** the use of the road markings 'Disabled..etc' may only be used in conjunction with a wheelchair icon in the traffic sign. There is no such icon in this case, why have the council chosen to use a non-prescribed combination of traffic sign and road marking, have they obtained the Secretary of State's authorisation and, if so, please may I have a copy.

** The applicable regulations are found in the Schedules to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 as follows:

1. Schedule 4, Part 4 Sign Table, Item 4; Part 5 Sign Table, Item 4;
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/4/made

2. Schedule 7, Part 4 Sign Table, Item 6 and Part 5 Sign Table, Item 1.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/7/made

The Council does not accept that a Blue Badge is acceptable in this bay. In order to use this “dedicated disabled bay” the Council has issued permits to residents whom the Council regards as exclusive and valid users of the bay. The Councils own instructions to these users indicates that it is not necessary to display a Blue Badge just the Council permit. Such a disabled permit is illegal. The Council does not have approval from the Secretary of State to use such a permit as per Sect 2(2)(a)(1) of The Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2013. Therefore the contravention "Parked in a permit space or zone without clearly displaying a valid permit" can never apply if the only permit used is illegitimate.

The council has only allowed one informal challenge and not responded in full to my appeal, legislation says they must consider any made before an NTO is served. This would appear to be a Procedural Impropriety.

Yours sincerely
mum25

The council rejected my appeal with the following reply:

NOTICE OF REJECTION OF INFORMAL CHALLENGE COUNCIL REPLY 1

Thank you for writing to us regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
Your informal challenge has been considered by this office in accordance with the requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. After a careful consideration of the grounds you have made and all other related circumstances we have decided not to cancel your PCN.
The reason for the rejection may be summarised as follows:
There is a sign where you parked that explains that the bay you parked in is for Brent permit holder 037 only.
You were issued a PCN for parking without Brent permit number 037 that was both valid and clearly displayed. Even if you have the permit, you have to display it so that a civil enforcement officer can see all its details.
This rule applies to disabled badge holders too; it is not a situation where you may use your disabled badge.
I have enclosed the photographs taken at the time the contravention occurred for your information.


I subsequently wrote again to the council asking for a fuller explanation as follows:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I made an appeal on 23/03/19 that you have rejected on 29/03/19. I am writing to you to request a full explanation as to why you have rejected my appeal.
Please could you therefore address all the points raised in my appeal so that I may make an informed decision as to whether I wish to await the NTO and proceed to formal appeal or pay the reduced fine.
A blue badge was on display.
The Council does not accept that a Blue Badge is acceptable in this bay. In order to use this “dedicated disabled bay” the Council has issued permits to residents whom the Council regards as exclusive and valid users of the bay. The Councils own instructions to these users indicates that it is not necessary to display a Blue Badge just the Council permit. Such a disabled permit is illegal. The Council does not have approval from the Secretary of State to use such a permit as per Sect 2(2)(a)(1) of The Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2013.
Therefore the contravention "Parked in a permit space or zone without clearly displaying a valid permit" can never apply if the only permit used is illegitimate.
The street sign has white tape over it, it is not clear who has done this or what it means.
It is unfair for you to not respond in full to the points raised and this will be raised a procedural impropriety in the event that a formal appeal is initiated.
Yours faithfully

Mum25

The council rejected my appeal and second time with the following reply:

COUNCILS SECOND REPLY

I write with reference to your recent correspondence received in connection with the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
Please be advised that your informal challenge has already been reviewed and the decision was made to reject your challenge. Your informal challenge rejection letter clearly outlines the next steps in the appeals process.
Under the current legislation, the Council is not obliged to consider any further challenges against a PCN until a Notice to Owner (NTO) has been served. If the PCN remains unpaid, the Notice to Owner is sent to the DVLA registered keeper after 28 days from the date the PCN was issued. Once the Notice to Owner has been received, the registered keeper can submit a representation to appeal their PCN.
We have looked into your case and read the previous letters (yours to us and ours to you). We can see that you are raising a point that we answered in our previous letter. Although we understand that you feel strongly about this point, we do not have anything new to add to the answer we gave in our previous letter.
Your options at this stage are to either pay the £65.00 or the registered keeper can submit a representation once the Notice to Owner has been received.
Please ensure you have read your Notice of Rejection of Informal Challenge letter to fully understand the appeals process; failure to do so may result in the registered keeper missing the opportunity to appeal further.


I have now received the notice to keeper:





I was going to resubmit my original appeal as the formal one, I have edited it as suggested by cp8759 but would be very grateful if anyone could give me guidance or any further advice as to what I should include/take out or rephrase.

I am very grateful to you.
Kind regards
mum25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Mon, 6 May 2019 - 12:54
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,694
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



Their response:--"Under the current legislation, the Council is not obliged to consider any further challenges against a PCN until a Notice to Owner (NTO) has been served"

The legislation:-
(b)that, if representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified for the purpose before a notice to owner is served—

(i)those representations will be considered;

(ii)but that, if a notice to owner is served notwithstanding those representations, representations against the penalty charge must be made in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner.

Procedural impropriety in my view.


Mick

This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Mon, 6 May 2019 - 12:54
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mum25
post Mon, 6 May 2019 - 13:18
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,622



Thank you Mick,

I did mention the procedural impropriety, the council seem to indicate in their reply they did address all the points raised, do you think the appeal I have posted above will be sufficient/ effective as it is?

Thanks
mum25

This post has been edited by mum25: Mon, 6 May 2019 - 13:19
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Mon, 6 May 2019 - 13:29
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,694
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



OP---when you respond to the NTO you should repeat your reps letter in full. I would not mention that they have failed to consider the substantive issues of your case --let them dig a deeper hole for themselves.

I would however raise the issue of the procedural impropriety in their 2nd letter where they fall foul of the legislation.

Wait for others to comment.

EDIT---- I would drop the argument that the bay is undersized--Brent have lots of DfT permissions for undersized bays. However I would add this case, based on the old TSRGDs, which supports the view that the lines and signs are a dogs breakfast and probably need DfT approval:-

2120294790

The Appellant's case is that the signage for this bay is incorrect and confusing. I agree with him.


The sign reads "Disabled resident permit holders only" accompanied by the blue "P" and a Zone identifier ( but without the blue disabled symbol). This sign is not a permitted variant of diagram 660 or 660.3 Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, and requires the authorisation of the Secretary of State, as would its use in conjunction with Diagram 1038.3 and the carriageway legend "DISABLED" ( which can only be used in conjunction with Diagrams 661.A or 639.1B - see Direction 25). I do not consider that what is a considerable departure from what the TSRGD prescribes can be said to be substantially compliant within the principles in the Court of Appeal's decision in R v The Parking Adjudicator and Sunderland City Council on the application of Herron [2010]EWHC 1161(Admin). The result of what is in effect a hybrid of two signs (660 and 661A) leaves its meaning unclear. Are those entitled to park a) Residents permit holders who also suffer from some disability or b) Residents permit holders who hold a disabled badge or c) Those who, whether or not residents permit holders or disabled badge holders hold some other form of permit entirely called a "disabled resident permit? If b) why no blue badge symbol on the sign? If c) why DISABLED on the carriageway inviting disabled badge holders to park?.


The signage is therefore non compliant and authorisation is required. None has been provided by the Council and as the issue has been so clearly raised one would assume the Council would have done so if authorisation had been obtained.


It is also the case that in the absence of the "parent" Traffic Management Order it is impossible to be satisfied who the bay is in fact reserved for , though doubtless further evidence would have made that clear.


The Appeal is therefore allowed.



Mick

This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Mon, 6 May 2019 - 14:30
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

6 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
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: Sunday, 18th August 2019 - 09:39
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.