Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Towed in 5 min from single yellow line - hackney council
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
grazi2
Hi there,

I would really appreciate any help on this...

I live since 5 years around the corner from a street which has yellow lines... as far as I remember (and neighbours remember), there was never a sign on it. No idea when they put a small sign and on 30/12 - at 8.46am they issues a fine on our car and all cars parked - and took our car within 5 min of issuing the ticket.

I'm attaching the documents and definitely want to appeal - the grounds of my appeal will be - and please let me know if you think this will be worth going through:

- I'm a resident and have been living and parking there for 5 years, if the rules changes I should be notified? They're trying to implement residents parking permit on that street and they've sent letters so I assume they should send letters to change this? Myself and neighbours have been parking there for 2 years and never had any problems. My neighbour said the sign is new... but I'm not sure how new as I never noticed it before!

- The sign is very unclear - as it's a one way street and the sign is about 40 meters down the street - we were the first car to park in the evening with 3 kids - so very hard to see it - I'm attaching pictures. I also read it should be in the entrance of the street - is that right?

- The car was taken within 5 min - I read on the internet that they should allow 15 minutes at least - but not sure if that's also the case for single yellow lines?

Any help would be wonderful and I'd be so grateful... £265 was a very unexpected unfair price to pay out of the blue like that :-(

Many thanks,


Grazi
Jlc
Needs to be moved to the decrim forum - a mod should notice, if not hit the '! Report' button and ask nicely smile.gif

If you have any more paperwork, post it up suitably redacted. The guys in the decrim forum will be able to advise, but my understanding is there's nothing to lose in taking the appeal all the way.
Korting
This should be in the Parking and decriminalised section, a moderator will move it for you.

Where exactly were you parked, because your photo's do not show any sign nor indeed any yellow line.

Perhaps taking pictures in daylight of exactly where you were parked and any sign appertaining to the yellow line
grazi2
Thank you! I'll wait for the moderator to move it then? Or should I re-post it there?

I'll go there and try to get more pictures... The yellow line is where the cars are parked and the sign is behind the truck - that is my point, you can't see it!

I don't really have any more paperwork, just the PCN attached and the form they gave me at the pound to appeal... I'm so devastated with it all... had 1 baby, 2 kids ready to go out and the truck just taking it away when we've been parking there for around 2 years!

Thank you so much!! :-)
nosferatu1001
Hit report, gets it moved

It is a no brainer to appeal. You've paid all you can.
PASTMYBEST
Page 48-49 of this will give some info

http://www.hackney.gov.uk/Assets/Documents/PEP-2010-2015.pdf

Here I think

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5626577,-...3312!8i6656

A quick look round on GSV I cannot see a yellow time plate at all. nor is it a CPZ.

The council should have taken a lot more pictures of the car in situ, it being loaded and on the tow truck. Post all of them, the sign showing the restricted time is important as that is what tells you and us of the restriction.

Absolute total no brainer to challenge all the way to adjudication, as there is no further cost and you may get all or part of your money back.

You challenge on two fronts that the PCN is invalid. This may be because of the time plate, or maybe legitimate expectation, or something else others may find.

And challenge that the tow was disproportionate, as it was outwith the stated policy of only towing to support traffic management . Clearly that is not the case here
grazi2
Thank you, I'll read those items and add what you said.

They didn't show me the pictures at all as I had to pay the fine when I collected the car from the pound. Those pictures I took the next day to show them that the sign is way too far from the beginning of the street - and it's a one way street, so no way I could see it in the dark!

It's also a new sign - not sure how new... the restriction is no parking between 6.30pm to 8.30am - and it was 8.46am when they gave the fine - they took the car at 8.51am... so yes, not much time to even see the fine!

And yes, not obstructing anything, in fact it was 30/12 so everything was pretty quiet / dead!

Thank you ever so much!

Grazi
i need help
post up rear of pcn so we can see it all clearly
DancingDad
QUOTE
the restriction is no parking between 6.30pm to 8.30am - and it was 8.46am when they gave the fine ...


Pardon ??
Have you got the times back to front?
StuartBu
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sun, 3 Jan 2016 - 22:21) *
QUOTE
the restriction is no parking between 6.30pm to 8.30am - and it was 8.46am when they gave the fine ...


Pardon ??
Have you got the times back to front?


More likely parking IS allowed 18:30 to 08:30 Hrs .
grazi2
Yes, sorry, it's from 8.30am to 6.30pm - so those hours no one can park... which is new!

I'll get a picture during the day tomorrow to show clearly.

PCN - there's only instructions on how to pay at the back :-(... And the car was towed, so, I don't even have pictures of it!

I'm thinking my grounds could be:

- the sign is further down a one way street - as my car was the first one I didn't see it - does it need to be in the entrance of the street by law?
- the sign is new
- the car was towed in 5 min

Would that make a case?

Thank you!
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (grazi2 @ Sun, 3 Jan 2016 - 23:37) *
Yes, sorry, it's from 8.30am to 6.30pm - so those hours no one can park... which is new!

I'll get a picture during the day tomorrow to show clearly.

PCN - there's only instructions on how to pay at the back :-(... And the car was towed, so, I don't even have pictures of it!

I'm thinking my grounds could be:

- the sign is further down a one way street - as my car was the first one I didn't see it - does it need to be in the entrance of the street by law?
- the sign is new
- the car was towed in 5 min

Would that make a case?

Thank you!


As it stands, not one that would win. We do not know where the sign is , nor what it say's The council must have pictures ask for them. They will show your car in contravention, being lifted and taken away, also the towing authorization and related documents get them all post them then we can see what can be done
grazi2
Thank you.

I just spoke to the council and they said they can't give me the photos as the fine was paid so the case is closed. They suggeted requesting the photos on my appeal so if it goes further they can see I requested this information :-(

I'll take pictures of the sign itself tomorrow morning as it'll be dark when I get home and post it here.

Thank you!

Grazi
RottenToTheCore
QUOTE (grazi2 @ Mon, 4 Jan 2016 - 09:33) *
I just spoke to the council and they said they can't give me the photos as the fine was paid so the case is closed. They suggeted requesting the photos on my appeal so if it goes further they can see I requested this information :-(


Paying a PCN normally closes the case, but not when paying to release a towed vehicle!

Send them an email requesting the photos, and see if they make the same mistake in writing.

Edit: In the meantime can you post a Streetview link showing exactly where the sign is (if you can remember)?
The Rookie
You have shown a copy of the front of the PCN in the first post, are you saying you no longer have it?

Its certainly worth appealing as you can pay no more, you may not win on the PCN, but I think you would have a good chance on the towing if it was only 5 minutes and there were other cars parked along the street (so towing you was disproportionate as it didn't actually remove the obstruction).
DancingDad
There do seem to be a number of issues that can be used in a challenge.
Legitimate Expectation. Lines had been present but no sign so no expectation that enforcement could or would be carried out.
Inadequate Signage. Given that this is a one way road and that no signs had been present, a sign some ???? yards up the road cannot be regarded as adequate to inform motorists that have traditionally used the road as a parking space.
Disproportionate Removal. Given that vehicles have traditionally parked within this road and in the very spot that my vehicle was in, there can be no benefits to traffic management in removal. Removal because it is lawful does not justify either the need or the benefit to other road users.
Discriminatory Removal. Other vehicles had been served PCNs. Mine had been removed. Without clear explanation why mine and not others, I must assume that I have been the victim of a perverse lottery, the winner (if that is the right term) by some random choice or selection by the CEO. Without clear explanation, the removal cannot be justified.
Discrimination against motorists who have had their vehicle removed. I was forced to pay for the PCN when I collected my vehicle. This payment, according to ??? of the Parking Department during a phone call on ????, means the case against the PCN is closed and that photos are therefore not available. Given that payment was not my choice and that the council normally makes photos available on request, this is discriminatory against myself. It also removes my traditional right to see evidence and restricts my rights to defend the allegations.

See what others have to say or add.
I trust you got the name of whoever you spoke to.
With any challenge, demand photos, all CEO notes and a transcript of the call recording.
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 4 Jan 2016 - 13:53) *
There do seem to be a number of issues that can be used in a challenge.
Legitimate Expectation. Lines had been present but no sign so no expectation that enforcement could or would be carried out.
Inadequate Signage. Given that this is a one way road and that no signs had been present, a sign some ???? yards up the road cannot be regarded as adequate to inform motorists that have traditionally used the road as a parking space.
Disproportionate Removal. Given that vehicles have traditionally parked within this road and in the very spot that my vehicle was in, there can be no benefits to traffic management in removal. Removal because it is lawful does not justify either the need or the benefit to other road users.
Discriminatory Removal. Other vehicles had been served PCNs. Mine had been removed. Without clear explanation why mine and not others, I must assume that I have been the victim of a perverse lottery, the winner (if that is the right term) by some random choice or selection by the CEO. Without clear explanation, the removal cannot be justified.
Discrimination against motorists who have had their vehicle removed. I was forced to pay for the PCN when I collected my vehicle. This payment, according to ??? of the Parking Department during a phone call on ????, means the case against the PCN is closed and that photos are therefore not available. Given that payment was not my choice and that the council normally makes photos available on request, this is discriminatory against myself. It also removes my traditional right to see evidence and restricts my rights to defend the allegations.

See what others have to say or add.
I trust you got the name of whoever you spoke to.
With any challenge, demand photos, all CEO notes and a transcript of the call recording.


Only thing I would add is to make a freedom of information request to the council for the following information

How many code 01 PCN's were issued in 2015 on Rossendale St broken down by month.

How many cars have been removed on this street in the same time period again by month. You are unlikely to get this before you need to send reps to the council but will help down the line
grazi2
Thank you everyone for all the info.

I think my biggest point is also that my car was the first one - as seen - and the sign is few meters futher down a one way road. Is there a law where parking restrictions on single yellow lines should be on the entrance of the street? I think I read that somewhere.

The council emailed me their pictures today. I still didn't manage to get mine as I leave home and arrive at dark... I'll get pictures tomorrow as I'm off.

As you can see the pictures don't show how far the sign has been place. I'll write my appeal this weekend - by Sunday - and if it's ok, I'll post it here - I'll use all your comments and help above. Please note around 3 cars were towed on the same day.

Many thanks,

Grazi

PASTMYBEST
para 11.5 of this may help

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/...204399/tmpg.pdf
Bogsy
I suugest you also include the paragraph below in your appeal.

I also bring to the council’s attention that it is regulation 5C of The Removal and Disposal of Vehicles Regulations 1986 that empowers a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) to remove a vehicle that is allegedly parked in contravention. However, the CEO’s power of removal under regulation 5C could not be exercised in respect of my vehicle since regulation 5C is limited to where a CEO first serves a regulation 9 PCN. My vehicle was not served with a regulation 9 PCN. It was served with a PCN pursuant to regulation 9A of the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007.Perhaps the Council is unaware that The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General (Amendment No. 2) Regulations 2015 recently inserted regulation 9A. As the law currently stands, CEO’s have no power to remove vehicles following the service of a regulation 9A PCN and consequently the removal of my vehicle was ultra vires.
grazi2
That's great, thank you! I'll definitely add that even if I don't quite fully get it happy.gif

Two questions to see if it's worth putting on my appeal or not:

1. Signage - is there any regulations on where parking restrictions on single yellow lines should be placed? Eg: beginning of the road, within X meters or the beginning if it's one way street

2. Residents - I've been getting letters from the council that they want to make that street a residents parking permit one - if I'm notified of this, shouldn't I be notified when the single yellow line becomes restricted? I've been parking there for 2 years. I asked the council when the sign was put up - google maps from May 2015 shows no signs and I'll use that on my appeal.

3. Time between PCN and towing: according to the PCN they gave me, the parking fine was issued and the car was towed 5 minutes later - basically truck was there waiting to do it. Legally shouldn't I have some time in between? I know there is a minimum of 30 min on parking spaces, but can't see anything when it's on a yellow line.

Many thanks as always rolleyes.gif

Grazi
PASTMYBEST
Have a read through this

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=98986
grazi2
Thank you everyone for the comments and help.

I finally drafted my first letter of appeal. I know it's long, but I'd be ever so grateful if you can have a quick scan through it and let me know your comments... I need to send it tomorrow as anxious to get a response and hopefully some money back :-(

Many thanks!!! Grazi




Dear Sir or Madam,

RE: ***

On the morning of 30/12/2015 I had a massive shock when I went down at 9.30am to get my car with a baby and 2 kids and it was gone, as it was the week of Christmas and new year festivities, the street was dead. No cars or people, except for the council truck towing away cars parked on that single yellow line – apparently they had started at 8:35am. We had arrived the night before around 11pm, parked on the spot that we always park when it’s late and our building parking space is taken. We were meant to go out that morning. When I questioned what was going on as this never happened before and I was a resident since 5 years, the CEO just pointed me to a tiny sign way down the street from where I was parked, which I had never seen before.

I asked when this was put up she said ‘I don’t work with signs, I just give penalties’. Then I asked what happened to the car she said ‘You were given a penalty, so you had time to remove it, then we towed it’.

She gave the number of the pound, when I called they said between the penalty and the towing there was 5 minutes.

It was a shock that I am still struggling to get over. I believe this was extremely – a contravention did not occur due to the reasons below - and hope you will consider the reasons listed below and refund me the £265 that I had to pay on the evening of 30th December 2015.

I believe it was incorrect because:

1. Legitimate Expectation

I live on the address above – around the corner from Rossendale Street - for 5 years and I have a car since around 2 and 1/2 years. When the street or the dedicated car park of our building is full I park on Rossendale Street. It never stays there more than one night overnight, but it has stayed many times in the last 2 and ½ years. Many neighbours and cars have done that for years.

The line has always been present, however the sign is new and was not there before. From my memory, I don’t think the sign was there even one week before. The council could not inform me when it was put up – I contacted the CEO, the pound and the parking department – all those failed to inform me. I got a picture from google maps – May 2015 that shows there was no signs there before (see below and one more photo on appendix 1).

Recently, I have been contacted by the council about changes on the parking on that street – about changing it to be Residents permit restricted parking zone – which I agree it should be. However, I did not receive any notification about the same street suddenly becoming a controlled parking zone on the single yellow line during weekdays from 8:30am. If you notified about the permit, I would expect notification about any other parking restrictions changes within my residency.

I would expect that no sign when I arrived at 11pm so no expectation that enforcement could or would be carried out – and in such extreme manner.
** google maps


2. Inadequate Signage
Rossendale street is a one way street. As you can see from your pictures on the PCN – see picure below and ones on appendix 2. My car was the first one on the street. The parking restriction sign is around 40 meters down the road after the yellow line starts.

Given that this is a one way street and that no signs had been present, a sign some 40 meters up the road cannot be regarded as adequate to inform motorists that have traditionally used the road as a parking space.

See picture below:
*** picture of where the sign is on day light****

My car parked in the beginning of the street (picture provided by the council after I requested it):
*** picture from PCN posted on forum

All pictures provided by the council regarding this PCN are on appendix 2 – please note there isn’t one showing the sign and the car. Just one of the sign itself.
The pictures below also show the same view in the evening – please note the one way sign, no restrictions sign or anything informing that that street is a now controlled parking zone. If you park on the first place in the street (again as you always did), it is impossible to see any sign.

*** pictures of the street in the evening – as posted on the forum


3. Disproportionate Removal
Disproportionate Removal. Given that vehicles have traditionally parked within this road and in the very spot that my vehicle was in, there can be no benefits to traffic management in removal. Removal because it is lawful does not justify either the need or the benefit to other road users – mainly in an early morning of 30th December when the traffic is absolutely inexistent as you can see from the pictures the council took.
The tow was disproportionate, as it was outwith the stated policy of only towing to support traffic management. Clearly that is not the case here.

I researched about when a card should be towed. On appendix 3 there is an extract from the government guidance to councils and I also saw this from Hackney website:

5.27. Hackney aims to re0move vehicles only where this supports its traffic management objectives (to improve road safety and relieve congestion). Markings such as yellow lines are used to ban parking in areas where it would be dangerous or would obstruct or reduce traffic flow. The Council aims to remove vehicles parked in prohibited areas as quickly as possible, but allows longer when a vehicle is parked incorrectly in a bay, as shown by Table 5.1, below.
None of the above was the case in the morning of 30th December.
I also would like to add to this letter, that I felt discriminated as a motorist who have had their vehicle removed. I was forced to pay for the PCN when I collected my vehicle. This payment, according means the case against the PCN is closed and that photos are therefore not available. Given that payment was not my choice and that the council normally makes photos available on request, this is discriminatory against myself. It also removes my traditional right to see evidence and restricts my rights to defend the allegations. I had to email the council to see the photos, which I finally got, there are only 3 photos which don’t even show the car being towed – probably to not show how empty the street was and how out of proportion the action was.
I also cannot find information anywhere on when this sign was put up – I believe it is the right of residents that live around that street and pay council tax to be better informed about such huge changes.
In addition to the above, I did seek legal advice on this frustrating matter, and as well as the above, I would like to also bring to the council’s attention that it is regulation 5C of The Removal and Disposal of Vehicles Regulations 1986 that empowers a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) to remove a vehicle that is allegedly parked in contravention. However, the CEO’s power of removal under regulation 5C could not be exercised in respect of my vehicle since regulation 5C is limited to where a CEO first serves a regulation 9 PCN. My vehicle was not served with a regulation 9 PCN. It was served with a PCN pursuant to regulation 9A of the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007.Perhaps the Council is unaware that The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General (Amendment No. 2) Regulations 2015 recently inserted regulation 9A. As the law currently stands, CEO’s have no power to remove vehicles following the service of a regulation 9A PCN and consequently the removal of my vehicle was ultra vires.



Appendix 1:
More images from the same spot Google Maps May 2015
** google maps picture without sign **


Appendix 2
Photos supplied as evidence by the PCN, please see below:
** pictures from PCN **

Appendix 3:
Extract from The government guidelines to council on parking
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AND PARKING GUIDANCE FOR LONDON
Removal action is appropriate in cases where parked vehicles are causing an obstruction, congestion or a hazard to other road users, where they are obstructing a restricted stopping or waiting place, such as a bus stop or a taxi rank, or where the local authorities have suspended the operation of a designated parking bay. Removal action may also be appropriate from designated parking places, for example, where a vehicle is parked across more than one meter bay or is parked in a loading or residents' bay without authorisation. Local authorities should not, however, remove vehicles displaying a valid disabled persons' Orange Badge from designated on-street parking places, and should only remove them in the case of 35 ANNEX breaches of other controls where the vehicles are creating a serious hazard or obstruction and removal action is absolutely necessary. No removal action should be authorised at designated on-street parking places for 15 minutes from the end of the period of time that has been paid for. Consideration should be given to photographing a vehicle in the position in which it was parked before it was removed. This can help deal with any representations about the removal action.
Immobilisation/removal 8.96 Very few authorities now use immobilisation. The Secretary of State is of the view that it should only be used in limited circumstances such as where the same vehicle repeatedly breaks parking restrictions and it has not been possible to collect payment for penalties, primarily because the keeper is not registered, or is not properly registered, with the DVLA. Where a vehicle is causing a hazard or obstruction the enforcement authority should remove rather than immobilise. Immobilisation/removal activity should only take place where it gives clear traffic management benefits. 8.97 An enforcement authority should formulate and publish clear guidelines for CEOs on when it will be appropriate to immobilise or remove. The guidelines should cover the order of priority in which vehicles should be dealt with, based on the nature of the contravention. Powers should not be used randomly and authorities should draw up guidelines in consultation with the police. Immobilisation and removal guidelines should consider the: • inconvenience that immobilisation causes drivers; • potential obstruction or loss of parking space that results; and • effect of immobilisation and removal on public perception and acceptance of CPE.





grazi2
Hi all,

I appealed with a huge letter and help with all of you above - thank you!

I lost and now I'm going to court / PATAS with them tomorrow.

The Council says the sign had been there since 2012, but it was vandalized. It has been put back on 29/12 and they towed the car on 30/12 morning.

My claim is basically to say the same - the sign for me is new since it was not there for at least 1 and 1/2 years - since I have the car! To back me up, I'm taking google maps picture - that show no sign there in May 2015 and my neighbour is doing a letter confirming she's not aware of a sign since years...

Do you guys think that's strong enough?

And anything else I can add to it?

Thank you so much as always!

Grazi
grazi2
Hi all,

I appealed with a huge letter and help with all of you above - thank you!

I lost and now I'm going to court / PATAS with them tomorrow.

Basically I was parked on a single yellow line around the corner from home, the next morning the car had a PCN and was towed within 10 minutes. Basically the sign with restrictions had never been there so I didn't see it as I often parked there...

The Council says the sign had been there since 2012, but it was vandalized. It has been put back on 29/12 and they towed the car on 30/12 morning.

My claim is basically to say the same - the sign for me is new since it was not there for at least 1 and 1/2 years - since I have the car! To back me up, I'm taking google maps picture - that show no sign there in May 2015 and my neighbour is doing a letter confirming she's not aware of a sign since years...

Do you guys think that's strong enough?

And anything else I can add to it?

Thank you so much as always!

Grazi
John U.K.
Have you shares in Lastminute.com??

Seriously, a lot seems to have happened since you last posted.

If you can, post up A.S.A.P. what you submitted to London Tribunals (not a court, no longer PaTAS) in Box 6 of the form and any additional material.

Please confirm that what you submitted to the Council was exactly as post #23.

Please post up the Council's Notice of Rejection of Representations.

And someon here may have some last minute suggestions for you.
John U.K.
edited
Mad Mick V
I've just used the following on another thread but it meets the requirements of this appeal. Essentially the OP is claiming legitimate expectation BUT has to argue unfairness and prejudice because the Council did not warn residents in advance. The text in bold outlines the argument.


2150253522

The Enforcement Authority do not comment upon and therefore I must assume do not dispute, the Appellant's claim that pavement parking at this location by residents and visitors has been tolerated for a number of years, at least 9. They simply say that no signage is required for this restriction – they are correct about that, but the Appellant’s argument is in effect that before starting to enforce the restriction after a long period of not doing so, appropriate notices and/or advance warnings should have been posted/given. Where a resident has been used to park in a particular place that is a statutory contravention without enforcement for a number of years, a legitimate expectation can be created.

There is a line of authorities that do sustain the proposition concerning a legitimate expectation, in particular the decision quoted on PATAS web site under the heading legitimate expectation, Beatt -v- London Borough of Wandsworth case no. 1950092219. In that case the Adjudicator stated that:

In my view, it is certainly possible for an authority to act in such a way as to be so unfair and prejudicial to the owner of a vehicle in issuing a PCN or NTO that it would not be proper for that authority to pursue a penalty based upon the PCN or NTO, if this is what they sought to do. In these circumstances, in any appeal, a Parking Adjudicator could make directions under Paragraph 5(2) of Schedule 6 to the Road Traffic Act 1991, to prohibit that authority relying upon such a PCN and/or NTO.

Have Wandsworth acted in such a way, in this case?

He went on to find they had not; the case concerned whether the Enforcement Authority could enforce a permit bay which the Appellant had argued they could not because of non or inconsistent enforcement and/or representations made. A similar point of law was raised in the Court of Appeal decision R v Jockey Club 1993 2 AER 225. In that case, Stuart- Smith LJ in setting out the requirements of legitimate expectation said: However, a legitimate expectation may arise from either an express promise or assurance given on behalf of an authority, or from the existence of a regular practice which the claimant can reasonably expect to continue..

Given the many years over which the practice of parking on the pavement at this location had been tolerated and the restriction not enforced, a reasonable expectation had arisen and as such because the Enforcement Authority had not given advance warning of enforcement they had act[ed] in such a way as to be so unfair and prejudicial to the owner of a vehicle in issuing a PCN or NTO that it would not be proper for that authority to pursue a penalty based upon the PCN or NTO.

In these circumstances, I must allow this appeal.

Mick
grazi2
Thank you Mick.

I have said that, however, they claim the sign was there since 2012 - so they didn't need to warn residents.

However, i had never seen the sign - they claim it had been vandalized and they replace them switfly! Since at least 2 years, google maps shows the spot without a sign in May 2015...

I'm posting the replies now...

Thank you!
grazi2
Hi John,

I know, sorry... I think I was denying I had to deal with this!

My reply is the same as the post 23.

The council reply - trying to attach but I don't have enough attachment allowance... any ideas?


The council also sent a very thick 'evidence pack'.



The notes I have taken so far for the appeal tomorrow are below (any tips / comments are welcome!):

1. The sign has not been there since at least June 2014 – item 5 – this fact is ignored on Council’s response.

Picture from Google – May 2015:


Neighbours statements:


2. The council claims the sign was vandalized and they ‘always replaced them swiftly’ – this time it was not replace for at least 1 and ½ years – I can prove with google maps going back to May 2015 which shows that was not there for at least 7 months

3. If the sign was replaced on 29/12/2015 – I find strange that the council comes on 30/12/2015 at 8:50am with the truck ready for towing. This surely was pre-mediated.


4. I requested the photos from the event via email on 4th January 2016. The council replied and provided them on 8th January 2016. The council sent 4 photos. See email copy – I also mention this on my appeal.
The council sent the Council’s Evidence pack on 15th March with 26 photos.
Not all evidence photos were not provided to me.
Photos on page 13,17, 18 and 26 would have been very important for my initial appeal on this case. They clearly show how the sign is not visible. Mainly for item 2 of my response – I wouldn’t need to have taken photos myself as the council’s photos clearly shows this. I actually mentioned this on my reply. The council should have provided me with all evidence they had.

5. On the Council’s Evidence pack provided on 15th March – page 6 – the Council totally ignores the fact that the sign has not been there for many months – and this is not mentioned on their ‘evidence’ or ‘conclusion’. This is the main point of this appeal and should have been taken in consideration.

6. Not clear signage
The Council claims that the sign complies with the rules and it’s the motorists responsibility to view them.
- if the sign is new for a long term resident, it would be unusual to be checking the sign


Thank you ever so much!
grazi2
Hi John / all,

I managed to upload the council reply.

Please see links:
http://graziela.com/councilreply.jpg

http://graziela.com/reply3.jpg

http://graziela.com/reply2.jpg

Thank you!
Mad Mick V
Let's not reinvent the wheel--- your argument is very simple.

Give the case I quoted to the adjudicator with letters from neighbours and GSV screengrabs.

The duties of CEO and Council regarding defective or missing signage are quite clear The CEO has to report and the Council has to maintain. Both have failed in those duties if the sign has been missing for 2 years. In that time the Council has been unable to enforce because a SYL needs a sign.

If, without warning, the Council now wishes to enforce this area, in the knowledge that motorists have been parking there regularly, it is acting unfairly and prejudicially. So towing a car within hours of a new sign being erected is grossly disproportionate in such circumstances.

Mick
grazi2
HI Mick,

You're right, thank you.

About this:

Give the case I quoted to the adjudicator
-- Can I actually quote the case number? Or the summary of the case you sent? Please advise on what I can / should give it to him...

I'm pretty nervous about it all... and really feel it's been so unfair that if I lose I'll be devastated - it's beyond money back!

Thank you!

Grazi
Mad Mick V
Either ---- quote the case number or give him/her the summary.

It's very informal --across the other side of a table. Good experience in case you have to do it again and in London that could be a given.

Mick
Mad Mick V
2160072182

The Appellant attended in person. The Authority was not represented.

The Appellant said that she has been a resident at Northwold Road for a number of years. She has a parking space but from time to time has had to park in Rossendale Street. She said that it is well known by local residents that there had not been a time-plate on Rossendale Street for many years so parking was allowed. She said that she parked in Rossendale Street in the evening of 29 December 2015. The vehicle was removed the next morning.

The Authority had not addressed the issue in the case summary. It merely said that there was a sign. The Appellant had to point out that her account was actually corroborated by the Notice of Rejection that there had been a missing sign which was replaced in the afternoon of 29 December 2015. The Authority has not produced any evidence as to when the sign was replaced. I have checked on Street view and found that in 2015 but prior to the alleged contravention, there was no yellow line at all on Rossendale Street

It seems to me that the failure by the Authority to concede to the missing sign and when it was replaced speaks for itself.

Even if I were to accept that the sign was replaced a few hours before the Appellant parked, I do not think that the matter can rest on this point.

I find that the Authority must have know that there was nothing to indicate when the hours of restrictions were in the whole street and it allowed the position to remain for a number of years. It then replaced the sign(s) and started to enforce as soon as restrictions commenced the next day. It is true that motorists parking on a yellow line should generally consult a sign but if a motorist parks on a yellow line late in the evening, it is unreasonable to expect the motorist to conclude that he has to get up at some (and what) time to check for a sign which had not been there the night before). In this case, not only had the Appellant parked after the restriction began, she parked when she had some expectation that there would not be any enforcement any way.

I do not find that the contravention occurred. I allow the appeal
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.