Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Council NTO but no ticket on windscreen
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
fed25
Dear All

I received a Notice to Owner on 2 Jan 2106 for parking "wholly or partly in a suspended space". See photo below.

This is the first I had known about the parking contravention as when I got to my car there was no parking ticket on the windscreen.

After viewing the photographs taken by the Parking attendant, it is clear that a ticket was attached to my windscreen at the time of photographing. It also looks as if I have parked in a bay (outside my flats) which was temporarily suspended.

Given the nature of the street and the time of day, I am guessing that a school kid has removed the ticket for a laugh.
I have also found some links that suggest that some parking operators may remove tickets after photographing them. https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/...Ghost-ticketing

I would appreciate advice on two things :

1. The yellow suspended bay sign that was attached to the sign post, nearest to where I had parked, had fallen to the floor. The parking attendant has photographed another sign in the same street, but one much further away from my parking spot. See photos below - the second photo shows the yellow suspended bay sign much further down the road (my car is on the right, behind the other car). Other photos show yellow suspension bay signs but they are not all suspended on the same dates.
How do I know that the sign that the parking officer photographed refers to the bay in which I was parked?

2. Is there a legal basis for challenging the serving of the first notice - ie: the parking ticket?
If my point above is not a valid case to challenge the fine altogether, then I understand that I am liable to pay the fine, BUT only at the reduced amount.

I did call my council parking services and explained point 2., but they said it was my word against theirs and that I should write an appeal. They said that they have acted legally and it is up to the adjudicator's discretion as to whether I would be able to pay the reduced amount.

Please can anyone help. The NTO was served on 30 December 2015.
Needless to say, the £130 fine will cause me some financial worry as a single parent on a low wage.





DancingDad
Let's see the NTO please, leave in dates and location, blank reg number, name etc.

It is not adjudicator's discretion to allow payment of the reduced amount. It is solely down to the council. They have discretion to do whatever they feel like regarding reducing penalties. Or cancelling them. Why they cannot be honest and just say, we can but won't?

Sorry, rant over.

Sounds like your photos and the CEO photos may well be critical.
Councils have a mandatory duty to sign restrictions so the reasonably alert motorist (who bothers to look) can see them.
A suspension sign on the floor and relying on one that is some distance away doesn't sound too promising for them.

So let's see the photos as well please, CEO ones and yours but please make it clear which are which.
A streetview link will be useful as well.

Forget ghost ticketing. May happen but may just be urban myths. Even if it did, prove it !
fed25
Thank you for your speedy response, dancing dad.

I have finally managed to post photos- the first two are cropped CEO photos and the last one is my photo of the NTO.

I am not entirely sure how to get a street view link -I will search and share if I can.
PASTMYBEST
please re post the NTO leave in everything but your name address reg no and NTO no also all photos you mentioned one showing pcn on your car please post
Incandescent
As you have an NtO, it is now a total no-brainer to take them all the way to adjudication, as there is no additional cost in doing so, just the PCN penalty if you lose, and you could well win this one with the mendacity of the CEO ignoring the sign that had dropped to the pavement. Just why did he photograph another one much further away ? Is the dropped sign just visible in the first photo by the motorbike, as I see a bit of yellow ?

DancingDad
I would like to see the relationship between where you parked, the pole sign with the fallen suspension sign and the pole sign/suspension the CEO photographed.
Streetview will give us this with a little explanation to aid.

If you are parked by the fallen sign, they haven't a leg to stand on. But if closer to the other, could be iffy.
At the moment we simply do not know.
fed25
Thank you for your reply Incandescent. When you say "take them to ajudication", do you mean file an appeal with the council or PATAS?

If I lose the case, will I pay the £130 or is there still a chance of paying the reduced amount as I was not given the chance to pay this in the first place?

Yes, the yellow you see in the first photo is a "dropped" sign. How would I legally argue that this is poor signage?
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE
I am not entirely sure how to get a street view link -I will search and share if I can.

let us have the location, we can find it

fed25
Dancing Dad - how do I post a street view? Will this compromise my anonymity by posting the street?
The fallen signpost is much closer to my parking spot than the other post.
I could measure the distance tomorrow if this will help my argument.
DancingDad
Do measure and make a sketch...this will help in future.

Give us the location, we can sort streetview, anonymity has to compromise somewhat if we are to have any chance of working out what is what.

System is challenge Council, get rejection, then appeal to Adjudicators.
Ys there is a chance of getting the 50% reinstated but in all honesty, at the moment it seems like a 100% winner... if it isn't we will say.
And always do our best to advise you.
fed25
Great - I appreciate your clarity.

Location is Lissenden Gardens, Camden NW5 .

Parking officer's photo of sign is outside number 35 (can be seen in photo) but I am parked towards number 65.
Will measure and draw plan tomorrow.
Would my phone call to parking services admitting I parked incorrectly and asking for reduced amount, have any bearing on making a case to cancel the fine on different grounds?
DancingDad
QUOTE (fed25 @ Sun, 10 Jan 2016 - 22:49) *
........Would my phone call to parking services admitting I parked incorrectly and asking for reduced amount, have any bearing on making a case to cancel the fine on different grounds?


Not by the time we have put together a challenge for you.

I think sign CEO pictured is this one... outside 46??
And the next one by distant corner, opposite the red car ?
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5571732,-...3312!8i6656

If not, scroll about to locate correctly, copy the link in the address bar and paste it in here.
fed25
I am parked by the big 20 (speed limit) sign on the road at this location
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5571732,-...3312!8i6656

I will have to check tomorrow about which post the CEO photographed the sign.
DancingDad
Which makes the sign you relied on, by the motorbike in the blurry picks, with the suspension sign at floor level, about three car lengths ahead of you.
And the one the CEO included in his shot of the car and close up, around 5 car lengths behind you.

Please confirm with actual measurements but I reckon we got a good case on inadequate signage.
Please don't tell us that you live by the sign that was festooned with the suspension notice at the proper height.

One other question, where did the picture of the pole sign by the motorbike come from ?
Was it on the NTO ?

Check the council website as well, they may have some more and clearer photos.
Usually under parking, challenge or pay.... you'll need to put in PCN number but if there, you can download and then post the pictures here.
Use a free picture host like photobucket or tinypic and link em. Saves space and hassle.
fed25
"Which makes the sign you relied on, by the motorbike in the blurry picks, with the suspension sign at floor level, about three car lengths ahead of you.
And the one the CEO included in his shot of the car and close up, around 5 car lengths behind you." - yes this is correct. See sketch below. PLease note these are approx measurements.

I have also uploaded all photos from Council website (some images cropped). I dont have any of my own photos as I wasnt aware at the time that I had got a ticket.

4 photos were printed on the NTO and 6 photos uploaded onto the council website.

I don't live by the photographed sign. I live fairly nearby, but it is worth noting that these bays were suspended for tree work, therefore the suspension signs said different days and times.
Hence why I got caught out. There is no photographic evidence of the closest sign to my car (the one on the floor) as saying the same suspension time/ date as the photographed one. Could be irrelevant - just thought I would mention.






DancingDad
More later but you have a winner.
DancingDad
Dear Sirs
Ref PCN ???

I found no PCN on my vehicle so had no opportunity to challenge this previously.
Whoever removed it have deprived me of my rights to challenge or pay at discount.


Contravention did not Occur

Reviewing the CEO photos does make sense of why I may have fallen foul of a parking suspension as I habitually check, even where I usually park and cannot imagine that I didn't on that occasion.
I note that some of the photos show my vehicle from the front with what look like the yellow of parking suspension signs on the restriction poles. These poles are some 17 meters behind my vehicle.
However, the closest pole and the one I would have checked is 10 meters in front of my vehicle.
There is a CEO photo of this pole (with a motorbike parked by it) and what looks like a yellow sign on the floor.
There is certainly no sign on the pole itself.
Given that this was the closest sign and the one I would have looked at when parking, it was after all, in front of my car and relatively close but had no suspension sign, it cannot be said that the suspension was adequately signed to convey the restriction to a reasonably alert motorist.
As the signage is inadequate, the restriction cannot be enforced and the PCN ought to be cancelled.
Please confirm cancelation
Hugs and kisses

The CEO has done you a favour, they cannot enforce without signing all relevant pole signs as there is no duty for a motorist to check more then one.
Without that photo, I suspect you would have been stuffed and best result a re-offer of the discount.
With that photo and your measurements, I cannot see this losing (No guarantees)
Although you may have to go to adjudication to get the win.

Nothing to lose in doing so and nothing extra to pay so stick with this one.
fed25
Please advise. I received this notice of rejection on Saturday 30th Jan.





Do you think I have grounds to win this appeal if I take it to PATAS?



DancingDad
"I am satisfied that suspension signage was placed on both time plates in the location"
But am totally ignoring the CEO photos that show that one was, at best, loosely draped on the floor.

I despair at times, of how venal they can be.

They have been relatively fair in reinstating the discount, TBH, without the CEO photos, I'd say take it as a good result.
However, as I said earlier in the thread, those photos IMO win it for you.

Personally, I'd take this to appeal and be applying for costs as they are being wholly unreasonable not only ignoring their own evidence but being cavalier with the truth regarding signs.
It is your money and your risk however.
Can never guarantee 100% but this is better then most we see.

Contravention did not occur due to inadequate signage, as already detailed within formal challenge and evidenced by their own photos
Procedural Impropriety for either being economical with the truth regarding signage in place or failing to consider as their own photos show this to be incorrect.
Plus costs as being wholly unreasonable in forcing such an obviously flagrant disregard of their mandatory duty, to place and maintain signage such is needed to adequately convey restrictions, to adjudication.
fed25
Thanks for speedy reply Dancing Dad.

So what is reasonable distance for signage? Can they not argue that there was adequate signage on the other post, behind my car?
DancingDad
Nope.
Although they quite possibly will try. If they actually contest an appeal, my feeling is that when someone with a little sense looks at it they will withdraw.
(no guarantees, just a feeling)

The procedures for signage is simple really, a council must (mandatory) place signs that adequately convey the restriction.
This imposes a duty on the motorist to actually look at and obey whatever signage is in place.
If a motorist looks at a sign that has the normal restrictions and they do not apply, the suspension sign on the next pole has as much bearing as one in the next street (or Liverpool or the moon).
There is no duty on any motorist to wander round every sign, just in case.

What is reasonable depends entirely on circumstances. In your case you pull into a regular parking space with a pole sign immediately ahead. Quite possibly with another car in front and between you and the sign. It looks the same as normal, no big yellow sign on it (that is on the floor) you may even read the sign. Yup, same as always.
At that point, why would anyone expect it to be reasonable to look at any other sign?
Why would anyone walk to the next sign in the bay and read that?
Or the one behind you that is further away?
Totally unreasonable to expect a motorist to do any more then read one pole mounted sign.
fed25
Thank you Dancing Dad - I understand your point.

Please can I use the text in your earlier post for the appeal?

"Contravention did not occur due to inadequate signage, as already detailed within formal challenge and evidenced by their own photos
Procedural Impropriety for either being economical with the truth regarding signage in place or failing to consider as their own photos show this to be incorrect.
Plus costs as being wholly unreasonable in forcing such an obviously flagrant disregard of their mandatory duty, to place and maintain signage such is needed to adequately convey restrictions, to adjudication."
DancingDad
QUOTE (fed25 @ Tue, 2 Feb 2016 - 18:24) *
Thank you Dancing Dad - I understand your point.

Please can I use the text in your earlier post for the appeal?

"Contravention did not occur due to inadequate signage, as already detailed within formal challenge and evidenced by their own photos
Procedural Impropriety for either being economical with the truth regarding signage in place or failing to consider as their own photos show this to be incorrect.
Plus costs as being wholly unreasonable in such an obviously flagrant disregard of their mandatory duties.
Firstly to place and maintain signage such is needed to adequately convey restrictions.
Secondly for serving a PCN when signs were obviously deficient.
Finally, in forcing such disregard to adjudication.


Welcome to, I've tweaked slightly above.
Don't expect costs but don't ask, don't get.
jade989
Hi all I'm new to this and looking for some help. On Friday I received an NTO from the council advising I had been issued with a PCN on the 30th of December and I need to pay £70. I never was issued a PCN on my windscreen and I park at the back of my work and we checked the cctv today and it shows the warden taking pictures of my car but not actually leaving a PCN on my windscreen he just took images and then walked away. Do you think this is worth appealing and advising I can provide proof of cctv that the PCN was never provided. Thanks
Mad Mick V
Jade 989 start your own thread.

You cannot be liable in the cicumstances if a PCN was never served. Get someone in authority to indicate any copy of the CCTV footage is true and valid so there is an "audit" trail for evidence.

Hopefully it is timed and corresponds with the NTO.

Which Council?

Mick
jade989
QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Wed, 3 Feb 2016 - 20:57) *
Jade 989 start your own thread.

You cannot be liable in the cicumstances if a PCN was never served. Get someone in authority to indicate any copy of the CCTV footage is true and valid so there is an "audit" trail for evidence.

Hopefully it is timed and corresponds with the NTO.

Which Council?

Mick


Thank you for your reply Mick, I have now posted a new thread regarding this (sorry new to this and wasn't entirely sure how to do one) it is Hull City Council and I have given more detail in my thread. Thank you.
bama
It is unlawful for a council to use PCNs as a revenue stream.
every council knows this and takes great pains to make sure there is nothing in writing to show that they are in fact using it as a revenue stream. and they are in fact using it as a revenue stream, of that there is no doubt.
A council caught knowingly acting unlawfully could end up in a world of hurt - and they know this full well.

You will not embarrass the council at all with your approach. It was the operative of the outsource provider that did it not the council.
nice 'plausible deniability' arrangement eh.
and of course the CEOs "do not have targets"

(just no overtime - in a minimum wage job - and crap shifts for those that 'don't perform' according to what CEOs have told us)


When you have nuclear evidence on a legal matter, evidence that proves your case and destroys the other side's case, it is always a bad idea to publish it before the case is over IMO.

Just a few of the reasons I would go softly softly and drop the CCTV bombshell into the adjudication.
Otherwise they will just drop the case down a black hole (that happens a LOT when councils are caught with their trousers down) and carry on as before.
Make what difference you can - is a good motto.
fed25
Dear All

I am extremely happy to report that the council have written to me today stating that they are not going to contest my appeal any further and have cancelled the PCN. Please see the following transcript of the letter....

"I am writing to inform you that the council have taken the decision not to contest this appeal any further. The Environment and traffic Adjudicators have been contacted to this affect, and they will write to you shortly to confirm that your appeal has been withdrawn.

The PCN in relation to the appeal has also been cancelled, and the council will be taking no further action on it, thus bringing the case to a close.

If a hearing at the hearing center was scheduled for your appeal, it too has been cancelled, and you no longer need to attend."


Questions now are .....
Do the council have the right to cancel MY appeal? Surely I am the only one who can withdraw my appeal?
I asked for compensation for my time wasted...The implication of the council "not contesting" means they were either in the wrong or are not confident of winning - these are not the same thing.
Should I be asking the council to admit that they issued the demand in error?
In what cases do PATAS award compensation and what calculation do they use? - I can then go back to the council and request this be paid.

Anyone able to help with these queries?

Many thanks






PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (fed25 @ Tue, 8 Mar 2016 - 12:07) *
Dear All

I am extremely happy to report that the council have written to me today stating that they are not going to contest my appeal any further and have cancelled the PCN. Please see the following transcript of the letter....

"I am writing to inform you that the council have taken the decision not to contest this appeal any further. The Environment and traffic Adjudicators have been contacted to this affect, and they will write to you shortly to confirm that your appeal has been withdrawn.

The PCN in relation to the appeal has also been cancelled, and the council will be taking no further action on it, thus bringing the case to a close.

If a hearing at the hearing center was scheduled for your appeal, it too has been cancelled, and you no longer need to attend."


Questions now are .....
Do the council have the right to cancel MY appeal? Surely I am the only one who can withdraw my appeal?
I asked for compensation for my time wasted...The implication of the council "not contesting" means they were either in the wrong or are not confident of winning - these are not the same thing.
Should I be asking the council to admit that they issued the demand in error?
In what cases do PATAS award compensation and what calculation do they use? - I can then go back to the council and request this be paid.

Anyone able to help with these queries?

Many thanks


Para 6 of the schedule is relevant

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/3482/schedule/made
fed25
Dear All

I am extremely happy to report that the council have written to me today stating that they are not going to contest my appeal any further and have cancelled the PCN. Please see the following transcript of the letter....

"I am writing to inform you that the council have taken the decision not to contest this appeal any further. The Environment and traffic Adjudicators have been contacted to this affect, and they will write to you shortly to confirm that your appeal has been withdrawn.

The PCN in relation to the appeal has also been cancelled, and the council will be taking no further action on it, thus bringing the case to a close.

If a hearing at the hearing center was scheduled for your appeal, it too has been cancelled, and you no longer need to attend."


Questions now are .....
Do the council have the right to cancel MY appeal? Surely I am the only one who can withdraw my appeal?
I asked for compensation for my time wasted...The implication of the council "not contesting" means they were either in the wrong or are not confident of winning - these are not the same thing.
Should I be asking the council to admit that they issued the demand in error?
In what cases do PATAS award compensation and what calculation do they use? - I can then go back to the council and request this be paid.

Anyone able to help with these queries?

Many thanks
orford
Do the council have the right to cancel MY appeal? Surely I am the only one who can withdraw my appeal?
They haven't cancelled your appeal, they've withdrawn and so PATAS have cancelled it

Should I be asking the council to admit that they issued the demand in error?
You can always ask, but they won't admit anything

In what cases do PATAS award compensation and what calculation do they use? - I can then go back to the council and request this be paid.
The council will only pay costs if awarded by the adjudicator and adjudicators very rarely award costs
seank
I have been through this exact situation.
orford is precisely correct, but I'd add the following:
If you can prove that you have sustained a loss as a result of the council's issuing of the penalty. you can write to them, effectively claiming your costs back.
If the council ignores or refuses, you can issue a county court claim against them, on the small claims track.
The cost is £25 to issue and £25 if a hearing is needed. You get those fees back, if you win, along with £90 per day or £18 per hour you spent in preparation, plus your mileage and other expenses if you have to attend a hearing.
The court views the councils actions as equivalent to "notice of discontinuance" rendering them liable to pay you.
I issued a claim against my local council, who paid up 2 weeks before the hearing.
www.moneyclaim.gov.uk
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.