Here's the case you need from PATAS (precursor to LTs).
QUOTE
Case Details
Case reference
2110166557
Appellant
James George Gibson
Authority
London Borough of Haringey
VRM
P844KKU
PCN Details
PCN
HY53096054
Contravention date
15 Jan 2011
Contravention time
09:40:00
Contravention location
Lausanne Road
Penalty amount
GBP 80.00
Contravention
In resident shared use place with invalid perm
Decision date
18 May 2011
Adjudicator
Carl Teper
Appeal decision
PCN appeal allowed
Direction
cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.
Reasons
The authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was parked in a residents' parking place or zone displaying an invalid permit when in Lausanne Road on 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 18, 19 and 21 January 2011 at 09.00. The Appellant's case is that the permit had not been renewed because they had not received a renewal notice from the authority. The Appellant and his wife were on holiday from 31 December 2010 until 23 January 2011 during which period the Penalty Charge Notices were incurred. I have considered the evidence and I find that the Appellant's vehicle was parked in a residents parking place displaying an invalid permit when in Lausanne Road on 4 January 2011. It is the Appellant's responsibility to renew their permit and they are not entitled to rely on the courtesy renewal letter, which may not have been received. However, I find that the Appellant's vehicle committed one contravention of parking in a residents' permit bay without clearly displaying a valid permit when in Lausanne Road on 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 18, 19 and 21 January 2011. I find that one continuous contravention has occurred; the vehicle remains at the same location throughout the period these Penalty Charge Notices were issued. Further, I have taken into account that the residents' bay is operational from 8am to 6.30pm Monday to Saturday and I find that the situation would be the same if the residents' bay was operational 24 hours a day 7 days a week. There is no rule of law or regulation that entitles an authority to issue a penalty charge notice every 24 hours or as in some of these Penalty Charge Notices less than 24 hours. An enforcement authority has other powers at its disposal for a continuous contravention, such as removal. For the reasons given this appeal is allowed.
This nails Steve's point as to whether a new offence is committed because the restriction periods are non-contiguous i.e. not a 24 hour restriction. The answer is, it doesn't make any difference.