Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Advice on PCN for parking on redundant double yellow lines
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Johntyb
Hi All,

Before I start a challenge for my PCN I would like to gather opinion to determine my chances of success.

I parked on some double yellow lines that are protecting a disused driveway entrance to the carpark of an abandoned building down a quiet side road in Birmingham. The double yellows are quite obviously completely redundant as the entrance to this premises hasnt been used for at least 2 years. The driveway is completely inaccessible as it has a steel barrier across it, a concrete block and 8 foot high wooden paneling.


In my opinion the double yellows serve absolutely no purpose and should have been removed a long time ago, and it would have been obvious to the traffic warden that this was the case.


So, should I appeal or not?

For some reason I'm unable to upload an image...not sure whats wrong. So here are some screen captures:
http://prntscr.com/f5xsbe
http://prntscr.com/f5xst1

Google street view of location
peterguk
Try this:
As usual, for best advice please post up PCN (both sides)

Do not attach docs/photos, but use this method:
Photo or scan. see http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=36858&st=0
for how to do it. I use Tinypic for stage 2 with no problems.
STAGE 1 takes care of resizing. If you use Tinypic for Stage 2, on the left each image in Tinypic is a list of links. Highlight and copy the entire link 'for forums' from the list for each image - beginning with IMG and ending /IMG (include all the square brackets [] ), and paste each link into your post. Each copied and pasted link will embed a thumbnail link in your post.

Using the attachment method is not advised as it means quickly running out of attachment space.
Redact/obscure personal details, PCN no. Reg No.

Also post up a GSV (Google Street View) link to the location.
LEAVE IN all dates/times; precise location, Contravention code and description.
Johntyb
I've added some images and a google street view location map.


The PCN says ' Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours' But it's not a restricted street, only this section in front of the redundant driveway is.
stamfordman
'Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours' is the standard if confusing language for contraventions such as parking on double yellows.

Must say you parked not only on a DY but also a dropped kerb, although clearly that isn't in use (but it could be at any time). However, it's the yellow line contravention that's on the ticket and it has been correctly given. In my view the street view doesn't seem to show a location where you could make a strong case for 'redundancy' but it's all you've got.

Post the full PCN leaving out only personal details as there may be something wrong with it.
DancingDad
Seems bang to rights but IMO worth checking the Traffic Order on this one.
Birmingham have been known to paint DYLs without benefit of an Order.

That was the Masonic Temple and quite possible the lines were painted on a nod and funny handshake back then.

Likely to be this one https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/T...ngham/BM140.pdf
But needs the maps that goes with the schedules.
troservices@birmingham.gov.uk and ask them for the Traffic order plan covering sterling road.
cp8759
Your should not appeal, nobody is meant to park there because there is a kerb that's flush with the road. The council could argue that someone in a wheel chair might use it to cross the road so they want to keep it free from obstructions, and the yellow line just reinforces the message (because some people will park on a flush kerb but not on a double yellow, strange as it may sound).

Unfortunately the law says you have to obey the restrictions in force no matter how pointless you think they are, I know a few speed limits which I think are pointless but that wouldn't give me a defence if I were to be caught speeding.
DancingDad
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 9 May 2017 - 21:59) *
Your should not appeal, nobody is meant to park there because there is a kerb that's flush with the road. The council could argue that someone in a wheel chair might use it to cross the road so they want to keep it free from obstructions, and the yellow line just reinforces the message (because some people will park on a flush kerb but not on a double yellow, strange as it may sound).

Unfortunately the law says you have to obey the restrictions in force no matter how pointless you think they are, I know a few speed limits which I think are pointless but that wouldn't give me a defence if I were to be caught speeding.


But they are not citing the dropped kerb, only the yellow lines.
Which if covered by an appropriate TRO is a certain loser.
But the DK has no relevance and if was used to continue enforcement would be totally wrong.

While Birmingham now do penalise on DKs (since 2009 IIRC) the argument would be that it is not for one of the specified reasons and given the sealed gate and concrete block ???
Mad Mick V
The OP asked what were the chances of a successful appeal.

If he parked on those very bright DYLs the answer must be not a hope in hell---pay at the discount.

If he thought they were redundant because of the concrete block which effectively blocks vehicle access then an adjudicator would disagree IMO.

I appreciate members are kicking this one around looking for potential grounds but the DYLs are insuperable.

Mick
Johntyb
Thanks for everyones input. I'll post the PCN tonight, if I can get my scanner working.

However something else occurred to me. Surely these DYL regulations are in place to protect the public and allow the traffic to flow but in this case they do neither of these things. So IMO they're purely retained for generating income. Thoughts?
hcandersen
OP, this is a matter of law, not supposition or conjecture on your part.

An adjudicator is not going to deny an authority the right to enforce DYL placed pursuant to a restriction in an order just because you don't think it serves any purpose. It is not going to happen.
cp8759
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 9 May 2017 - 22:26) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 9 May 2017 - 21:59) *
Your should not appeal, nobody is meant to park there because there is a kerb that's flush with the road. The council could argue that someone in a wheel chair might use it to cross the road so they want to keep it free from obstructions, and the yellow line just reinforces the message (because some people will park on a flush kerb but not on a double yellow, strange as it may sound).

Unfortunately the law says you have to obey the restrictions in force no matter how pointless you think they are, I know a few speed limits which I think are pointless but that wouldn't give me a defence if I were to be caught speeding.


But they are not citing the dropped kerb, only the yellow lines.
Which if covered by an appropriate TRO is a certain loser.
But the DK has no relevance and if was used to continue enforcement would be totally wrong.

While Birmingham now do penalise on DKs (since 2009 IIRC) the argument would be that it is not for one of the specified reasons and given the sealed gate and concrete block ???


On the legal point, I agree. I was just pointing out to the OP that while he might think the lines are redundant, the council could legitimately take a different view.

QUOTE (Johntyb @ Wed, 10 May 2017 - 07:33) *
Surely these DYL regulations are in place to protect the public and allow the traffic to flow but in this case they do neither of these things. So IMO they're purely retained for generating income. Thoughts?


Surely when it's 2am on a straight, lit, empty stretch of motorway I should be allowed to drive at 85mph, after all I've done it in Germany so why can't I do it here? If I get prosecuted I can argue I wasn't doing anything I haven't safely done before and the speed limit in those circumstances is only being enforced to generate revenue. Do you think I'll win?
DancingDad
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 10 May 2017 - 10:17) *
........On the legal point, I agree. I was just pointing out to the OP that while he might think the lines are redundant, the council could legitimately take a different view.

...........


On that we agree, that the DYLs are there is reason not to park and reason for the PCN, needs no thought, justification or consideration.

But I would still suggest that the OP gets a copy of the TRO, just in case.
But doesn't let the discount slip away, if needs be, enter a plea for discretion, Birmingham do re-offer the discount so buys time.

I do suspect that these were placed unofficially given that Brum had no way of enforcing DKs prior to 2009 and that very likely that council officials were part of the lodge and inconvenienced by people parking over the DK. Only a suspicion, the TRO will confirm.
Johntyb
PCN image:

TRO TRO Document
TRO plan TRO Plan Document

I await feedback, although I fear it's looking like i'm going to have to pay.

Thanks everyone

PASTMYBEST
before you pay up lets check the back of the PCN conforms to regs
cp8759
QUOTE (Johntyb @ Wed, 10 May 2017 - 19:42) *
I await feedback, although I fear it's looking like i'm going to have to pay.

Thanks everyone


Well on the TRO plan you can clearly see the yellow lines at the entrance to what is labelled the "Warwickshire Masonic Temple and Edgbaston Assembly Rooms", so the lines appear to be supported by a valid TRO. As PASTMYBEST says, post the back of the PCN and we can check if there's any flaws in the wording.
DancingDad
QUOTE (Johntyb @ Wed, 10 May 2017 - 19:42) *
.......I await feedback, although I fear it's looking like i'm going to have to pay.

Thanks everyone


Yup, looks like it.
Let's check the rest of the PCN but last time I looked at a Birmingham version it was solid so don't hold out too much hope.

A challenge in discount period will delay the inevitable and help budget if needed and they may mess up answer but that is best I got now.
Johntyb
Back of the PCN:


So what should I do next?
PASTMYBEST
Can't find fault with the PCN, best take advantage of the discount
Johntyb
Thanks for everyones advice. Appreciated
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.