Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Code 01 - Parking on grass verge DYL - wrong road name?
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
tennisfan88
Hi there, this is late notice since I need to submit my dispute by last post tomorrow to get under the 28 days!

I got a PCN (attached) from Milton Keynes council for parking on a grass verge, a clear car length off the road - very annoying given the circumstances (see below) but I understand from reading this forum that verges are covered by DYLs no matter how big they are. Here's about where I was parked:

https://goo.gl/maps/f1Ceacid4GH2

What I'm wondering is it that the PCN states my car was on (or the location as) "Denbigh Road Service Road" - which actually only seems to exist (that Google can find) on 3 Milton Keynes TROs:

https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/T...eynes/MK019.pdf
https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/T...eynes/MK274.pdf
http://tro.parking-adjudication.gov.uk/TRO...eynes/MK075.pdf

Other than that the road I was actually parked on / near was simply named Denbigh Road, including on Milton Keynes own mapping website: https://mapping.milton-keynes.gov.uk/mymiltonkeynes.aspx

Is that grounds enough to appeal?

My other thought is that the photos on the Notice to Owner don't actually show the DYLs - is that required? Might they have other photos not shown and is there a way I could test that?

My thought is that my Dispute should be something like:

1) I cannot find any map (including https://mapping.milton-keynes.gov.uk/mymiltonkeynes.aspx) showing Denbigh Road Service Road which is where the alleged contravention occurred. Given this I believe that the PCN is invalid because I was not parked at the location stated on the PCN.
2) In addition to the above, having reviewed the evidence, including the photos on your Notice to Owner, I do not believe that my car was parked in contravention of the Code given - unless you have photographic evidence that the car was parked on an area covered by double yellow lines (or other applicable signage or markings) and also in the location given on the PCN, again I believe it is invalid.

Is that too much / too little - or am I wasting my time (though may as well give it a go anyway now?!)

Here are the PCN photos and a section of the Notice to Owner:





To give the full context (which may be irrelevant) - I had run the MK Half Marathon and was heading back to the finish to meet my friend who was running the full Marathon (both for charity). There was heavy traffic and on the marathon website (partnered by Milton Keynes Council) there were instructions (which I've screen-grabbed) saying not to park at the Asda or other shops around the stadium finishing area. Instead it gave three postcodes on a nearby industrial estate and said to "park considerately" there. Which is exactly what I did - there was a lot of traffic and a load of other cars already there, but one space where I put my car on the verge - a clear 4 metres off the road:

https://goo.gl/maps/f1Ceacid4GH2

I was genuinely trying to be considerate by parking there and thought I was following instructions - had no idea about verges being covered so far by DYLs. The parking officer was still nearby ticketing a load of cars and was very polite and sympathetic - she said she wished she hadn't turned up and felt terrible - she was clearly getting a load of stick from other marathon runners for ticketing people running for charity who had already told her about the website instructions - but obviously she had to continue doing her job at that point!

I already informally appealed on the basis that the council supported Marathon site said to park there, that it was a bank holiday and the industrial estate was totally closed), and that my car was considerably parked a distance from the road in an area with no pedestrian access. Predictably I got nowhere. Here are the links on the Marathon website which say to park in the area where I did:

http://mkmarathon.com/travel-parking/

Alternative Parking
If you have not booked VIP Stadium or Park N Walk then you should park considerately in the industrial areas surrounding the stadium and NOT in the parking areas of the nearby retail and trade outlets, or in areas signed as privately owned (such as Granby Trade Park) where there is a risk of clamping.

http://mkmarathon.com/faqs/#answer29
29. Where can I park on race day?
If you have not pre-booked a car parking space close to the stadium we suggest you head for a local industrial area. Use postcode: MK1 1LG, MK1 1NL or MK1 1DH

(Where I parked was between the latter two postcodes.)

Any help very welcome - apologies for the long email, hope I've included anything of potential use. Cheers.

ford poplar
Denbigh Rd (GSV) does not appear to be an Industrial site road, as recommended, but part of the public highway, inc DYLs & verges. (width of verge irrelevant).
Suggest you still make Formal Reps to NTO, based on imprecise location (a verge is not a Service Rd), to enable you to Appeal to TPT on rejection.
I feel for you & CEO.
hcandersen
OP, what is the date of the NTO?

Forget TROs and anything else, what is its date???

You have 28 days beginning on its date of service in which the make reps without running the risk of them being disregarded. You've told us that today is your last day whereas experience tells us that OPs tend to miscalculate.

You say 28 days if you post today. Post should be first-class which would therefore this imply Thurs. 6 as the last day of the 28, which itself implies 7 June as the date of the NTO. But if it is 8 June then the last day leaps forward to 9 July.

We must know.
Mr Mustard
Email saves a day
tennisfan88
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 07:10) *
OP, what is the date of the NTO?

Forget TROs and anything else, what is its date???

You have 28 days beginning on its date of service in which the make reps without running the risk of them being disregarded. You've told us that today is your last day whereas experience tells us that OPs tend to miscalculate.

You say 28 days if you post today. Post should be first-class which would therefore this imply Thurs. 6 as the last day of the 28, which itself implies 7 June as the date of the NTO. But if it is 8 June then the last day leaps forward to 9 July.

We must know.


Hi, thanks. The date of posting as stated on the Notice to Owner is 06/06/17 and it states that the "taken as being served on the second day after the date of posting" which I've taken to mean that my response needs to be with them by this Thursday 6th June, which is 28 + 2 from 06/06/17. So I could risk sending it first class tomorrow, Wed 5th, if required. Is that right?

QUOTE (ford poplar @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 04:15) *
Suggest you still make Formal Reps to NTO, based on imprecise location (a verge is not a Service Rd), to enable you to Appeal to TPT on rejection.


Thanks for the advice, much appreciated. Are you able to add any detail on what exactly my formal reply should be based on the fact that the verge is not a Service Rd as stated on the PCN? I'm not sure which bit of the appeal is the bit which has most strength in this case and what I need to try to establish.

Is there any point asking if they have photos of the car with the DYLs shown? I appreciate that might be a long shot, but I'm not 100% sure if the CEO was taking all the required shots. Do they need this as evidence or is the CEO's observations enough?
Peter MCR
Let's face it - there is no dispute as to where / when you were parked is there? I don't see that any particular observation / photo is absolutely required.

I would question whether you were actually parked on a road or not. I understand that the road runs from property boundary to property boundary. But where is the property boundary? It may be that the kerb represents the boundary in this case. It looks to me like you were essentially parked in a field.
tennisfan88
QUOTE (Peter MCR @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 11:02) *
Let's face it - there is no dispute as to where / when you were parked is there? I don't see that any particular observation / photo is absolutely required.

I would question whether you were actually parked on a road or not. I understand that the road runs from property boundary to property boundary. But where is the property boundary? It may be that the kerb represents the boundary in this case. It looks to me like you were essentially parked in a field.


Well, there is no property boundary in this case, because there's another road on the other side, Watling Street, as shown here (parking spot was somewhere up against the lighter coloured bushes):

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.006441,-0...#33;3m1!1e3

I do have some photos but not sure whether it's particularly helpful to post them here since they only show what has been described in terms of where I was parked and the DYLs. But I can with pleasure if it would help in terms of my appeal in some way.
Peter MCR
Yes - sure. Let's see the Council photos. As you have the full amount in play and time is short, if you are going to make representation anyway you might as well say something about the status to the land.

Perhaps something along these lines?

QUOTE
I was parked on land adjacent to, but not part of, the road. The land I was parked in is between Watling Street and Denbigh Road, but is not part of either road. The line of the kerb represents the road boundary for Denbigh Road, and I was parked behind this boundary. Therefore the contravention did not occur. If the Council will not cancel this PCN I require the Council to state where they believe the road boundary for Watling Street and the road boundary for Denbigh Road lie and the reasoning behind this belief
.
PASTMYBEST
2170253401

The Appellant's father Mr John Bans has attended with the permission of his son.
The Authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway when in Cains Lane on 5 February 2017 at 11.33.
The Appellant's case is that the vehicle was not parked on a road.
I have considered the evidence in this case and I find that that the Authority has not proved that the location where the Appellant's vehicle was parked was actually part of a road.
I have considered the evidence in folder H, and whilst the newly painted double yellow road markings may make it clearer now that parking is not permitted where the Appellant's vehicle was parked. I am not satisfied that location is part of a road and not that of a field.
The Appellant is now aware by the issue of this Penalty Charge Notice that he should not park as he did on the 5 February 2017.
The appeal is allowed.
tennisfan88
QUOTE (Peter MCR @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 17:05) *
Yes - sure. Let's see the Council photos. As you have the full amount in play and time is short, if you are going to make representation anyway you might as well say something about the status to the land.

Perhaps something along these lines?

QUOTE
I was parked on land adjacent to, but not part of, the road. The land I was parked in is between Watling Street and Denbigh Road, but is not part of either road. The line of the kerb represents the road boundary for Denbigh Road, and I was parked behind this boundary. Therefore the contravention did not occur. If the Council will not cancel this PCN I require the Council to state where they believe the road boundary for Watling Street and the road boundary for Denbigh Road lie and the reasoning behind this belief
.


Apologies - I meant I took my photos which do show the DYLs. The only council ones I have are very low-res ones printed on the Notice to Owner and don't show any DYLs at all - my hope was that perhaps the CEO didn't move back far enough from the vehicle to capture them (though if not presumably that would be a very rooky error).

Concerned about the bit about raising where I WAS parked is would that hurt my chances on appeal as regards the other point - that I definitely WASN'T parked on Denbigh Road Service Road since that doesn't seem to exist except when mentioned in Milton Keynes TROs.

The relevant TRO seems to be this one: https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/T...eynes/MK274.pdf - part NW77ii - though I guess it could be read both ways as to whether the DYLs includes the entire area between the two roads or if they are intended as a boundary in themselves. If anyone has time to look and give a more expert opinion?

Here's what I'm minded to submit (first class by end of 5th to arrive on 6th!):

1) I cannot find any map (including https://mapping.milton-keynes.gov.uk/mymiltonkeynes.aspx) showing Denbigh Road Service Road which is where the alleged contravention occurred. Given this I believe that the PCN is invalid because I was clearly not parked at the location stated on the PCN and hence it should be cancelled.

2) In addition to the above, having reviewed the evidence, including the photos on your Notice to Owner, I do not believe that my car was anyway parked in contravention of the Code given. I was parked on land adjacent to, but not part of, the road. The land I was parked on does not form part of either of the roads it was between (Watling Street and Denbigh Road). The line of the kerb represents the road boundary for both roads, and I was parked behind this boundary. Therefore the contravention did not occur. If the Council will not cancel this PCN I require the Council to state where they believe the road boundary for Watling Street and the road boundary for Denbigh Road lie and the reasoning behind this belief.

Anything else I should / could include which might help with the inevitable appeal, or is relative brevity key here? Thanks again for all the help so far.

ford poplar
1. is your best bet at Adj IMO- imprecise/inaccurate location.

The verge appears to be part of the highway (road centre line to private property boundary) and not part of a field.
PASTMYBEST
wrong location should be fatal to a PCN as the CEO would have no reason to believe you were parked at the location stated on the PCN if you were parked elsewhere.

vague location is unlikely to succeed for a PCN served by affixing to the vehicle. you know where it was parked

An idea may be to ask the council for a copy of the highway terrier for the location. you might have more luck with highways rather than parking
hcandersen
NTO dated 6 June, deemed served 8th, last day of 28-day period is therefore 5th July, today.


And as service of a notice is taken to be second day, so it is with your reps: you are too late to make the 28-day deadline by first-class post.

If you post your reps you would miss the 28-day deadline and they could be disregarded.

Make them online or by email if possible, otherwise you take a risk.

And check any limit on the number of characters which would be accepted and/or attachments, you are not compiling a submission to the Supreme Court, so keep it short and simple - your chances of success are not proportional to the length of your reps, IMO and experience the opposite tends to be the case.



Peter MCR
QUOTE (ford poplar @ Wed, 5 Jul 2017 - 03:24) *
1. is your best bet at Adj IMO- imprecise/inaccurate location.

The verge appears to be part of the highway (road centre line to private property boundary) and not part of a field.


So where is the property boundary? Where is the line, behind which the motorist is not on the road and in front of which the motorist is on the road?

IMO if there is unfenced land adjacent to the road then the road boundary would be the back of the footway if there is one or the edge of the carriageway if there isn't a footway.

Let's push the Council for an answer.
tennisfan88
Hi there,

Predictably the council have now rejected my appeal, so I'm on to the next step of taking it to the Parking Adjudicator.

It seems to me and from the response that my best chance of success is on the road name difference - they didn't address this at all - they said I parked on "Denbigh Road Service Road" but I can't find anywhere where this road is marked - even on the map appended to the TRO it's not at all clear:

https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/T...eynes/MK274.pdf

Do you think that technicality will be enough to win?

I also wonder whether it's worth me including my initial appeal on the grounds that I was parking there as expressly suggested by the website and stewards of the Milton Keynes Marathon - an event officially supported by the Council. They asked people to park on that industrial estate (it was a Public Holiday and all the businesses were completely closed) so I was trying to be a good citizen by not clogging up the large Asda car park directly opposite! Will the tribunal take any notice of that or is it irrelevant - is their decision purely law based or do they have discretion to think that the ticket was unreasonable due to the mitigating circumstances? (You can see in both photos how many other cars were also parked in this area for the same reason.)

Here is the council rejection:










As previously any advice gratefully received. Many thanks in advance.
tennisfan88
Just to finish this story in case it's of use to anyone else, I took this to appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and MK Council didn't even contest it, so success! Thanks for the advice previously. I'll paste my appeal summary and what MK said when they didn't contest it below for reference. I suspect the road name confusion was probably what swung it in my favour, but who knows. Very pleased anyway!

Appeal Summary

I was not parked on (or on a verge covered by) "Denbigh Road Service Road" which is where the alleged contravention occurred according to the PCN. Given this I believe that the PCN is invalid and hence should be cancelled. In rejecting my appeal the council did not provide any evidence which shows the location of "Denbigh Road Service Road" - I cannot find any map showing this road online - including on their own website here: https://mapping.milton-keynes.gov.uk/mymiltonkeynes.aspx

In their rejection they refer to a non-specific TRO which covers "Denbigh Road Service Road". I believe they are referring to TRO MK274 (which I will submit as evidence). However, even the map attached to this TRO shows other road names but not “Denbigh Road Service Road”. It seems clear that the grass area I parked on is not referred to on TRO MK274 and hence it is not relevant to this case. They haven’t given any evidence of a TRO which does cover this grassed area, which they refer to as an ‘island’ in their rejection (which I will submit as evidence).

Whilst I do not anyway believe the PCN is valid due to an incorrect location being given and my car not being parked on an area covered by a valid TRO, I also believe there is a compelling case why this ticket should be cancelled anyway. I was parked safely and considerately in an industrial area on a public holiday (all the surrounding businesses were closed) as I was a runner in the Milton Keynes marathon event. I parked in this location specifically as requested by the authorities on the event website - and have a reasonable expectation that Milton Keynes council had provided the specific advice to motorists since they were in charge of road closures for this event. They are shown as an event partner on the event website.

There was local retail parking - including large Asda and Ikea car parks - which were free and closer to the event finish location, where I needed to park for just 45 minutes to meet my friend who was running the full marathon (after I was running the half marathon). However, as requested I parked considerately (on a grassed area well away from any roads) on the closed industrial estate instead, so was shocked to receive a ticket.

There are two sections on the event website which give specific instructions of where to park. I have attached links to these and screenshots as evidence. In addition I witnessed stewards at the entrance to the retail parking telling drivers for the marathon to park on the industrial estate where I parked. If the council are in any way responsible for this guidance then issuing parking tickets to cars which are parked away from the road in a considerate manner is unfair.




Reasons

Milton Keynes Council will not pursue xxxxx for the outstanding Penalty Charge Notice as the Council has reviewed the case and used its discretion to cancel the charge. Milton Keynes Council will take no further action and the case is now closed.

The rule regarding not parking on the pavement or off the road applies 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Drivers are not permitted to park on verges
The rule forbidding off-road parking does not have to be signposted and is covered in the Highway Code, with which all road users are expected to be familiar. There are signs erected all around the Stadium MK to prohibit parking on verges.
The council have a borough wide ban that prohibition of waiting on footways and verges. The definition of a verge means any grassed or un-grassed strip of land within any carriageway and forming part of the highway.
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.