Here is the letter I sent to PATAS on 11 May 09:
Details of Appeal
The Authority has rejected my representations against the PCN whilst entirely ignoring a primary aspect of it.
The Traffic Management Act of 2004 states 86(9) "The prohibition in this section is enforceable as if imposed... in Greater London, by an order under section 6 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (c. 27)".
I pointed out to the Authority that Regulation 18(1) of The Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England & Wales) Regulations 1996 directs that where orders have been made (such as under section 6 RTRA 1984) relating to any road, that traffic signs MUST be placed.
The Adjudicator has previously recognised that signage is required when Authorities seek to enforce a penalty under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 - in case 207018528A (Jeremy Obano v the London Borough of Newham).
In my representations I pointed out that while the Authority that the London Local Authorities & Transport for London Act 2003 specifically states that signage is not required, the TMA 2004 is unconnected with that Act.
I also considered that Schedule 7(1)(2) may apply but concluded that it cannot since I was not parked in a ‘parking place’.
I expected the Authority to explain why signage is not required but the failed to do so in their letter of rejection.
I would like to ask the Adjudicator to consider my appeal based on the information sent in my representations to the Authority which are summarised above. Further, I have received information that the Authority may have had this matter brought to their attention but may be ignoring the relevance of it. If this is the case then they would be serving PCNs unlawfully and I would ask the Adjudicator to consider this matter in so far as its powers allow it to do so.
Included in my appeal are the Notice of Rejection from Camden, a copy of the Notice to Owner and also the details of the representations I made to them.
And on 28 May I received a defence bundle from Camden.
Interestingly they have admitted that there is a discrepancy in the time of the PCN and that of the 5 pictures taken, one isn't even of my car and all the others are blurred (nothing to do with the time, the CEO just couldn't hold his camera steady!).
So do I need to write anything further to PATAS?
Page1:
Page 2:
Page 3: