Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Islington PCN
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Awphot
Last month I posted this http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=41579

I was challenging the ticket on the fact that the main signage did not have any restrictions on returning to the bays within a certain time.

I have just received an e-mail with pictures of the front of the actual machine showing that on the machine there is in fact a restriction which states
4. Do not return to any parking place within one hour of leaving.

This is only on the machine and pretty small. The main signage just states 2 hour max and does not show a restriction on returning.

Is it worth continuing to fight this on the fact the main signage and the machine signage is different?

Any advise or links to rules on signage much appreciated.

thanks
Andy
buttonpusher
Are you sure its the correct machine, the one you used?
Awphot
QUOTE (buttonpusher @ Wed, 8 Jul 2009 - 18:37) *
Are you sure its the correct machine, the one you used?


According to the photo and the ticket it is.
I will be up there tomorrow and will take pictures all around.

My view is that it is the actual road signage which is the relevant thing as far as regulations are concerned.
The ticket machine is not a part of the actual regulations.

However, even if it were then the PCN would be invalid due to the official signage and the machine having different and contradictory information.

My original challenge was that I had parked for less than 2 hours, moved away and came back at which time a new period would have started as the signage did NOT state no return.

tks
Teufel
since it is clear hat the signs could state that regulation it shoud have done

even lawful signs can be confusing

see PATAS case bladon v westminster

http://keycases.parkingandtrafficappeals.g...ocs/BLAJHL2.pdf
Awphot
QUOTE (Teufel @ Wed, 8 Jul 2009 - 18:57) *
since it is clear hat the signs could state that regulation it shoud have done

even lawful signs can be confusing

see PATAS case bladon v westminster

http://keycases.parkingandtrafficappeals.g...ocs/BLAJHL2.pdf


Thanks for that. Not exactly the same but may be worth keeping in mind.
I have sent a mail back to them stating that as the signage is not correct and that there is contradictory information on the signage and the actual machine then they should cancel the pcn.

I will see what they come back with.
Awphot
SUCCESS.

Today I got an e-mail through from Islington Council advising that "due to an administrative error"??? the PCN was being cancelled.

Nothing to do with the fact that they were going to lose on the signage and not having any "detailed evidence" of the offence had this
gone to arbitration then!!
Glacier2
Typical wuss reply from a London council.
dave-o
Islington are buggers for this "administrative error" cop out.

I'm tempted to FOI them to find out how many appeals encounter "administrative errors" and then demand an explanation as to why their adminmistration department are seemingly so inept.

Come on, grow some balls and admit when you're wrong.
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.