Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Wheel on footpath - Hammersmith and Fulham
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Charlie Moto
Check attached images for front and back of parking ticket. [edit] wont attach for some reason.

Parked my bike on the footpath, not blocking anyone from getting past. Ran into a shop, that was staying open so I could get to it, was in there for 1 and a half mins tops. Came out and the guy issuing the ticket was already taking a photo on my bike. £65 for 90 seconds of parking!

Clearly he was there when I pulled up but was in too much of a rush to see him.

Any chance of fighting this one?

Thanks for your help
The PCN looks OK.

The grounds of defence are:
3)A person shall not be convicted of an offence under this section with respect to a vehicle if he proves to the satisfaction of the court that the vehicle was parked—
(a)in accordance with permission given by a constable in uniform; or
(b)for the purpose of saving life or extinguishing a fire or meeting any other emergency; or
©for the purpose of rendering assistance at the scene of an accident or a bona fide breakdown involving one or more vehicles, and—
(i)such assistance could not have been safely or satisfactorily rendered if the vehicle had not been so parked; and
(ii)the vehicle was not left unattended at any time while it was so parked; or
(d)for the purpose of loading or unloading goods, and—
(i)the loading or unloading of the vehicle could not have been satisfactorily performed if it had not been so parked; and
(ii)the vehicle was not left unattended at any time while it was so parked.

Can't see that any apply given that you do not say that you were loading/unloading; that the vehicle was left unattended; and that you could probably have parked on the road.

Charlie Moto
Thanks HCA.

(d)for the purpose of loading or unloading goods

How would the court determine if loading or unloading goods was taking place with a motorcycle?

(i)the loading or unloading of the vehicle could not have been satisfactorily performed if it had not been so parked; and

The vehicle was parked on the footpath to try to avoid parking in a residents only bay and incur a parking fine.

(ii)the vehicle was not left unattended at any time while it was so parked

Am I right in thinking this means in order to load or unload on motorcycle there would need to be 2 people riding the bike. One to load or unload and another to attend the vehicle at all times during loading or unloading?

Thanks again.
QUOTE (Charlie Moto @ Mon, 18 Jun 2012 - 17:32) *
(d)for the purpose of loading or unloading goods

How would the court determine if loading or unloading goods was taking place with a motorcycle?

Loading is an exception to the rule so it is your responsibility to demonstrate that you were loading (not the council's to demonstrate you were not).

A letter from the shop explaining you were collecting goods that were ordered in advance would suffice, as would a delivery note.

There is no court. First there is appeal via the council - some routinely reject most appeals. After that is the adjudicator - they will look at the balance of probabilities and how credible they think you are.

CEOs usually observe for 5 minutes to make sure no loading is taking place. The fact that they did not observe helps massively if (a) you were un/loading and (b) there is an exception for un/loading at that location.
If the defence is open to you, then we could help you with the wording.

But we do not support untruths - we leave that to councils.

Charlie Moto
The exact chain of events that led to me parking on the footpath were:

* I called the shop (a specialist tobacco shop) regarding buying some of their goods.
* Confirmed that the good were available and that I would be along to pick up the goods.
* They were due to close after I could get to them so they agreed to stay open
* I parked were I thought was the most convenient place to avoid keeping the shop waiting and not blocking the carriageway
* I was in the shop for no more than 2 mins
* When I came out of the shop I saw the CEO and said I was just about to move the bike. Had to walk down a ramp to get to the bike.
* By the time I got to the bike the CEO had finished typing up the ticket and was taking a photo.

I would like to challenge the ticket. Will try contracting the tobacco shop to get them to back up my story. Any help you can offer with the wording would be much appreciated.


And did you keep the bike under obs at all times while you were in the shop?

Charlie Moto
Can't find that acronym on the site. What does OBS mean relating to parking tickets?



Charlie Moto
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 19 Jun 2012 - 14:22) *
And did you keep the bike under obs at all times while you were in the shop?

No, I wasn't aware the bike was being ticketed till I left the shop.
If nothing concrete materialises then throw the text below at them.

I note from the PCN that the council believes my vehicle to have been parked on an area of road not considered by them to be carriageway.

It is necessary to bring to the council’s attention that the parts of a road considered by law to be and not to be carriageway, is not decided by physical appearance. A carriageway is not legally defined simply by the placing of tarmac and nor is a footway legally defined simply by the presence of a curb and a raised surface. Under law, what exists is road, otherwise known as highway.

The public has a right of way over all land that is public road. How the public exercise this right of way is not regulated by default. Therefore, unless regulation is imposed then the public can traverse over any road by any means, be it by foot, motor vehicle, bicycle etc. Government recognises that such unregulated use of a road is not only dangerous but also poor traffic management and so Government has introduced various laws to regulate how traffic flows over a road. Of these laws the most pertinent to this case is the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

The 1984 Act enables an authority to make an order regulating how different classes of traffic can use a road. Therefore, if an authority wants to prohibit vehicles or any other class of traffic from using a road or a part of a road then it is necessary for the authority to do this by order. Clear demonstration of this is the existence of orders that prohibit motor vehicles from cycle lanes and classes of traffic from bus lanes. Such orders are essential to lawfully deny a class or classes of traffic their right of way that would otherwise exist over those parts of road.

It is alleged that my vehicle was not parked on carriageway. All unregulated road is by default carriageway since the public has a right to pass and repass by vehicle if they choose. For the alleged contravention to be correct then the council needs to have regulated by order those parts of road where a right of way for vehicular traffic is prohibited, thus in effect making those parts of road footway, as only those on foot will have a right of way. The council however, has provided no evidence that the part of road my vehicle was parked on has by order been designated as a right of way for those on foot only. Therefore, I require the council to confirm if that part of road where my vehicle was parked is identified in any order as being footway. If there is such an order then I require the council to make it available to me.

If no order under the 1984 Act prohibits vehicles from that part of road then the law does not recognise that part of road as being restricted to those on foot only (a footway) and therefore that part of road remains unregulated and does lawfully qualify as being carriageway. In such circumstances the penalty charge should be cancelled forthwith as there has been no breach of section 15 of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974.

I look forward to either the council’s confirmation that the penalty charge has been cancelled or a full explanation detailing why the council lawfully considers that part of road not to be carriageway.

Charlie Moto
Thanks Bogsy, it's much appreciated.

QUOTE (marvin28 @ Mon, 18 Jun 2012 - 19:49) *
CEOs usually observe for 5 minutes to make sure no loading is taking place. The fact that they did not observe helps massively if (a) you were un/loading and (b) there is an exception for un/loading at that location.

Here's where the bike was parked. Between the tree on the left and the sign post.

Is an exception possible in that location?
I can't read what the sign says I am afraid.
Charlie Moto
QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Fri, 22 Jun 2012 - 00:57) *
I can't read what the sign says I am afraid.

Yeah but I think its very unlikely the sign says anything about a pavement unloading exception or anything about parking on the pavement at all. The bike was parked fully on the pavement btw.

With that in mind deos anyone on the forum think its worth persuing the 'loading defence'?
If you read the reverse of the PCN you will see that the council undertakes to re-offer the discount beyond the 14-day period if a challenge is made within that period.

So in answer to your question "is it worth while pursuing the loading defence" - yes, provided you submit your challenge by 29 June. Submit everything. But do it in a structured way and separate the points clearly so that the council is obliged to respond separately to each point. Then we can look at their reasoning.

But at present on the basis of the facts of the case as we know them, IMO you've not got much by way of a defence.

Charlie Moto
Here's the draft letter and proof (except sales receipt and letter from store, which is due tomorrow). Anything you would change?

Dear LBHF Parking Services,

Penalty Charge Notice number: HZ38516628
Date of issue: 16/06/2012
Vehicle registration: xxxxxxx

I am writing to formally challenge the above Penalty Charge Notice.

On 16/06/2012 my motorcycle was issued with a Penalty Charge Notice for the reason of "Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway".

My challenge is on the basis of
- Section 15(3d) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 and
- Procedural impropriety

Section 15(3d) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 states:
A person shall not be convicted of an offence under this section with respect to a vehicle if he proves to the satisfaction of the court that the vehicle was parked
(d) for the purpose of loading or unloading goods

Procedural Impropriety
The CEO did not observe the vehicle for 5 minutes as he is supposed to do before applying an instant parking fine.

Please find enclosed evidence that loading was taking place and evidence that the CEO did not allow any time to confirm that loading was taking place.

The time that the CEO started entering the PCN into the system was 18:41 and completed entering the PCN into the system at 18:45 (the time that the PCN photo was taken - downloaded from -

The motorcycle was parked at 18:40 at the closest point on the pavement to the store and the goods were collected for loading at 18:43. Upon leaving the store I observed the CEO entering ticketing details. This was the first time I had observed the CEO. I said to the CEO "I'm about to move the bike". The CEO continued to enter ticketing details and proceeded to take a photo of my motorcycle. There is a picture of me in the CEO photo returning to complete loading the bike and move it (

Please find enclosed evidence to this effect, in the form of a signed letter from the store, the exact time I entered the store (confirmation of when the bike was first parked) and the exact time that the good were purchased on the sales receipt (confirmation of when loading was due to be completed).

I would like to mention that I am a law abiding resident and generally park within the rules.

I hope you take the reasons stated and my good record into account and cancel the PCN. If you wish to proceed with applying the PCN, then for preparing for my defence at any future adjudication, I need the below items from LBHF:
1) Notes from the CEO’s logbooks detailing the events leading to the PCN.
2) Evidences that LBHF passed a resolution with regards to footpath parking – the permissible evidences are detailed in Section 15(10) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974.

A contravention can only be enforced if it has been correctly enabled and I would need the above mentioned items to establish this fact. If LBHF fail to provide all the requested items I will be asking the adjudicator to extract an explanation for the failing to produce these evidences.

Yours sincerely,
ford poplar
It has been held thatcollection of goods from shop may consititute loading, but not if it involved paying for goods at the time of collection. -Argos situation, pre-pay & collect OK, check avail then collect & pay at shop,not OK
Charlie Moto
Given that I didn't prepay for the goods may have to try Bogey's defence in that case or take a chance with appeal.

If an appeal fails would I be looking at the full amount?
If your initial informal challenge is rejected, they will usually re-offer the discounted penalty for a further 14 days. After that, it is Notice to Owner time, if you do not pay, and the charge reverts to the full amount. Always put in an informal challenge first.

Let's get the terminology correct, please:-

1. Informal challenge(s) against PCN.

2. Formal representation against NtO.

3. Appeal to PATAS.
You have until 29 June to submit your challenge and to hold the discount (see back of PCN where is state this clearly). But if you miss the 29th and if they reject your challenge and you submit formal reps than the full penalty is in play. As per Hippocrates, it's possible that even if they reject formal reps after serving a NTO they could still re-offer the discount.

Charlie Moto
Appeal submitted 12 days ago. Got confirmation that it's submitted. Still waiting to hear. Apparently H&FC are dealing with a big backlog of appeals.
Charlie Moto
Heard nothing more about this, 43 days and counting.
Charlie Moto
Ok, heard back.

09 August 2012
Dear Mr Abbott
Penalty Charge Notice : HZxxxxxxxx
Vehicle Registration : xxxxxx
Thank you for writing to us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
I have carefully considered what you say and all the available evidence, but I do not
agree that we should cancel your liability for this PCN.
This PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked on the public footway, or on
an area covered by the footway parking ban. Parking with one or more wheels on the
footway is not allowed at any time, unless signs indicate that pavement parking is
Any part of the public highway which is not set aside for vehicles is covered by the
footway parking ban. This includes:
- pavements
- grass verges
- central reservations
- crossovers (i.e. ramps linking private property to the road), and;
- any other pedestrian area
Parking on the pavements can obstruct and seriously inconvenience pedestrians,
wheelchair users, the visually impaired and people with prams, buggies or
pushchairs. It can also damage the pavement as they are not built to take the weight
of motor vehicles.
I am therefore satisfied that the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) was properly given
within the law.
If you wish to pay at the discounted rate of £65, you may still do so, provided wereceive your £65 payment within 14 days of the date of this letter. THIS OFFER
WILL NOT BE REPEATED. Once these 14 days have expired, the full charge of
£130 will become due.
How to pay:
1. By cheque or postal order
- cross your cheque or postal order 'a/c payee';
- make it payable to 'LBHF';
- write your registration number and PCN number on the back; and
- send it to us at the above address.
You can pay:
- either via the internet at, or;
- by calling us on (020) 7371 5678. We have an automated payment system that
you can use at any time. Assistance with card payments is available during our office
hours of 8am to 6pm, Monday to Saturday (except public holidays). Please note that
all telephone calls to the Parking Services Office are recorded.
3. In person
- at the Cashiers office on the 1st floor of Hammersmith Town Hall Extension, King
Street, W6. They are open from 8:45am to 5pm, Monday to Friday (except public
holidays). They accept cash, cheques, postal orders, and the credit/debit cards listed
How to take the case further: (if you believe you were legally parked)
1 If you do not pay, we will send a 'Notice to Owner' to the keeper. This form offers
the keeper the chance to formally challenge the PCN, or to pay the full charge (by
this time it will be too late to take advantage of the discount). If you are not the
registered keeper, let them know what you decide to do.
2 If we still disagree with you, the keeper can take the case to the Adjudication
Service. The Adjudicator is independent and his or her decision is binding on both
Yours sincerely

I'm still trying to challenge this, any help would be much appreciated.
You would get more replies if you could show us that reply in full. If it's a letter then a picture of it, all of it, just cover your name/addy and the PCN number/ref. There's wording missing presumably, about continuing to appeal. It's important wording.
Charlie Moto
Amended the quote to include everything apart from my address, reg and the authors name.

Hmmmm...I have looked back at page 1 of this thread as well and can't see anything to add. As others said earlier on, you didn't have much of a defence but it was worth a try at an informal challenge. Can't see you have much chance of winning if it goes to adjudication and you say the CEO got a photo of the bike on the pavement as well...possibly one of the rare cases on here where we might say to consider paying it while you still have the discount.
Charlie Moto
Interesting that that rejection came through 1 day after I posted an update here. Wonder how many parking departments monitor forums like these, perhaps the site owners or any mods with access to this site stats would know, anyhoo.

Their defence is you cant park on that stretch of pavement, for loading or anything else. Which kind of makes a mockery of trying to launch a successful appeal. The BCO saw me pull up, issued an instant ticket and there's no way to appeal it, even tho the vehicle was only parked there for no more than 5 mins.

I've not heard before that it's possible to determine the exact time a photo is taken by a BCO. Hopefully that new tip will help someone else appeal.

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 © 2001-2020 Invision Power Services, Inc.