Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Challenging PCN Motorbike parked on pavement on private land
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices

I had been parking my motorbike on the pavement on Talbot Court EC3V, I parked alongside two other bikes that were there every day. After a month or so I received a PCN for parking on the pavement, neither of the other bikes appeared to have a PCN. I noticed a brass plate on the floor I'd never seen before stating "THE LAND WITHIN THE BRASS STUDS IS PRIVATE NOT DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC".

I kicked myself then paid £65 (half of the £130 charge).

I then started parking within the brass studs (as the other bikes were). A few weeks later I had another PCN for the same offence. Neither of the other bikes had a PCN attached (although theoretically the owners could have already removed them). I challenged the PCN on the grounds that I was parked within the brass studs, so on private land.

Today my challenge was rejected. The letter refers to rule 244 of the highway code, specifically it says that "any part of the public highway not set aside for cars is covered by the pavement parking ban including ramps linking private property to the road.

Apparently "the area where my vehicle was parked forms part of the footway hence the PCN".

Is it worth progressing (I'm going to phone the Case Officer tomorrow)? I feel that I was parked on private land so if I was committing any offence it would have been trespass. I was hoping to have my challenge accepted so I can go back to parking there.

Scan (or photograph) and post up ALL sides of the Ticket (and/or any other paperwork received)

- edit out your personal details and your car reg. and the Ticket number (from the SCANNED version ONLY - do NOT amend anything on the original hard-copy PCN or other original paperwork!) before uploading.
Here we go

Click to view attachment
Well first of all it's the City of London who are very rusty about pursuing cases all the way to adjudication so your chances of getting this cancelled before adj are quite high IMHO. They didn't contest ANY cases at adjudication for a whole year from Summer 2010 to Summer 2011 and even now it seems they keep folding before adjudication on any case we see.

And secondly - did you take a photo of the notice on the pavement and the brass studs which demarcate the separate area? I would get that evidence.

Your case is similar to Dr Dawood who unfortunately lost his multiple appeals:

But yours seems stronger as you say the area is clearly signed as not dedicated to the public, marked as separate. Can we see a photo of the place please?

These sort of things are very difficult to sort out in English law.

Apart from private land with no obvious boundary like a fence, there are also passages between streets used as footpaths which are private property and marked with similar labels. However to ensure the "privacy" of the passage (and other places), the owner normally has to shut off the property and then place beadles at each end. The public must then ask permission to proceed for the 24 hours of operation of the closure. I believe all this has to be announced locally too, by publication, and by notices at the location. However, that is the limit of my knowledge, so others more expert may be able to explain more. The key point is that the public are only allowed access by permission. Dr Dawood's case was of a place where the landlord had never restricted the access, so a public right-of-way had been established so the parking restriction applied to the private strip of land alongside the street.

I think the above is right, but please check.

Sorry, left off the word 'ocasionally' as in

"However to ensure the "privacy" of the passage (and other places), the owner normally has to ocasionallyshut off the property and then place beadles at each end.
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.