Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: PCN Code 62 C (2 wheels on foothpath) Waltham Forest
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
AFR80
Hi All,

I was issued with a Code 62C 2 wks ago. Waltham Forest Borough Council.

I was parked outside my residence, with two wheels on the footpath.

I wrote my informal appeal letter (pre-NTO) on 12/09/12.

Received reply 21/09/2012. Rejecting my appeal.

I believe I have a very valid reason to have parked the way I had. The road I live in is extremely narrow in one particular section and that is where I was parked. Although their letter rejecting my appeal states that footpath parking is not allowed on the street, had I parked all four wheels in this particular section of the road, I would have without a shadow of a doubt blocked all through traffic.

FACT: There is no regular warden patrol on our street to enforce this law fairly and consistently. There are no cameras.

FACT: It is a regular occurence for vehicles parked with wheels on the footpath, so why has one person been penalsed. Is is ok to excercise the law when the council pleases and overlook it 99.9% of the time. IN fact I have taken multiple photos of this 'contravention' over the last two weeks and not one car owner has been penalised. One car has been parked almost completely takeing up footpath space for the last 3 days and still is. NO PCN issued though!!

Below is the image of the PCN. Ive followed the site instructions, hope i've done it right??! :-I

I have many more points to mention ,inc. photographs of a refuse truck just about managing to get through the gap left, only because a vehicle has parked with two wheels on the footpath - photo will be provided later. I would appreciate any advice and tipe and do I have a cse to carry my appeal forward.

My point is, if I was to park where I had done, with four wheels on the road, I would have definitiely bloked vehicles, incl fire engine or petentially ambulances. Legally, I am allowed to park in this section of the road with four wheels on the road, but I chose to be courteous and leave space for paedestrians and drivers.

The road narrows in thsi section because of the way the road has been designed to incorporate a shrubbed area opposite which cuts in awkwardly, creating a bottle neck effect. (Where I had to park that night).









My Informal appeal letter below;










Bagshot
Can't do much without at least seeing pictures and their reply. I take it you were on a vehicle crossover?
hcandersen
We must see the time-line of correspondence, everything the council states must be viewed.

So let's see your challenge and their reply (actuals pl, not transcripts).

In general terms, we need to see if you can establish "legitimate expectation". Parking enforcement should not be a guessing game and therefore consistency is important. A simple request to the council for the number of PCNs served in this location (wherever that is!!) during the past 6 months would go some way to establish or demolish your argument.

HCA
AFR80
Hi Bagshot and HCanderson, thanks for the qick response.
Sorry, never done this before and editing and uploading has taken me all day sad.gif.

I've just edited my original post and included the PCN (front and back), my informal appeal letter. (the letter i sent by email was annotated by me, which I relaise is illegible possibly......all it points out are narrow section of the road, other cars with wheels on footpath due to narrowness of road, how little space is left for cars to drive through....etc. Please let me know if I should re-write each annotation in my reply corresponding to each photo.

Will upload the reply in next few hours hopefully.

Please see what i've uploaded so far.

PLEASE NOTE; the red van in the picture i tootk, was pretty muh exactly where I was parked. i took these pictures from my second floor window

TIME LINE FOR CORRESPONDENCE SO FAR;

10TH SEPT 2012 - ISSUED WITH PCN - PLACED ON WINDSCREEN

12TH SEPT 2012 - EMAILED MY PRE NTO INFORMAL APPEAL (SEE POST ABOVE)

21ST SEPT 2012 - LETTER RECEIVED REJECTING APPEAL (SEE POST BELOW)

24TH SEPT - IM FED UP AND CAME ACROSS THIS FORUM - ASKING FOR YOUR HELP, I GUESS I'VE GOT TIL 5TH OCT TO PAY AT THE DISCOUNTED £65.00 , OR WAIT OUT TIL THEN, TO PLACE MY FORMAL APPEAL. THAT'S WHERE I STAND RIGHT NOW. NEED SOME HELP ON WHETHER I HAVE A CHANCE.
AFR80
Below is the councils reply, the poor grammar in many places makes me wonder what fools they have working for them!!














QUOTE (Bagshot @ Mon, 24 Sep 2012 - 19:36) *
Can't do much without at least seeing pictures and their reply. I take it you were on a vehicle crossover?



What is Vehicle crossover? sorry for ignorance!
AFR80
Here is a photo I took this morning of the refuse truck passing through the parked cars. Note the only way it got through was because the olive coloured hatchback is parked on the pavement. (this car btw, is still parked like this outside as I type, been there for 3 days!!

I was parked on 9th sept approx where i've outlined in red, deffo not taking up the pavement space the car in the picture has!

Bagshot
Clearly at this location (as with many other streets in London), once cars are parked on one side, it isn't possible to park on the opposite side without causing an obstruction. If you obstruct the road, the police start to get interested. I'm not sure where you can go with this one.

If parking down there starts to become a problem, the council's solution will be restrictions which make everyone's lives more difficult.

Sorry I can't see a route out of this one. Someone may spot some technicalities.
AFR80
QUOTE (Bagshot @ Mon, 24 Sep 2012 - 22:07) *
Clearly at this location (as with many other streets in London), once cars are parked on one side, it isn't possible to park on the opposite side without causing an obstruction. If you obstruct the road, the police start to get interested. I'm not sure where you can go with this one.

If parking down there starts to become a problem, the council's solution will be restrictions which make everyone's lives more difficult.

Sorry I can't see a route out of this one. Someone may spot some technicalities.


Thanks Bagshot. I did suspect the same. Parking on our street has become a problem and that's because there are no restrictions. Many a time I don't find a space to park because it's a convenient road for non-residents. I think restrictions would be welcome to most residents....... but anyone else who may think I may have a case based on inconsistency on enforcing this law when it's clearly broken every day, with noone penalised.
interlog
I think there was a case earlier this year where Newham Council started to issue PCNs for cars that were parked on the pavement (at allegedly private ground) when they previously never enforced it. An Adjudicator ruled that because no prior warning was given that enforcement of such contravention was going to happen, the Appeal was allowed.

Perhaps somebody can remember the topic / case reference number?
AFR80
QUOTE (interlog @ Mon, 24 Sep 2012 - 23:03) *
I think there was a case earlier this year where Newham Council started to issue PCNs for cars that were parked on the pavement (at allegedly private ground) when they previously never enforced it. An Adjudicator ruled that because no prior warning was given that enforcement of such contravention was going to happen, the Appeal was allowed.

Perhaps somebody can remember the topic / case reference number?



Thanks interlog for the info. I'm a little disheartened though, and I feel this probably may be a non-starter. Will wait a few more days to see if anyone else has any further advice, but if not, will probably pay up at the discounted price. Thank you all for your help. It was definitely worth a try.
interlog
Found it:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=68676

QUOTE
Case Reference: 212000135A
Appellant: New Wear Fashions Limited
Authority: Newham
VRM: LD04BWC
PCN: PN05028923
Contravention Date: 26 Sep 2011
Contravention Time: 17:24
Contravention Location: Katherine Road
Penalty Amount: £130.00
Contravention: Footway parking (one - four wheels on footway)
Decision Date: 23 Feb 2012
Adjudicator: Sean Stanton-Dunne
Appeal Decision: Allowed
Direction: cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.
Reasons: Mr Idris Ugradar appeals on behalf of New Wear Fashions Limited. Mr Ugradar appeals because he says that the van was parked on private property which has a dropped kerb for access. He says that he has parked in this location for more than 10 years with no PCNs having been issued on previous occasions.

The images of the alleged contravention show the van parked off road in front of commercial premises next to a pavement area. It may be that this is private land. However, it is adjacent to the pavement and the area is effectively part of the footway as the public clearly has access to it. The van was therefore parked on the footway. I am, however, allowing this appeal because it is clear that the Council has previously permitted parking in this area without the issue of PCNs. The Council cannot suddenly start to issue and enforce PCNs without first taking adequate steps to alert users of a particular parking area that there has been a change of enforcement policy.


Remember though that no other Adjudicator is bound by the decision of another Adjudicator but I would argue that this particular decison is quite persuasive.

Your money though.
AFR80
QUOTE (interlog @ Tue, 25 Sep 2012 - 23:46) *
Found it:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=68676

QUOTE
Case Reference: 212000135A
Appellant: New Wear Fashions Limited
Authority: Newham
VRM: LD04BWC
PCN: PN05028923
Contravention Date: 26 Sep 2011
Contravention Time: 17:24
Contravention Location: Katherine Road
Penalty Amount: £130.00
Contravention: Footway parking (one - four wheels on footway)
Decision Date: 23 Feb 2012
Adjudicator: Sean Stanton-Dunne
Appeal Decision: Allowed
Direction: cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.
Reasons: Mr Idris Ugradar appeals on behalf of New Wear Fashions Limited. Mr Ugradar appeals because he says that the van was parked on private property which has a dropped kerb for access. He says that he has parked in this location for more than 10 years with no PCNs having been issued on previous occasions.

The images of the alleged contravention show the van parked off road in front of commercial premises next to a pavement area. It may be that this is private land. However, it is adjacent to the pavement and the area is effectively part of the footway as the public clearly has access to it. The van was therefore parked on the footway. I am, however, allowing this appeal because it is clear that the Council has previously permitted parking in this area without the issue of PCNs. The Council cannot suddenly start to issue and enforce PCNs without first taking adequate steps to alert users of a particular parking area that there has been a change of enforcement policy.


Remember though that no other Adjudicator is bound by the decision of another Adjudicator but I would argue that this particular decison is quite persuasive.

Your money though.




Thanks interlog.

I should have been a bit clearer in explaining my case. I was vaguely aware that parking with two wheels on the footpath may not be allowed on my street, but because it happens on a daily basis and noone is ever penalised, I began to believe that the law is no longer being enforced. My suspicions are someone or possibly the dustcart ppl that comes on Monday morning reported me due to access difficulty, just a guess. I strongly belive I got the PCN cos somebody called them up and reported my car. But as is quoted above, the council does allow this contravention to occur (and I have photo evidence) without the issue of pcns. I estimate the last time somebody received a PCN for this offence was approx 7 years ago. Is is possible to get this info from the council and if so, who do I call, the parking office that issued the PCN?

I would love to fight this, but it seems like a risky one from was bagshot has said. Would hate to pay them £130!
interlog
You can do a Freedom of Information Request online to the Council asking how many code 62C PCNs were issued for this particular street:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/

It is a narrow point of Appeal and as it is your money it is not for me to say that you should fight it all the way to Adjudication.
hcandersen
It's your risk as it's your money.

If you are certain regarding the inconsistent approach taken by the council, then it might be worth a punt. But to add to what's already been stated, you have no right to park on the carriageway because it's there for the passage of vehicles etc, not the parking of them. And if parking causes an obstruction, the the BiB could well serve a FPN/tow away.


HCA

Incandescent
OK, so its decision time, £65 or £130 (the double-or-quits appeal) ! You definitely have a case based on the previous adjudication on rare/no existent enforcement, related to non-enforcement in your street, but you need the facts at your disposal to make a credible argument. Of course, this will be at PATAS, as the council are unlikely to give way on a formal appeal to a Notice to Owner. I agree with you that its funny they suddenly start enforcing so likely have received a complaint.

You could also petition the Council to make a TRO for your street to allow half-pavement parking, but you'd need some neighbour support. Some streets have this in London although they are rare. A petition is a formal thing, and council would have to respond.
AFR80
My conerns are that in my informal appeal, I cannot argue that the contravention did not occur. I used the issue of lack on space for vehicles to pass as being my strongest reason to park the way I had. However, this it seems is not a strong argument.

Since the last two posts, I have made a request to WFBC to provide details of the number of PCNs issued for this contravention on this street. But it's going to be some time til the info is received.

If I do decide to formally appeal, am I allowed to appeal on different grounds to my informal appeal, as the narrow stretch of road issue is not going to help.

I don't have any fact at hand, and will have to wait til Oct 25th for a reply form WFBC on my request made on Sept 27th.

Is the argument that this law is not enforced consistently strong enough grounds to be able to get heard at the PATAS stage?

Incandescent suggested I put together a petition, however, is this something I would do separately or as part of the appeal process?

Thanks all once again.

SchoolRunMum
QUOTE (AFR80 @ Sat, 29 Sep 2012 - 14:16) *
My concerns are that in my informal appeal, I cannot argue that the contravention did not occur. I used the issue of lack on space for vehicles to pass as being my strongest reason to park the way I had. However, this it seems is not a strong argument.

Since the last two posts, I have made a request to WFBC to provide details of the number of PCNs issued for this contravention on this street. But it's going to be some time til the info is received.

If I do decide to formally appeal, am I allowed to appeal on different grounds to my informal appeal, as the narrow stretch of road issue is not going to help.


You don't have to say the contravention did not occur, and yes, you can appeal formally on new grounds.


QUOTE (AFR80 @ Sat, 29 Sep 2012 - 14:16) *
Is the argument that this law is not enforced consistently strong enough grounds to be able to get heard at the PATAS stage?


Yes as you can see, it could be, from the successful PATAS case already shown above. BUt another adjudicator may not agree, it's a gamble but there are no extra costs or anything. It would be an all or nothing appeal (no discount available after the NTO stage, nor at adjudication).


QUOTE (AFR80 @ Sat, 29 Sep 2012 - 14:16) *
Incandescent suggested I put together a petition, however, is this something I would do separately or as part of the appeal process?


Separately and later. It's an idea for resolving the issue but only if you can get enough interest & influence going on. It's for the future.
ford poplar
I would caution against too much reliance on the above successful appeal, as all the facts are not detailed.

It sounds like a van was parked mainly on private land (drive) with 2 wheels on the cross-over, perp to but not on the pavement (footway), thus the normal footpath was prob not restricted for pedestrians at all. Easy if there is a public grass verge between property line and footpath. Also it was the same property owner in contravention for 10 years.

Also any Adjudication does not set a binding precedent for other locations (or even same location)

A road can consist of several elements and extends from the centre line of the carriageway up to the private property line and may include footpath, grass verges and cross-overs to private driveways, so a slightly perverse judgement IMO.

In OPs case, vehicles are clearly parked parallel to the kerb with 2 wheels on the pedestrian-only footpath (footway).
Whilst this may assist traffic flow, it could force pedestrians with/out child & buggy on to the carriageway to get past, though unlikely at this location as path seems quite wide.

As OPs pics show, drivers when parking, forget how wide are fire engines (& dustbin lorries).
It was not unknown for a fire engine on a 'shout' to gently nudge an obstructing vehicle out of the way.

Parking, even on a carriageway with no parking restrictions, is only 'tolerated', provided no obstruction is caused to moving vehicles or pedestrians.
SchoolRunMum
On the other hand, the 'not enforced for years' appeal can work at PATAS, here's another one mentioned today:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...mp;#entry739475

See if the OP gives the case number and quote that case as well (if you decide to proceed with your appeal further).
AFR80
..page 2..
SchoolRunMum
No laws about patrols regularly. Just previous cases to rely on and your FOI request which you were hoping would show you are right. It works at some adjudications but it's never an exact science I am afraid.

It's your money, your decision - but I always think it's a shame when posters waver just because of the bribe/discount. That's precisely why Councils make so much money out of parking enforcment...correction, 'collect' so much money to plough into half-baked & obstructive & tailback-causing traffic calming, overly-wide bike lanes, rip-off residents' permit areas, small business-killing no stopping, or pedestrian areas and also into bus services which strangely never seem to improve at all...
AFR80
Thanks schoolrun mum. Great advice. It makes me angry that they can double the fine like that! There should be a law against it!!. I think you might have swayed me to try my luck and appeal. Or i'll always be wondering 'what if??'....Thanks for the encouragement. Even if I lose, at least I'll be satisfied that I gave it a shot and didn't let the council get away with it so easily....

So what next, just let the 14 days go by and wait for NTO?? when will I receive this approx and should I start and how long will i have to send my formal appeal once I 've received it?
ford poplar
The 'fine' does not double, it is discounted by 50% for 14 days to 'encourage' quick payment. It then reverts to normal level for remainder of appeals process after which they issue a charge cert if unpaid. This adds a further 10% to the 'normal' penalty.
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.