I don't follow.
Register your appeal or lose what you've paid.
Some thoughts.
Contravention did not occur;
Procedural impropriety
Contravention did not occur
By the authority's own admission, parking place markings and DYL co-exist at the location: 'I note your comments regarding the white bay markings visible at the location'. The authority suggests that a motorist should compare and contrast these and the clarity of 'the marked permit bays further along the road..' and conclude that while the parking bay markings at issue are present they are 'faint' (or possibly fainter) and these should therefore be disregarded by motorists because the DYL were clearly visible. They were therefore, according to the authority, 'prevailing'.
I refer the adjudicator to GSV snapshots of the location dated 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021 and 2024. These show that between 2018 and 2020 a parking bay was installed at the location but removed. I would draw the adjudicator's attention to the upright traffic sign(which is still in situ), which corresponds with the type recommended for use within a parking place, that is to say it omits any directional arrows indicating the start of a restriction. This sign is consistent with a bay existing where my car was parked.
Since 2020 the markings have been left, apparently to weather naturally, but this casual approach by the council places motorists in jeopardy.
I ask the adjudicator to find that the signage is not adequate and that a contravention did not occur.
I would also refer the adjudicator to the council's decision notice which states the following:
'You have the right to appeal...before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service[of the notice]'
Whereas the first requirement of Appeals Regulation 11 is:
11(a): inform R of R’s right to appeal to an adjudicator under regulation 13,
As the adjudicator will know, as regards appealing to the adjudicator Regulation 13 provides:
An appeal under this regulation must be made within—
2(a)the period of 28 days beginning with date of service of the decision notice under regulation 12(4)(b) informing P of P’s right to appeal under this regulation, or
(b)such longer period as the adjudicator may allow.
The decision notice omits 13(2)(b) in its entirety. However, I submit that as the regulation does not distinguish between the importance of these complementary provisions, then neither may the authority: the right of an owner to request that the adjudicator accept a late submission, and the adjudicator's corresponding power in this regard, is as fundamental as '28 days...'.
I ask the adjudicator to find that the decision notice is defective in this regard and that this is a procedural impropriety. I would add that, should the authority respond to this by reference to the tribunal form enclosed with the notice, I submit that this is not part of the notice, it is an information sheet prepared by the tribunal to assist appellants and does not relieve the authority of its duty under regulation 11(in fact in some material respects it contains information contrary to regulation 13, but as this is purely an administrative document which attempts to capture the tribunal's practice as well as give an overview of the appeals process, nothing lies against the tribunal because of this).
For the above reasons I ask that my appeal be allowed and that the authority be directed to refund all that all sums paid.