Free Traffic Legal Advice

My user name refers to Hans Christian Andersen author of, among other stories, 'The Emperor's New Clothes'. I adopt the stance of the young child who, when seeing the emperor naked, is not afraid to step out of line with the received wisdom and says what they see.

Same here. Sometimes I'm correct, but it gets me into hot water none the less, and sometimes I'm wrong.

Thankfully the forum isn't just one person's view.   

THe regulars on here are far more informed on the legislation than the council staff enforcing it !

That's not how footway parking works. It is banned everywhere except where signs say otherwise. This is a cul-de-sac, so you have to drive past that sign on the way into the road. Once you're in an exempt area, there is no requirement to have a sign for each bay, as the footway parking exemption (with any qualification such as "in marked bays") applies to the whole street.

This is the best I can come up with in the circumstances:

If, as you say there is no requirement to have the sign for each bay - the fact that there is the sign, does it not just reinforce the rule?  Somewhere there must be a sign saying you can park within the markings on the pavement, but as I said I was partially outside the marked area.

Yes, it's the sign you photographed which you attached to post 18 above.

Do you really think Barnet would cancel the charge if it was discretionary on their powers?  They would want to get as much money in as they can!  Do you believe that the fact that I ask them to turn up the relevant statutes, mean they will think they can't be bothered, ie too much hassle?

No, I think it's far more likely that Barnet will fail to consider or deal with your representations properly, and you might win a tribunal appeal due to a lack of evidence from the council and/or a procedural impropriety in failing to consider your representations.

Just to say I received my (surprise!) letter of rejection from Barnet today.   The offence was 3 November and they received my appeal on 16 November.  They are hardly rushing it through.

They say that my wheel(s) was partly on the pavement which can force pedestrians to walk on the carriageway which could cause an accident particularly to wheelchair or pushchair users, the very young or elderly, or partially sighted people who maybe forced off the pavement.

The fact that they tell you to partially park on the pavement, inches away from where I parked, seems irrelevant!   I will check tomorrow to make sure that the paving isn't significantly  narrower at the point where I parked.   If there is no appreicable difference I think I will challenge it again when I receive the NtO.

What do you all think, have I got a case worthy of challenge?

Would somebody please remind me who to shrink documents to fit on the forum.

This is what I wrote to Barnet.

I would invite you to cancel the penalty charge on a discretionary basis, given that I parked at night and the contravention appears to be minimal if not de minimis. The vehicle was slightly outside the bay and only on the kerbstone with one wheel.

I went to post the reply from Barnet, but unfortunately when I tried earlier this evening the server at imgb.com is down and it still is. Hopefully tomorrow they will have rectified the fault. 

Discretion?

There are NO marked bays despite their signs because a parking place is not a 'marked bay' for the purposes of footway parking. I cannot express this any clearer. And in addition the parking place markings are incorrect.

So, the signs are incorrect and therefore misleading.