Free Traffic Legal Advice

I parked to Barking Park parking on Saturday and a local advised that the first 2 hours were free, which was confirmed on the Notice Board in the parking area. Unfortunately, I did not notice the small writing underneath that required 'all free sessions need to be registered with the app'.

https://imgur.com/a/STMD22M  (DISPLAYED NOTICE)

I thought to check out the park first and see if we want to stay and then come back and book for the 4 hours option, which was about £2.50, including the 2 free hours. After less than an hour, we decided to leave, but there was already a PCN on the windscreen from the Council (not private) for not registering with the app. The PCN was issued about 15mins before I found it. I did buy a ticket after that for £2.50 for 4 hours and left.

This is the link to the PCN: https://imgur.com/a/9Ropmkv

The next day I challenged it based on the fact that I purchased a ticket for a session that was free anyway (!). How can they say I parked without payment if the charge is 0! And I did buy a ticket in the end paying £2.50 even though I lefty after about an hour, within the 'free period'.

Barking Council replied rejecting my challenge, with the explanation: ' we do allow motorists a small window of time in which they can purchase a session after the vehicle was observed, your session was purchased outside of that window'. Which means, had I gone to the car and found the PCN 5 min earlier, then I would have purchased the ticket within this window of time. However it is absurd to pay £40 for simply not registering for a free session!

This is the rejection letter: https://imgur.com/a/E0Rb0wt

My options now are to either pay the reduced fine or wait for the 'Notice to Owner' to make a formal representation to the Council.

Are there grounds and a good chance to make a formal representation?

Frankly, I don't think you are on solid grounds at all, to take this all the way to London Tribunals, which is what is implied if you wait for the Notice to Owner.  This is because whilst you say " Unfortunately, I did not notice the small writing underneath that required 'all free sessions need to be registered with the app'", it is difficult to see how you might have missed it, as it is very clear what you have to do, and is directly below the 2 hour free limit statement.

I say London Tribunals because the council will refuse your reps to a Notice to Owner and may not re-offer the discount. Certainly if they don't, it is a no-brainer to go to London Tribunals, but with what argument ? So you'd be risking the full PCN penalty on a weak case. Not good.

Of course, somebody may come up with a "technical" appeal argument that could win for you, so wait a bit, but don't miss the deadline for payment of the discount if that is to be your decision.

many thanks for the reply. I missed it because it was quite a long sign, I did not read it properly, 3 kids tagging along... and never saw something similar before. Live in Essex, most of the times parking with P&D, not often using parking apps really ... and I relied on the local's advice that it was 2 free hours parking, what can go wrong! Had I seen it, why wouldn't I register? I only stayed 1 hour anyway. And I was hoping for some common sense when I appealed, that it is absurd to pay £40 for not paying £0, but what can you do, live and learn.

This needs more digging into than I can do right now, but I think you might be in the clear (although you'll likely have to go all the way to the adjudicators to win).

Knowing Barking & Dagenham's slapdash approach to following the proper processes and procedures, I had a quick look at "THE LONDON BOROUGH OF BARKING AND DAGENHAM (OFF-STREET PARKING PLACES) AMENDMENT No. * ORDER 202*", which I think is the most recent off-street parking order, and it looks to me as it they have cocked up the paperwork. If I'm reading this right, the order does include a requirement to book by phone for free parking in note (1), but only for schedule 2 on-street parking, not off street parking in car parks.

Can someone else take a look at https://www.lbbd.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-11/ID373%20%20PBP%20%20Tariff%20amendments%20NOI.pdf and check I'm reading it right?

thanks for the input and attachment provided. I can see the note on 'on-street parking' mentioning the requirement for "the start of the parking period must be registered on the telephone payment parking system"... And there is not something equivalent under 'off-street parking'.
Do you think this is enough justification for me to continue the appeal?

That's great. thank you for the advice. I will keep you posted.

IMO, as the off-street order is only amended by these revisions and not revoked and remade then you need to see the whole order to see whether there was and still is an existing provision regarding how free periods are obtained.

Agreed, this is why I wrote that it needs more looking in to, I can't however find "The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (Off-Street Parking Places) Order 2017" online.

Having said that, the amending order does say...

"1. The items shown in Schedule 1 to this Notice shall replace those items in Schedule 1 to the Off-Street Order to:
a. remove the current 30mins free parking and change the current charges for 1 hour tariffs to ‘free’ for all
emissions for payment parking places;
b. change the payment parking places in Barking Park Western Car Park to max stay 6 hours no return within
2 hours, the current 1hr tariff shall be removed and a tariff for up to 6 hours will be added and the charges
for all tariffs will be replaced by those shown in Schedule 1 to this Notice;" (emphasis added)

...so I think the OP is on pretty safe ground here.

IMO OP, your circumstances are not the same.

In the cited case it was common ground that a ticket was displayed and that the PCN was issued within 10 minutes of the ticket being displayed. As I read it, the 'not valid..' alternative arose only because the VRM had not been included when the ticket was obtained.

Your circumstances are different in that there is no objective evidence as to how long you were parked, in other words, if you were parked for more than 2 hours then payment was required. So, was it possible on the evidence available to the CEO that a parking charge was due?

It would seem so unless, for example, charging hours started less than 2 hours before the PCN was issued. But they didn't. You could have been parked for 5 hours. I suggest you flesh out the 'I was parked for less than 2 hours' part and perhaps add that if the authority accept that you were so parked then the contravention is clearly wrong.

However, you could still succeed at adjudication but it could well depend on the reasoning in their rejection.