Author Topic: Barnet - PCN Code 16 - No sign next to permit bay within CPZ, can you still park?  (Read 1410 times)

0 Members and 22 Guests are viewing this topic.

The permit bay I parked in within a CPZ does not have its own sign (there is no sign at all for this particular bay). This bay has been missing a sign for several years and I have parked on it daily without a problem until now. One of the CEO's photos was of a different sign for a permit bay across the street within the same CPZ.

My challenge as follows, has been rejected:
The Parking place outside XXXX where the vehicle was parked, has no sign. See attached images. The Council's photo of the sign relates to a different Parking place. Refer to the following: 1) Highway Code Rule 245: Controlled Parking Zones. The zone entry signs indicate the times when the waiting restrictions within the zone are in force. Parking may be allowed in some places at other times. Otherwise parking will be within SEPARATELY SIGNED AND MARKED BAYS. 2) Barnet.gov.uk How Controlled Parking Zones (CPZ) work. Permitted Parking: Parking places are marked out in white to show where parking is allowed. Parking places will be subject to conditions and SIGNS WILL SHOW WHAT THESE ARE.

It seems pretty clear that: 1) the council must place a sign on each bay; and 2) as there's no sign on the bay, I can park there. Should I go to formal representation, or am I missing something and should pay up? [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: May 17, 2024, 07:54:50 pm by Misanthrope »

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


It's the usual Fob-Off letter we see so often.
Please give  us a GSV link to the location telling us exactly where you parked,  so we can have a look around. Also a link to one of the CPZ entry signs too, please.

See attached photo of sign on entry to CPZ. Also attached traffic order parking map, showing location of signs in the immediate area.

GSV link to location (parked where the red Renault Clio is):

https://maps.app.goo.gl/bmtTsNMi5fjSqb7W7

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: May 27, 2024, 12:04:25 pm by cp8759 »

If there is no sign by the bay where you parked, then no contravention has occurred. Their letter is the usual Fob-Off letter we see so often on this forum. However, did you include a photo in your reps showing the bay had no sign ?
 
TBH, I cannot see your case failing at London Tribunals, but wait a bit to see what others say; they should confirm my opinion.

So, if you want to take them all the way, you now have to wait for the Notice to Owner, and submit representations against that. This means the discount would be lost, but the council may well reoffer it if they reject your representations to avoid the work they have to do if you take them to London Tribunals.

The NtO is sent to the name and address on the V5 Registration Certificated for the car. Is this you and is the address up-to-date ?

Just to add to my last post, I went onto GSV to look at the bay, and there is a blanked out part of the view, so I can't see if the bay has a sign and what it says. Obviously as the latest GSV is 2008, then it is likely the sign is present. I presume the short pole for the sign is still there ?

I can confirm there is no sign whatsoever for this bay. The GSV is old. Interesting that the CEO took a photo of the sign for a different bay across the road, presumably realising there is no sign for the bay I was parked in. I included two photos in my reps showing clearly there is no sign for the bay I was parked in and also stating this clearly, however this seems to have been ignored. So, shall I hold out and go to net stage?
« Last Edit: May 18, 2024, 11:23:37 pm by Misanthrope »

I would say go to the Notice to Owner stage. A sign by a bay does not apply at any other bay. As I said before, their letter is their usual Fob-Off letter. 
Agree Agree x 2 View List

I can confirm there is no sign whatsoever for this bay. The GSV is old. Interesting that the CEO took a photo of the sign for a different bay across the road, presumably realising there is no sign for the bay I was parked in. I included two photos in my reps showing clearly there is no sign for the bay I was parked in and also stating this clearly, however this seems to have been ignored. So, shall I hold out and go to net stage?
This should be taken to the tribunal, and I'd say you've got a fair chance of getting costs if the formal representations are drafted properly. It would be wholly unreasonable for the council to pursue this.
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

Agreed, thank you. I have no experience of drafting formal representations, I would simply restate my case. Are you or others on this forum able to assist and/or review before submitting? Thank you again.

@Misanthrope here you go:

Dear London Borough of Barnet,

As I have previously explained, there is no sign for the bay where I was parked and it follows that no contravention occurred. Your CEO has taken a photo of a sign in a different bay, but that sign might as well be on the dark side of the moon: each bay must have its own sign and signs placed elsewhere are irrelevant.

I suggest that rather than carrying out a desktop review of this representation, you actually arrange for the signage to be physically investigated (i.e. someone needs to get out of the council office and go down to the location to have a look). If you do so you will find that the sign is indeed missing, and you need to arrange for the signage to be reinstated if you wish to enforce that bay.

In the meantime you need to cancel this PCN and suspend enforcement of that particular bay until the signage issue has been resolved.

Furthermore, I hereby raise a formal complaint against CEO, who has plainly taken a photo of a sign for a different bay. This is incompetent at best and dishonest at worst, so a the very least some retraining is in order: the CEO should simply report the missing sign and arrange for reinstatement, rather than take photos that paint a misleading picture of events.

Of course you will appreciate that if you issue the usual templated fob-off rejection, I will pursue an order for costs against the council on the grounds that the notice of rejection is wholly unreasonable. I will pursue this course of action even if the council does not contest the appeal.

Yours faithfully,


Once you have the notice to owner you can submit that online, make sure to keep a screenshot of the confirmation page.
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Like Like x 1 View List

Please look at these and let me know your thoughts?

https://www.keycases.info/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Decision_120514_AW00054-2210_Redacted.pdf

Also: https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/905.html&query=(.2011.)+AND+(EWCA)+AND+(Civ)+AND+(905)+AND+(herron)

"Looking therefore at the CPZ as a whole the absence of a yellow line, the fact that the single stretch of road had not been marked, or that some of the bays, taxi, disabled, bus-stops, etc had not been correctly marked, should be considered trivialities which could not mislead a driver who parked on a clearly marked restriction"... "...I remain of the view that a motorist driving into an area which is a CPZ will be correctly notified of that by the entry signs and will know that there are restrictions in place for parking during the hours stated upon that. If the motorist then chooses to park on a yellow line he or she must expect a contravention to have occurred and if the motorist parks in a bay then he or she should abide by the restrictions and timings indicated on any plate relevant to that bay"
« Last Edit: May 28, 2024, 10:35:46 pm by Misanthrope »

Please look at these and let me know your thoughts?
The first case relates to a permit parking area, which is completely different to a CPZ, and the Herron case relates to a wholly different issue around substantial compliance vs literal compliance, which is also irrelevant.

You were parked in a perfectly compliant bay and you were only bound by the time-plates for that bay. If there were none, then you were parked in a perfectly complaint unrestricted bay.

For what it's worth https://www.keycases.info/ is a crock of $hit, 11 pages of refused appeals and only 4 allowed appeals overall, all out of date anyway. If you want to look at key cases, look at the key cases tab here.

I would suggest you send the draft I wrote for you.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2024, 12:24:02 am by cp8759 »
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Formal representation rejected by Barnet Council, using your wording per your last post. Grateful if you could please advise next steps? Thank you. PS received message saying upload folder on this site is full hence could not upload letter.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2024, 10:10:41 pm by Misanthrope »

Formal representation rejected by Barnet Council, using your wording per your last post. Grateful if you could please advise next steps? Thank you. PS received message saying upload folder on this site is full hence could not upload letter.
You have to use a hosting site and then post a link, see here: -
https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/

https://1drv.ms/f/s!AtIKTU4fSYCcgZwSbpB48J0awzuO8g

Link to copies of Barnet Council rejection letters. Please advise next steps. Thanks