Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello fellow forum members,

I'm seeking your advice on whether I have a strong case to escalate my parking ticket appeal to the tribunal. Here's a brief rundown of the situation:

Parking Suspension Location: The council indicated that a parking suspension was in place between 19 - 25 Atherton Road.

My Parking Location: On the day in question, I parked in front of 27 Atherton Road, which is outside the suspension zone. (The council claimed the rear portion of my car fell within the suspension zone)

Timeline: I appealed against the ticket on 26 June. They only responded to my appeal on 6 September, which, to my understanding, exceeds the 56 days allowed for a response.

The council rejected my appeal. Given these circumstances, do you believe I have a good chance at the tribunal? Has anyone faced a similar situation or have insights about the 56-day rule?

Appreciate any guidance or experiences you can share. Thanks in advance!


https://imgur.com/a/Exg4sq9

https://imgur.com/a/Op29Urk

https://imgur.com/a/8GbJMdT

Here from the photos a good chance but first you must make formal representations to the council when you receive the NTO. It is that representation that is subject to the 56 day limit

Here
https://goo.gl/maps/ED7WDRgdt8egx2gW7
IMO the photos do not prove a contravention

Yes, let us see the complete PCN, cover nothing up and then we can study the complete picture.

You have a chance at the tribunal but we are one step ahead of ourselves as you do not have the Notice to Owner yet (and it should already have been sent but is not late enough to be out of time).

The parking place is continuous and extends from the junction with Abercrombie to well beyond the boundaries of 19-25;
There are no internal markings indicating parking spaces;
Traffic signs are situated o/s the flank wall of 19/21 and at the junction with Abercrombie;
The authority's response in support of their rejection states 'a suspension sign was visible one car length in front of the vehicle'.

IMO, given the traffic direction and that the only sign you had passed was o/s 19/21 then it is whether this sign carried a suspension sign which is key and not a sign which wasn't even in the suspended area. IMO, the authority's burden is to show that the only sign post situated within the suspended area carried a suspension sign, not one 'one car length ahead'.

But there isn't any evidence to this effect as far as I can see. OP, do you have other photos showing a suspension sign o/s 19-21?

..and 'one car length ahead of your car' means the rear of your car couldn't have been within the suspended area - not the strongest point, just picking up on their so-called rationale.

I am only making one point re signage i.e. that the council must establish that  there was a suspension sign o/s 19/21 because:

It is the one last passed by the OP;
It is the only one within the suspended area.
Thr council have not as far as we know included this in their evidence.

The point which derives from the sign ahead is their casual reference to being one car length ahead. If they can be as approximate with their measures, which in this case if taken literally must establish that the OP's car was not within the suspended area, then it undermines their credibility as regards their certainty that the car was in the area based upon a single imprecise photo taken at an oblique angle.

Sorry, cannot accept this, but c'est la vie. There is no reason for a driver to even look at a traffic sign ahead of them when the one they've already and very recently passed showed no additional restriction.

If true...

But it is for the authority to prove IMO in order to meet their 'adequate information' burden.

I've ordered the suspension logs.

@cp8759 Sorry for going awol, work has been busy lately.

I appreciate your assistance in obtaining the suspension logs. From what I've seen, they appear to be in order. Or do you think there's any information within them that could be useful for my appeal?

I've recently received a Notice to Owner from the council.