Free Traffic Legal Advice

PCN received for parking in a Restricted Parking Zone. No yellow lines, loads of other cars parked on the same bit of road when I parked, no visible repeater signs whatsoever on my side of the road stating that I couldn't park there.

I was parked outside 21 Bull Plain, I later found that the nearest (very small) repeater sign on my side of the road was a further 50 yards or so up the road outside 3 Bull Plain! Once again, this was definitely not visible from where I parked.

The only visible parking signs from where I parked was a zone ends sign further up the road (which I did not notice at the time) and a small repeater sign on the other side of the road stating no parking at any time. There were no cars parked on that side of the road and a load of other cars parked on my side. I therefore assumed it was fine to park where I did.

When I went back to Bull Plain the day after getting a ticket, there were two other cars in the same part of Bull Plain with parking tickets on them. Clearly people are not realising and the council must be fully aware from the amount of tickets being generated that they are not communicating the parking restrictions well enough.

What are my chances of being able to successfully contest this extortion?

No point in looking on Google Maps as in the last picture they took a few years ago there were actual yellow lines there. Instead I've attached photos of where I parked, the nearest repeater sign and the PCN.

There must be a zone entry sign to a restricted parking zone. Seems to be one on Google Maps. Seems they've dispensed with yellow lines since.

Please type the PCN number and car registration here as your pic is a bit fuzzy.

Here's the order.

https://cdn-eastherts.onwebcurl.com/s3fs-public/documents/The_Hertfordshire_Bull_Plain__Hertford_Restricted_Parking_Zone_Order_2018.pdf

Yes apologies about the fuzzy PCN photo, PCN number is ET3502870A, vehicle reg is BP18UUK.

Thank you very much for that copy of the order, I'll have a read of that as soon as I get the chance.

I'm getting an error entering those details here:

https://hertsocm.itsvc.co.uk/ETOCM/EastHerts/Error.aspx?aspxerrorpath=/ETOCM/EastHerts/details.aspx

Yes, I also came across that URL. It doesn't work, you have to enter the details here instead:
https://www.hertsparking.co.uk/eastherts/default.aspx

By the way, under the photos they've provided as evidence, the only things that indicate any restriction is a Restricted Parking Zone sign, which of course is not visible from where I parked. And a small repeater sign which is also not visible from where I parked. The fact that the warden has taken a photo right next to the sign and that my car can just about be seen quite a bit further down the road is neither here nor there. Obviously my car is a lot bigger than the very small repeater sign. Therefore, from where my car was parked, that sign was not visible. Which is presumably why the warden has provided no photo from where my car was parked attempting to show the repeater sign!

Edit: This is the view from more or less exactly where my car was parked looking towards the repeater sign photographed by the warden. As you can see from the photo, it isn't visible in any way whatsoever...
https://imgur.com/a/gzUKHgC

If you pass the gateway signs, then you're subject to the restriction. Your argument seems to rely upon discretionary repeater signs.

IMO, an adjudicator would start with your obligations as a driver, not the council's to provide reams of repeater signs. Was there a gateway sign which you passed but didn't observe?

I expect that there was yes. If you look at the evidence provided by the warden one of the photos is of a zone entry sign. Where exactly this sign is I don't know.

However my understanding is that the repeater signs are mandatory, not discretionary. But how often are these signs expected to be repeated along the road?

Personally if I was an adjudicator then I would want to see that the council had clearly and adequately communicated the restrictions. And a lack of repeater signs indicates to me that they have not met this threshold. Particularly when they could have used yellow lines either in addition or in place of a Restricted Parking Zone to make it perfectly clear. And particularly as for some odd reason there were previously yellow lines that they have gone to the trouble of actually removing and not replacing.

But I appreciate that you may be playing devil's advocate and that I am coming at this from my own perspective.

OP, I have to say that I think you wouuld lose at adjudication, because the RPZ is so small. RPZs do not have road markings and were introduced by HMG to cater for places where carriageway markings would be intrusive and ugly in places there there is a street scene that is in need of protection. Repeater signs are NOT a legal requirement. The duty on councils for signing a restriction is in the LATOR regulations, in particular Regulation 18 : -

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/2489/regulation/18

Whether signage is adequate is subjective; the council will say its all perfect, yet you disagree, so the matter can be taken to the adjudicators. For a street 290 feet long, an adjudicator may well decide that the entry signs are sufficient.

Of course we just give advice here based on experience of previous cases, but you have the absolute right in law to take the council to the adjudicators. All you are risking is the full PCN penalty, with no additional costs.

Basically you have to put it to the touch at adjudication because the council are unlikely to give way. To do this, you have to wait for the Notice to Owner, submit formal representions, then when rejected, register an appeal at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. Of course, you have to risk the full penalty, which is about half of what it would be in London.
I'm afraid this is how the system works, and has worked since 1991.

The zone entry sign here is presumably at the other end to the one I posted on Google Maps. You should satisfy yourself you did pass a sign or not.

Restricted parking zones do away with intrusive yellow lines and were introduced for small central historic areas but are now used in small residential zones

The CEO's photos show a clear regulatory sign at the start of the RPZ in your direction of travel o/s no. 27.

You passed this and were no more than 25-30m into the zone.

I would not test an adjudicator with a defence based around adequacy of signage.

Fair enough, appreciate the advice. However firstly I am not sure I even passed that sign because I initially didn't drive into the RPZ from that direction. Whether I turned around and parked before or after I possibly exited and reentered the zone I frankly can't remember.

But secondly, one of the photos shows a warden has taken a photo from the repeater sign attempting to show my car in the distance. Which is neither here nor there because the sign cannot be seen from my car, it is in fact not visible at all from where my car was actually parked. So let's send them a photo of the view from my car itself looking towards the repeater sign that cannot be seen. And let's give them a URL to actually view the image with that has a view counter. And let's see if they even bother considering this evidence. And from reading here, if they don't then my understanding is that they have just invalidated their PCN. I can send them this URL in writing by post presumably? No need to make it easy for them by sending it electronically, unless I have to.

This is in view of the fact that the Traffic Signs Manual, Chapter 3, Section 15 states "the aim should be to place [repeater] signs [within an RPZ] strategically so that where drivers might be tempted to stop,
they can see a sign". The council have at the least failed to do that because where I parked no repeater sign on my side of the road can be seen and no other sign explicitly stating I could not park can be seen either.