Author Topic: Islington, Code 11 Parked without payment of the parking charge, Highbury Station Road  (Read 25024 times)

0 Members and 12 Guests are viewing this topic.

I'll be sure to take your name off. But the case hasn't been put on the register so I suspect Islington asked for a review.

So we think it's all over but maybe it isn't.

OK so no review. You were lucky to get Mr Teper as he does dig deeper than most.

I'll look into the lower panel multiple events issue - this could wipe out a lot of these cases if universal. Teper just says 'should'.

I've just been to Laycock Street and Canonbury Lane and around and below are two signs - trying to take in that is not on.

----------


Case reference   2250584855
Appellant   xxxxxxx
Authority   London Borough of Islington
VRM   WL62BZH
PCN Details
PCN   IZ35607033
Contravention date   07 Jun 2025
Contravention time   16:00:00
Contravention location   Highbury Station Road
Penalty amount   N/A
Contravention   Parked without payment of the parking charge
Referral date   -
Decision Date   11 May 2026
Adjudicator   Carl Teper
Appeal decision   Appeal allowed
Direction   
cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.

Reasons   
The Appellant has attended the video linked hearing; the Authority was not in attendance.

The Authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was parked without payment of the parking charge when in Highbury Station Road on 7 June 2025 at 16:00, when extended match day restrictions were in force.

The Appellant's case is that it was not a match day as no football match was going on that day at the Emirates Stadium, there was a concert instead. He cited a number of other Adjudicators decisions in support of his argument. Other Adjudicators decisions are not binding on me, they are only persuasive.

However, in this case I find that I am in agreement with all the decisions the Appellant has cited. The first case was 2250451308, the second case 2250480306, the third 2250482414, then 2250512537 and finally 2250234820.

I agree with these decisions and I adopt their reasoning and findings as if they were my own.

I would add the following, whilst the signage has Secretary of State approval, I find that the signs appear to be in disrepair and the panels zig zag, which make it more difficult to read.

And further that the lower panel should only record the date of the next event and not the date of the next event and the event following that.

The appeal is allowed.

-----------