Author Topic: Haringey, Code 12(r) parked in a restricted street, Ambiguous/Obstructed sign, Vernon Road-Turnpike Lane Controlled zone  (Read 569 times)

0 Members and 677 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hello, this is a weird one. The car was parked on Vernon Road around 8:30 pm, with a Controlled Zone sign next to it indicating restrictions from 8am - 6:30pm. There are no other sign on the side of the street (see pictures) so it appeared ok to park here. On returning from a 10 min shopping, a parking inspector was attaching a ticket to car. He explained that although the Controlled Zone sign shows 8am - 6:30pm on this side, the sign that matters is the one attached behind it, which says 8am - 10:00pm. The driver had no idea about that other sign, and also it was unusual that a sign visible from the parking area is not applicable. What have that sign showing 8am - 6:30pm, then?

When this was pointed out to the parking inspector, he said that the 6:30pm sign is for cars driving towards that sign from inside Vernon Road and the 10pm sign attached behind it is for cars driving from the opposite side from Turnpike Lane - even though the restriction applies to the same section of road. If that were to be the case, how did the inspector know which direction the car was being driven from? I have never heard of such as thing!

In addition, the sign showing restrictions till 10pm is not visible from a driver's viewpoint, because of an overgrown shrub (see pictures) and the driver would not have seen it even if they were turning into Vernon Road from Turnpike Lane. The only point the driver would see a sign would be after the car was stationary on the side of the street and the driver checked for restrictions, where the sign would show that the restriction has already ended.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Google map location - https://maps.app.goo.gl/UTUKc9idEKKEnBKw8
PCN -

Pictures - https://imgur.com/a/eZ2b8kJ

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Hello, this is a weird one.

The sign is not 'weird'. The parking inspector was quite right: this is a sign governing the entrance to a CPZ, not a small sign governing the bay. These small signs are not required in CPZs. See the Highway Code:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/traffic-signs
and scroll down to 'Information Signs'.

What is weird is the sign is positioned so the the bay falls into two CPZs.

You could post the rear of the PCN in case of errors in the 'small print'.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2024, 10:09:25 am by John U.K. »

As John UK said, the situation is not weird. Those signs are zone signs; you parked in a marked bay that requires a sign for the bay parking conditions, and you should have gone to look at it. Here is the sign for the bay a short distance away from where you parked: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/X3649ZMVTmZ5mLyn8
As you can seen, between 7-10 pm it is residents permit parking only
« Last Edit: October 19, 2024, 12:29:08 pm by Incandescent »

Controlled zone entry signs control single yellow lines and not bays - you must always check bay signs.

That said many CPZs are put in to unify bay parking and yellow lines and this could be seen as misleading.

Understood. Should have checked for any small bay signs  :( . It looks like there was one a bit further away, as Incandescent says, but the CPZ sign was more obvious and convincing at that time. But could I still argue that the presence of the CPZ sign was misleading especially in the absence of bay signs nearby?

Here is the rear of the PCN - https://imgur.com/a/P1IjDN8

OP, the CPZ sign is irrelevant. That you thought it had effect within a bay shows your lack of understanding of signs. But you're in good company as the CEO apparently thought the same! But they had the presence of mind to take a photo of and include as evidence the applicable traffic sign i.e. the one within the bay.




Am I right in guessing from the messages that there isn’t any recourse to this?

Am I right in guessing from the messages that there isn’t any recourse to this?
Well, normal advice is to submit informal representations and see what their reply says, before either paying or deciding to take the matter further. So you could submit reps based on your initial post, pointing out their own CEO was also confused on the signs. The PCN says they will re-offer the discount if refusing reps that are received within the discount period.  PCN date is 10th Oct so if you're going to do this you need to get your skates on as today is the 21st, 11 days into the 14 day discount window.

Reply to my informal representation came back saying PCN would not be cancelled. Is there any point in taking this matter further, or should I pay the discounted fine?

https://imgur.com/a/VavVBWb

The rejection has been written by an idiot without any regard to the process position of this PCN. But whether this could be developed, I don't know.

The letter states the following:
You can pay the discount of £65 if paid by 13th December;
You could have(NOT can, could have) paid £130 by 7 November;
The owner should now have a NTO demanding payment of £130 no later than 6 December with no discount option.

So, you can pay £65 - whether in full settlement or as an instalment who knows- whereas the owner must pay £130.
If you are not the owner(and how would the council know at this stage and how could YOU be expected to know what the owner might have received) then 2 penalties are being demanded concurrently: £130 from the owner and £65, or is it £130, from you.

Clear as mud. 

Is this inconsistency/contradiction something that can be used to challenge the PCN? Any suggestions would be helpful if there is a chance of success. I don’t have long to make use of the discount for the fine.