Author Topic: Islington - 85 parked without a valid permit  (Read 1316 times)

0 Members and 193 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Islington - 85 parked without a valid permit
« Reply #15 on: »
A rough draft below, I’ve tried to scout the regs for any concrete guidelines that state the signage point but can’t find anything to reference. Let me know your thoughts.

Dear London Borough of Islington,

I challenge this PCN on the grounds that the contravention did not occur. There is no clear signage to indicate that this is an off-street car park therefore there is no way a motorist can be certain that they are parking subject to an off street car parking places order or an ordinary car park. There are no terms and conditions stipulated and as such the PCN must be cancelled.

Regards

Re: Islington - 85 parked without a valid permit
« Reply #16 on: »
Just doing some reading of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/5/made

And I think the sign may not be totally compliant if I’m interpreting the regs correctly. The sign table under Schedule 5, Part 4 of the TSRGD dictates the permitted items allowed on the lower panel. These are:
1) A time period
2) A time period (with permitted variants)
3) “Except in signed bay”
4) “No motor vehicle parking on verge or footway except where signed”

None of the above, nor permitted variants for the above, are included in the sign in question of this contravention. Instead the sign says “Park in marked bays only” which doesn’t comply with the above.

Please do correct me if I’m reading them wrong, thinking about adding this to the appeal.

Re: Islington - 85 parked without a valid permit
« Reply #17 on: »
The TSRGD do not apply to car parks, so they're largely irrelevant, here's a revised draft:

Dear London Borough of Islington,

I challenge liability for this PCN on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur. The PCN alleges an off-street contravention, so there is a requirement for the council to communicate the terms and conditions of parking created by the off-street parking places order to users of the car park.

As the location is off-street, the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 are irrelevant and are of no application. Ordinarily in an off-street car park there would be a tariff board outlining that the car park is subject to statutory parkings controls, listing the terms and conditions of parking, and stating that failure to comply with the requirements imposed by the parking places order might result in a penalty charge notice being served.

At this location there is nothing to bring the terms and conditions of parking to the attention of motorists, indeed here is nothing to advise motorists that they are within an off-street car park subject to statutory controls, nor is there anything to inform users that the bay markings and signs are anything other than merely advisory.

I had been given no information about the fact that the land in question is an off-street car park, or that a parking places order imposed any restrictions, let alone that a statutory penalty charge notice might be issued for failing to comply with the terms of the order.

In the circumstances the alleged contravention cannot have occurred, and the penalty charge must be cancelled.

Yours faithfully,

Make sure to keep a copy of the representation, and 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

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

Re: Islington - 85 parked without a valid permit
« Reply #19 on: »
Hello, yes reps were made as per above and the council have rejected, see response below:

https://imgur.com/a/4KkEdOD

Re: Islington - 85 parked without a valid permit
« Reply #20 on: »
It seems the discount is no longer on the table, so a no brainer to go to tribunal. Has this argument worked before in the tribunal?

Also is there anything in the traffic orders which can be used in the argument?

Re: Islington - 85 parked without a valid permit
« Reply #21 on: »
I wouldn't worry about arguing anything until we know whether the council is going to contest the case. Where I've used this line of argument I've never lost, but we've not had a decision where all the issues have been fully ventilated because I've never come across a council capable of formulating a proper rebuttal.

I'm not sure we'd need to use anything from the parking places order, the key issue really is that the council has done nothing to bring the terms of the order to your attention (in many car parks the tariff board tells you the name of the order and also that you can go and inspect it at the town hall, this car park doesn't even tell you it's a car park).

I'm going to drop you a PM in case you'd like to be represented.
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

Re: Islington - 85 parked without a valid permit
« Reply #22 on: »
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