This is the type of case where a system is relied on.
-------------
Case Details
Case reference 2240522705
Appellant Jonathan Sandford
Authority London Borough of Redbridge
VRM JS74JHS
PCN Details
PCN AF07944481
Contravention date 13 Sep 2024
Contravention time 11:18:00
Contravention location George Lane
Penalty amount GBP 80.00
Contravention Parked without payment of the parking charge
Referral date -
Decision Date 09 Jan 2025
Adjudicator Henry Michael Greenslade
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction
cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.
Reasons
At this scheduled personal hearing the Appellant attended in person but the Enforcement Authority did not attend and were not represented.
A contravention can occur if a vehicle is parked in an on-street payment parking bay during controlled hours, without payment of the parking charge.
There appears to be no dispute that the vehicle was parked in this bay, or that the Penalty Charge Notice was issued to it, as shown in the photographs/digital images produced by the Enforcement Authority.
The Appellant’s case is that he arrive at the location and as pay and display is no longer available, opened the RingGo mobile phone application and was presented with the nearest location (18 yards) number 7176. The Appellant has produced a screenshot of the display which shows that the next nearest (7092) is 32 yards away. The Appellant therefore understandable paid to park in what was shown to be the nearest location.
The Enforcement Authority submit that the 7176 is The Shrubberies and that 7079 is Geroge Lane. However, the Appellant has produced evidence to show that The Shrubberies is actually part of George Lane.
I have had the opportunity of hearing the Appellant personally and find him to be a credible and convincing witness. I accept what he tells me.
It does remain the responsibility of the motorist to check carefully on each occasion before leaving their vehicle, so as to ensure that they do so only as permitted and that this will remain the position for as long as the vehicle will be there. This includes making sure that where any payment is required to park, it is made for the correct vehicle, at the correct location, and for the correct parking period. However, it is also the responsibility of the Enforcement Authority to ensure that restrictions and prohibitions clear, so as adequately to inform the motorist of the requirements. Since there is now no pay and display machine at this location and the Enforcement Authority rely upon payment by RingGo system, it is not unreasonable for motorist to assume that it will provide the correct information.
Considering carefully all the evidence before me I cannot on balance find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, a contravention did occur.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
