Author Topic: 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours - Barnet / No signage.  (Read 129 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Londoner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Two of these cases are about the appellant relying on a sign near the location of parking, that was closer than the CPZ sign.  Your last one is about missing signage. There is no guarantee that you'd win citing some or all of these cases. Your case seems to be that you passed the CPZ entry sign some way back, probably missing it in traffic, and then passed no other signs before parking. Therefore your case would be based on the size of the CPZ being totally against council guidance on CPZs.

Of course, you have the absolute right in law to take them to London Tribunals, but must first go through the process of getting formal reps against a Notice to Owner refused. Are you the owner as per the V5 Registration Certificate for the car.

Yes, I am named on the V5.

Quote
I should point out that in the Authority’s Case Summary they seek to rely on the fact that there was signage at the entrance to the other end of Hodford Road that indicated a restriction: Monday to Saturday - 08:00 to 18:30 and on Sunday - 09:30 to 18:30. At no time did the Appellants see this signage because she entered Hodford Road from the other end, and she exited the road from that end as well. Accordingly, the signage to which the Authority refer in the Case Summary is of no relevance. The Authority have not addressed the absence of signage at the Golders Green Road end of Hodford Road in their Case Summary. However, as indicated above, they have provided photographs of the relevant signage in the area and a plan on which the signage has been marked. I note that there is signage on Finchley Road [‘the Finchley Road signage’] shortly before the junction with Golders Green Road indicating a restriction: Monday to Saturday - 08:00 to 18:30 and on Sunday - 09:30 to 18:30. The question is whether it would have been reasonable for the Appellant to have interpreted that signage as indicating a restriction some distance away on Hodford Road.

&

Quote
I take the view that the signage pertaining to Hodford Road is unclear and ambiguous and that this should have been remedied by placing signage at the Golders Green Road entrance to Hodford Road indicating that there was a restriction: Monday to Saturday - 08:00 to 18:30 and on Sunday - 09:30 to 18:30. In those circumstances, whilst a contravention occurred, I take the view that the signage was not fit for purpose and so I allow the appeal.

How is this not a strong argument? Why is my case any different?

Also, the adjudicator clearly stated this flaw should be remedied by the council placing a CPZ sign at the (Golders Green Rd) entrance to Hodford Rd - which the council still haven't done.

H C Andersen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
  • Karma: +15/-0
    • View Profile
One adjudicator's decision is not binding on another.

Of the three cases cited one, the third, was decided in the appellant's favour because the authority's evidence was unreadable. In the other two, the phrase 'in the circumstances of the case' or equivalent leaps out.

Your circumstances are not the same. You did not see another CPZ sign and we don't know which route you took.

Therefore, under the particular circumstances of this case, I am not satisfied that a contravention took place and this Appeal is allowed.

In those circumstances, whilst a contravention occurred, I take the view that the signage was not fit for purpose and so I allow the appeal.
Much of the council's map evidence at 'H' is blurred and unintelligible and on none of it can I identify zone entry points. It may well be that Hodford Road junction with Golders Green Road is not in fact a CPZ entry point but I cannot be satisfied on the council's case that it has established that its CPZ is clearly and correctly signed at its entry points and I accordingly find that the contravention has not been proved.


The council's duty in law is to place and maintain '..on or near the road of such traffic signs in such positions as the order making authority may consider requisite for securing that adequate information as to the effect of the order is made available to persons using the road;'

Because appellants are in the main the equivalent of litigants in person and not legally trained, the tribunal extends to them what would otherwise be denied to a qualified lawyer i.e. they tolerate references only to cases which support their appeal and which ignore perhaps a body of contrary decisions.

Here's Hodford on the ETA register for the last few years. I suggest you look through these decisions and where the circumstances are the same create two columns of appeals allowed and refused. Then decide whether you would want to risk the discount by taking your case all the way.

https://londontribunals.org.uk/ords/pwslive/f?p=14952:60:10303268843615:pg_R_12214301622549612:NO&pg_min_row=16&pg_max_rows=15&pg_rows_fetched=15

Londoner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Your circumstances are not the same. You did not see another CPZ sign and we don't know which route you took.

I didn't see CPZ signs at all, despite checking 2 different entrances to Hodford Road. Shouldn't that strengthen my case if anything? I appreciate one could argue I should've figured out I was in CPZ zone from the nearby paid parking bays, but the signs at the paid parking bays don't always necessarily reflect the same restriction times as the SYL's, or do they?

I alluded to the route I took in reply #2. I would think this point also strengthens my case, since compared to the "winning" case above the CPZ sign I drove past was about 0.5 miles from my parking location.

Having said that, I don't doubt your expertise. I'm just torn at the moment on whether to fight this all the way or just pay the discount. It really is hard parting with £65 for a genuine mistake.

H C Andersen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
  • Karma: +15/-0
    • View Profile
I've set out the legal test.

You were parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours - fact.

There is no law to which you could refer which would require an adjudicator to find in your favour.

If the balance of relevant tribunal decisions is in the authority's favour then I could not see them accepting any reps from you based on the inadequacy of signs. Which would mean adjudication if you want to pay nothing. Your risk would be having to pay the full penalty.

Extracts from a couple of 'appeal refused' decisions:

There was no legal requirement for additional signage at the junction of Hodford Road.

The waiting restriction that applies within a CPZ is signed at the entry points to the zone. The motorist is expected to note the restriction that applies on driving past such signage. There is no duty on the council to post repeater signs within a CPZ. That is why the appellant did not see any such signs. This council enforces yellow line restrictions on Sundays. It is not a defence to this penalty charge that the appellant believed otherwise. I acknowledge the photographic evidence of signage provided by the appellant but I am satisfied that this CPZ was clearly and correctly singed and that the restriction conveyed by signage was in force at the relevant time.

Incandescent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Karma: +27/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Crewe
    • View Profile
OP, you need to back-track your route to check for CPZ entry signs. I seem to have finally managed to find a map of the Golders Green CPZ. The black line is the boundary, so there should be CPZ signs where roads cross the boundary.

www.barnet.gov.uk/sites/default/files/assets/citizenportal/documents/parkingroadsandpavements/Parking/GoldersGreenCPZ.pdf