Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello,

I'm looking for guidance on challenging a parking fine  I received on Cambria Street, which I believe was unfairly issued.

The actual PCN



Here's a brief overview:

I believe I parked on Michael Road which joins into Cambria Street. This street has confusing signage for parking bays on opposite sides of the same road. PCN states the location occured at 'Cambria Street' when in fact, on Google Map the car was parked in the bay which is on Michael Road.


See google map of the parking bay on Michael Road where I parked:

1.
2.

I paid for parking using the Ringo app but accidentally used the wrong location code (17730) for Michael Street instead of the correct one (17454) because I assumed the location code on the meter was for the parking bay next to it.

The photographic evidence provided does not conclusively show that my vehicle was parked in violation of the rules.


The key issues are:

- Misleading signage leading to an honest mistake in payment.
- Photographic evidence is insufficient – it doesn’t clearly show my car’s number plate or a valid PCN, and there's no photo proving my car was in the specific bay with the rules.
- PCN location is incorrect, states Cambria Street but Google map says the location of the parking bay where the car was parked is Michael Street.

Question: do I have grounds to claim procedural impropriety due to these issues? Has anyone faced similar situations on Cambria Street?


Upon receiving the fine, I reviewed the photographic evidence provided and found that there is no conclusive proof associating the parking restrictions on the sign with the specific location where my vehicle was parked. While the images do capture my vehicle and a parking sign, they fail to illustrate the sign and my car in a single frame to indisputably confirm that the particular restrictions apply to my parking spot.

A couple of the photos are blurred;
  - the photo of the back of my car does not clearly show my number plate due to the flash
  - the photo of what might look like a PCN attached to the windscreen has no visible marking or words to suggest it's a PCN
  - crucially there are no photos showing my car was parked in the bay with the parking location number (17454)


You can see all 9 photos taken by the CEO here:


1.

2.

3. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vO_2rFQe8adPpiyv7CKpsNgjbzmgbOcF/view?usp=drive_link

4. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SyIH5-It37yY72raT5nNTP8b0tR4ZALe/view?usp=drive_link

5. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Mn0ma0LWahe39XE_X3Nw__pRDCKQWLNK/view?usp=drive_link

6. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I6EID11EOc9W5aAzLpNzLtnFtX-_t7OD/view?usp=drive_link

7. https://drive.google.com/file/d/14FXXVxoUQ7lS39syZbE3JCBP5NJWw8Lp/view?usp=drive_link

8. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CHI8wcJoP--VQ0lGUCBK8qdfQalOnk5J/view?usp=drive_link

9. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z6a6h50CokfwMeQGHIoRJ2jyVs0HKXAb/view?usp=drive_link

10. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XJHkBGA_Vk24NdKo3TqwDwonnPLgDZuZ/view?usp=drive_link


The timestamps on the photographs indicate they were taken within the controlled parking times. However, without evidence that directly ties these times to my vehicle's parking spot, i believe the validity of the fine is questionable.


more details

Location
Cambria Street
PCN - HZ76502049
VRM - LB22RXW
Date of contravention: 25/11/23
CEO observed the vehicle from 7.01pm to 7.06pm

Thanks,

Microsoft Display Adapter (MDA)

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Well, it does look like Google Street View is wrong : -

This is the pub opposite where you parked with a clearly displayed sign "Cambria Street" so the PCN location looks correct.

However, there seem to be some serious errors with the pay-by-phone numbers.
The parking bay sign: -

clearly displaying parking code of 17454

then the label on the parking ticket machine located right by the bay where you parked !

giving a code of 17730 and app RingGo.
This code is also repeated on the sign for the bay on the opposite side of the road

Although it is a rule that parking restrictions and payment methods are not applicable if they are on the opposite side to the parking bay where parked.

Finally, your point about inadequate photos not showing your car's number plate or the PCN stuck to it.Photos are not a legal requirement for parking PCNs served at the roadside, and never have been. It is a point worth making in any reps you send in or in an appeal to London Tribunals, but not a winner on its own. The civil law test applies with PCN appeals, being "the balance of probabilities", not the criminal test of "beyond all reasonable doubt".

I think the signs here are a real Dog's Breakfast, and confusing. Of course the reason for the two codes is that the bay you parked in has a one hour restriction, (17454), the other code is unlimited (17730).
Essentially, to avoid confusion, the council should not have the ticket machine next to the bay to which it doesn't apply.  I wonder how many people use the ticket machine to get a ticket for that bay and are then whalloped for it !

If you haven't already done, so, at this stage, you would be submitting an informal challenge. Be aware that 99% of these get a Fob-Off letter from the council, as they know from experience most people then cough up to get the discount. They do this because most people know little about parking law, and have a somewhat naive belief that councils act correctly at all times. Would that it were so !!

So if you really want to fight this one, after getting the inevitable rejection to your informal challenge,  you would have to wait for the Notice to Owner that is sent to the name and address on the V5 registration certificate for the car. Is this you ?  Assuming it is, you submit formal representations, basically the same as your previous reps but this time informed by what they said in their rejection. Reps against an NtO are normally looked at a lot more carefully, because the council now know that you accept the loss of the discount, so are more serious. However, a large percentage of formal reps get rejected, thus forcing you to London Tribunals. HOwever, councils are now wise to the fact that if they reject formal reps it is a no-brainer for the appellant to take them to adjudication as the penalty remains the same, and there are no extra costs. To counter this, and also avoid the fag of preparing an evidence pack, it is now commonplace for them to re-offer the discount to "encourage" payment.  Of course if you take them to London Tribunals it is always with the full PCN penalty in play.

PS: You don't have to submit an informal challenge, but it is useful to do so, as you might get material that can be used against them.  Councils ruthlessly game the system so we must, too.