Free Traffic Legal Advice

That's been done substantially in your informal reps. The next stage is formal reps by the keeper once a NTO is received. Any subsequent 'appeal' to the adjudicator could add references to tribunal decisions and comment upon the traffic order which they'd be obliged to supply to you within their evidence.

I assume the owner is known to you and also knows about the PCN. Only the owner can submit representations against the NtO, although you can provided you get a letter of authority from the owner to act on their behalf. Alternatively, you prepare the reps for the owner to submit.

This is the representation that I have prepared for my daughter to submit. Thank you for taking the time to assist me in this submission

Do I include the copy of text message from Boots and the blue badge also please?

The vehicle was parked in a disabled bay and a valid Blue Badge placed on the dashboard together with a clock which is clearly displayed from the windscreen as shown in CEO's photographs.

The holder of the blue badge was parked for less than 15 minutes from 9.12am to 9.22  They had an appointment at 9am at Boots opticians in the Hildreds Centre Skegness, the journey to the appointment was delayed because they called at an egg distribution centre to collect eggs for the local food bank on the way to Skegness and there was a problem there.  They arrived on Lumley Road Skegness at 9.12, parked in the disabled parking bay and displayed the blue badge and clock.  they were unable to see the optician and were given another appointment for Saturday 8 March (photos of text confirmation of appointment's attached)

They returned to the vehicle to see the CEO placing the PCN on the car, they couldn’t understand why they were getting the PCN the CEO pointed out that the time on the clock was 10 am and it was only 9.22. He had only observed the vehicle for  1 minute before he issued the PCN  the driver arrived as the CEO was placing the paperwork in the sticky envelope.  It would appear that they did not display the parking clock with the arrival time of 9.15am correctly as they were in a rush to attend the appointment they may have caught the clock and accidentally moved the time that was showing. However, according to the Disabled Person’s (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) Regulations 2000, using a clock is not a requirement when parking in a disabled bay.

I am making representations against this PCN on the grounds that the penalty exceeds the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. My detailed reasons are set out below, but before going into these I would add by way of background that the car was parked in the bay, displayed a blue badge and was stationary for less than 30 minutes. They displayed the parking clock out of habit rather than by virtue of any legal obligation.  The other parking bays on Lumley Road have free parking with a limit of 30 minutes or unlimited for Blue Badge holders.

I understand that the County Council's traffic order requires a parking disc to be displayed in this bay in addition to a blue badge being displayed in the prescribed manner. However, the contravention grounds state that I was parked without displaying a disabled badge in the prescribed manner and do not refer to the parking disc despite this being the only issue between us. What the authority are attempting to do is to broaden the specified contravention grounds which refer only to a Blue Badge to include a parking disc.

This is not lawful because the grounds include two terms defined in legislation, namely disabled badge holder and badge displayed in the prescribed manner, and amending these for the council's own purposes is not permitted. That the TRO requires a parking clock is not at issue, the council's problem is how they may enforce this within the limits set by legislation and the Secretary of State's Statutory Guidance, and using this contravention description is not an option.

In addition, there is no requirement to display a parking clock stated on the traffic sign and this is because the sign used is of the form specified by Ministers in the Traffic Signs etc. Regulations and therefore compliant with the council's LATOR duties. However, for the same reasons as above it does not lie with the council to use this sign to convey a different  bespoke restriction i.e. that because you have placed a time limit on use of the bay this necessarily conveys an additional, non-prescribed, meaning namely that a parking clock must be displayed in the same manner as applies to yellow line waiting restrictions.

I have included attachments to two cases of a similar nature namely Mr William Watson - v - St Helens Council and Miss Michelle Dhillon - v - Leicester City Council.

There is also an Equality Act issue that the Council has a duty to consider. Regular limited waiting bays don't require the display of a parking disc clock. By making disabled people set and display a clock is treating them different to able bodied people who park in a regular limited waiting bay and it creates a situation where disabled people have a higher chance of making an error such as the clock falling off or being set incorrectly. Timings should be based on CEO observations the same as a regular limited waiting bay. There is no need to give the disabled the extra burden of setting and displaying a clock. I believe that the Council is unlawfully treating disabled people differently from able bodied people and I ask you to reconsider your approach to disabled badge holders only limited waiting parking places.






Links in the message (1)

William Watson v St Helens Metropolitan...

Sorry I cannot find how to edit a post I wanted to add the links at the bottom and the legislation how a badge is to be displayed.

This is the representation that I have prepared for my daughter to submit. Thank you for taking the time to assist me in this submission

Do I include the copy of text message from Boots and the blue badge also please?

The vehicle was parked in a disabled bay and a valid Blue Badge placed on the dashboard together with a clock which is clearly displayed from the windscreen as shown in CEO's photographs.

The holder of the blue badge was parked for less than 15 minutes from 9.12am to 9.22  They had an appointment at 9am at Boots opticians in the Hildreds Centre Skegness, the journey to the appointment was delayed because they called at an egg distribution centre to collect eggs for the local food bank on the way to Skegness and there was a problem there.  They arrived on Lumley Road Skegness at 9.12, parked in the disabled parking bay and displayed the blue badge and clock.  they were unable to see the optician and were given another appointment for Saturday 8 March (photos of text confirmation of appointment's attached)

They returned to the vehicle to see the CEO placing the PCN on the car, they couldn’t understand why they were getting the PCN the CEO pointed out that the time on the clock was 10 am and it was only 9.22. He had only observed the vehicle for  1 minute before he issued the PCN  the driver arrived as the CEO was placing the paperwork in the sticky envelope.  It would appear that they did not display the parking clock with the arrival time of 9.15am correctly as they were in a rush to attend the appointment they may have caught the clock and accidentally moved the time that was showing. However, according to the Disabled Person’s (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) Regulations 2000, using a clock is not a requirement when parking in a disabled bay.

I am making representations against this PCN on the grounds that the penalty exceeds the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. My detailed reasons are set out below, but before going into these I would add by way of background that the car was parked in the bay, displayed a blue badge and was stationary for less than 30 minutes. They displayed the parking clock out of habit rather than by virtue of any legal obligation.  The other parking bays on Lumley Road have free parking with a limit of 30 minutes or unlimited for Blue Badge holders.

I understand that the County Council's traffic order requires a parking disc to be displayed in this bay in addition to a blue badge being displayed in the prescribed manner. However, the contravention grounds state that I was parked without displaying a disabled badge in the prescribed manner and do not refer to the parking disc despite this being the only issue between us. What the authority are attempting to do is to broaden the specified contravention grounds which refer only to a Blue Badge to include a parking disc.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/682/contents https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/682/contents

Manner in which a badge is to be displayed

12.  For the purposes of section 21(4A) of the 1970 Act a disabled person’s badge is displayed on a vehicle in the prescribed manner if–

(a)the badge is exhibited on the dashboard or facia of the vehicle, or

(b)where the vehicle is not fitted with a dashboard or facia, the badge is exhibited in a conspicuous position on the vehicle,

so that the front of the badge is clearly legible from the outside of the vehicle.

This is not lawful because the grounds include two terms defined in legislation, namely disabled badge holder and badge displayed in the prescribed manner, and amending these for the council's own purposes is not permitted. That the TRO requires a parking clock is not at issue, the council's problem is how they may enforce this within the limits set by legislation and the Secretary of State's Statutory Guidance, and using this contravention description is not an option.

In addition, there is no requirement to display a parking clock stated on the traffic sign and this is because the sign used is of the form specified by Ministers in the Traffic Signs etc. Regulations and therefore compliant with the council's LATOR duties. However, for the same reasons as above it does not lie with the council to use this sign to convey a different  bespoke restriction i.e. that because you have placed a time limit on use of the bay this necessarily conveys an additional, non-prescribed, meaning namely that a parking clock must be displayed in the same manner as applies to yellow line waiting restrictions.

I have included attachments to two cases of a similar nature namely Mr William Watson - v - St Helens Council and Miss Michelle Dhillon - v - Leicester City Council.

There is also an Equality Act issue that the Council has a duty to consider. Regular limited waiting bays don't require the display of a parking disc clock. By making disabled people set and display a clock is treating them different to able bodied people who park in a regular limited waiting bay and it creates a situation where disabled people have a higher chance of making an error such as the clock falling off or being set incorrectly. Timings should be based on CEO observations the same as a regular limited waiting bay. There is no need to give the disabled the extra burden of setting and displaying a clock. I believe that the Council is unlawfully treating disabled people differently from able bodied people and I ask you to reconsider your approach to disabled badge holders only limited waiting parking places.





William Watson v St Helens Metropolitan Council
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j3F5-usOqEk4ZeV4WH8vLjOsB6JaMN5G/view

Miss Michelle Dhillon - v - Leicester City Council
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SWPQvyFnxTCIkzz4XHjTBhchA8i-hvKm/view

Good afternoon @Enceladus  thank you for your reply. The notice to owner was posted above on 10 April reply #16

I am sorry if the posts have got out of sequence

My daughter is the owner and is aware of the PCN, the V5c documents are all in order with her name and address which is where the NTO was sent, I am preparing the representation for her.

Thank you for your assistance

The owner of the vehicle has received Notice to owner PCN QJ4125144A I was the driver but not the owner
This is what has been received

I look forward to directions as to my next action. Thank you

If HC Andersen doesn't do something I'll look at this tomorrow.

Sorry I've not got much time.

I would start off by saying:

I am disappointed to receive your rejection of informal challenge given I clearly explained I used the bay for far less than 3 hours and made an honest error with the clock.

But I must now hold you to the law on your assertion that the clock is required, as you state "these rules are set by central government".

I repeat the points of my challenge below, and I request you quote the regulation you rely on.

etc.

The council's position, although incorrect, is no doubt embedded. It's received wisdom(or lack of) as opposed to proper analysis.

But there you are. They're judges in their own cause until adjudication..and you've been given two notable decisions on this point.

Incandescent tried to set your mind at rest (reply #13 I think) as regards the straightforward nature of 'hearings'..by telephone or video, probably 15 minutes, but your last post suggested that you might be minded to pay if the reps are rejected. Let's hope that you can be guided on this.

Anyway, the only thing I could add to your draft is that the authority's position is predicated on the booklet 'Rights and Responsibilities....*'. However, as the publication makes clear, this is guidance and that as regards interpretation legislation takes precedence, and you have supplied this in your** representations.

Looking at dates: NTO issued 9 April; deemed served 11th(day 1); 28-day period ends 8 May. Reps may be made online, so you have a couple of days.
*- I couldn't get their link to work, was it the same for you?
**- your daughter's.