Free Traffic Legal Advice

This looks like the location, please confirm: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/oSJqTEamzUgmjj6s9

Well, first off, we need your reg number and PCN number so we can look at their website to see what photos the CEO may have taken to support the PCN. The photos you have posted show no bright yellow suspension signs, but that doesn't mean it or they weren't there. Normal practice of CEOs is to take a photo of the suspension sign nearest the car.

So just to make sure you supply all the info needed, please read this and update your thread accordingly: -
https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/

Hi yes the location is correct in your link and chijiiki has provided the deets.  thanks

deleted, can't read

GSV July 2024 shows 2 parking places in this length of street, one for loading the other for Disabled BB holders. The latter is internally divided into 3 spaces. Numbering from the loading bay, the OP was parked in the first and a single traffic sign (Disabled BB holders 24/7) was situated at the kerb between the second and third.

The CEO's photos show a 'suspension' sign on the traffic sign post suspending use of all 3 spaces from Oct 2024-28 Feb. 2025 for 'works'.

The PCN was issued on 25 Feb.

The OP wrote: 'I saw nothing to indicate the bay was suspended (I'm not local) but took a picture of the car/bay. Forgot to take a picture of the disabled parking sign. Would be helpful to know what I should write in the appeal.

OP, does this mean that you did not look for and read the traffic sign but simply assumed that your length of stay would be such that you could not possibly be in contravention of the regular restriction which you inferred from the marking alone?

This happens regularly on this forum, but usually with Res permit holders whose parking spaces extend to perhaps 100m in length and as frequent flyers they don't check signs every time they park.

For me, the most important parts of your account are that:

The parking place was suspended in its entirety for 4 months for 'works', that it was small and that you managed to park easily;

Nothing on the ground was occurring in your or the other parking spaces to cause you to think anything other than the spaces were available for use;

The CEO's photos confirm that no 'works' vehicles were parked behind you neither can any 'works' paraphernalia be seen.

IMO, the likely scenario is that the 'works' had ceased but the council had not removed the suspension sign because the applicant had paid for a further 3 days.

This defence has succeeded with councils and adjudicators i.e. once the reason for the suspension has ceased then the suspension itself cannot be enforced.

Wait for other views and pl answer tne queries above.

You were there, was there any sign of 'works' that you could see?

These are disabled bays and are in relatively short supply compared to regular bays. The council determined that these 3 should be placed to support BB holders accessing nearby facilities and shops and IMO the authority were (as the end date has passed) under a duty to lift the suspension once the bays' alternative uses had finished and not to deny access to legitimate users. 

Wait for other views.

See also this case:

https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/suspended-bay-penalty-charge-notice-(mcc)/

I would challenge this on the lines Mr Anderson puts forward but draft something and post here first.

That there is no council pic of your car in relation to the sign is one point; the works finished another.

I saw the road marking 'Disabled' and parked as seen in the CEO's photos. I displayed my BB and clock and left. I did not look at the traffic sign because my stay was going to be short enough to fall within any BB restriction. I returned to find the PCN. I then looked at the traffic sign post and saw the suspension notice. This stated that the 3 bays which comprised this parking place were suspended from ** to 28 Feb. due to 'works'.

The CEO's photos show that the area was absolutely clear of any works or associated paraphernalia, including the road surface having been made safe for vehicles to park, and that the purpose of the suspension had clearly ceased. This is hardly surprising given the extended period of the suspension (over 4 months) i.e. whoever was undertaking the works would have given themselves a safety buffer of time when applying for the suspension.

I suggest that this is a case of left and right hands within the council not co-ordinating their activities i.e. whoever authorised this suspension had lost sight of the council's obligation to maximise the availability of these disabled spaces and had not checked whether the legal (Traffic Regulation Order) basis under which the council was permitted to suspend the space by the simple **** of signs existed on 25 Feb.(simply paying the fee does not satisfy the council's policy criterion of need) and the CEO simply applied a date perspective.

In summary, the only power under which a parking place may be suspended by officers derives from the TRO which requires that specified conditions must  be met before a bay may be suspended. The concomitant of this is that when this condition ceases to apply then the suspension has no legal effect. The **** of signs is simply a subsequent requirement and of itself is not evidence that a lawful suspension is in place.

I submit that the contravention did not occur and that the PCN must therefore be cancelled.

Is my take.

Edit- by way of example, see paras. 28 and 30 of one of MCC's TROs: https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/TRO/Manchester/MC232.pdf