Free Traffic Legal Advice

[quote name='MMV Redux' date='Thu, 19 Oct 2023 - 09:26' post='1796218']
Wow! that NTO is late--just within the time allowed for issue.

OP----HCA's ground is the strongest----you cannot get a Code 01 PCN for parking on a yellow line with a Blue Badge if the clock was set correctly.

The Council are trying to finesse a parking suspension contravention which is wholly unreasonable.

If you like I will write you a "kitchen sink" appeal which covers everything members have supplied. It should be signed by the owner/keeper of the vehicle i.e. the NTO addressee.

If that appeal is rejected I am willing to represent you at the Tribunal at no cost.

Mick
[/quote]

My mistake it wasn't on a yellow line but the point made is still valid.

Here's my draft for the OP:-

Code 01 Appeal: Priory Road, Newham

This appeal relates to PCN number PN35614550 Dated 23/04/2023 against VRM: KM72HJV

The appeal is in four parts, but each part is predicated on errors made by the Enforcement Authority.

1. Circumstances

Driving into Priory Road there were no signs indicating the whole area was covered by parking restrictions indeed there was a line of parked vehicles on the side of the street where I parked. I believed that with the works shuttering in place I had a legitimate expectation to park in the spot I chose with my Blue Badge on display. There was an advance warning sign next to the shuttering but no prescribed. parking suspension sign.

2. The Contravention Did Not Occur.

The Authority has issued a Code 01 contravention which relates to “Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours” but has attempted, in it’s rejection letter of 22 June, to conflate this contravention with a parking suspension.

The display of a valid BB with the clock in the correct position is an exemption to a Code 01 contravention so it is difficult to determine how the Authority can enforce a penalty charge.

The Authority has not specified a Code 21 Parking Suspension contravention on the PCN so again it is difficult to determine how it can enforce such a restriction. If it were to continue this line it should be pointed out that, regardless of the red roundel, the advance warning sign cannot substitute for the Authority’s suspension sign approved by the DfT on 22 March 2012. In this respect I refer the Authority to the Tribunal Decision Reference 2160447106 (Saiyid Noor v London Borough of Croydon.

3. Legitimate Expectation

I contend that I had a legitimate expectation to park in that position given the following reasons:-

a. The shuttering indicated that the rolling programme of water mains renewal had been completed;
b. Under the Authority’s noise and environmental protocols no works would be carried out on a Sunday  https://www.newham.gov.uk/public-health-saf...olition-sites/1
c. The effects of the Order expire once works have been completed;
d. There was no apparent parking suspension for that bay.

4. Other Matters

I would argue that the issue of an NTO six months after the PCN puts me in a prejudicial situation and that, as you are dealing with a disabled person, the Authority has failed in its duty to act fairly because of this unconscionable delay. I therefore request the Authority to exercise its discretion and cancel this PCN. I trust the Authority will have regard to my disability and their statutory obligation under the Equality Act 2010 to take my disability into account when considering this appeal. If the Authority decide not to cancel I require it to fully explain why it thinks my rights under the Equality Act 2010 do not merit cancellation of the penalty charge.

Yours


Mike

Don't forget if they kick it into touch, what the Statutory Guidance says about service of the Notice to Owner.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-enforcement-of-parking-contraventions/guidance-for-local-authorities-on-enforcing-parking-restrictions

"The NtO may be issued 28 days after serving the penalty charge, and we expect authorities to send them within 56 days. The ultimate time limit, in exceptional circumstances, is 6 months [footnote 33] from the ‘relevant date’. There should be a very good reason for waiting that long to serve an NtO"

Hi all,

They've gone ahead and rejected again! Please see the pdf attached.

https://ibb.co/XLKnfDV

Please kindly advise on next steps.

Thank you

Thank you. I hope someone can help devise an appeal.

Thank you. Forever grateful for your time and effort.

@cp8759

I see that the traffic order in the evidence pack is titled:
"Thames Water Mains Rehabilitation Scheme - Various Roads (Temporary Prohibition of Traffic) Order, 2022".

Paragraph 1 says:
"1. This order may be cited as the London Borough of Newham, Thames Water Mains Rehabilitation Scheme - E16 Area (Temporary Prohibition of Traffic), Order 2022"

The evidence photos of the posted sign refer to Priory Road, E6. IE not E16. However there is a Priory Road listed in the schedule to the order.

And Newham have already told you "We do not have an order as specified above as the E16 area so therefore cannot supply this information"

Does any of that help the OP or is it just a typo in the order and substantially compliant?

I also note that the Council's submission is dated Feb 7th which is Wednesday. The OP implies it was received by post so deemed served on Friday the 9th. The hearing is scheduled for 13th Feb which is Tues and so the Council's case has not been served with three clear (working) days.

@Fazzy
Did the evidence pack arrive in the post? Does the envelope have a post mark. Newham are notorious for postal delays. If it was posted I'd certainly add the point above about late service to your appeal.