Free Traffic Legal Advice

Glad to see you've moved to here !

Whilst I see some markings, if there is no sign governing the bay, then the double-yellow lines trump the bay markings.  Yellow lines apply to the whole road including verges and footways. There are two exemptions, (1) loading/unloading, and (2) boarding/alighting passengers, neither of which would seem to apply to your situation.
The cars that didn't get PCNs were not adjacent to the DYLs, only your car, hence only you got a PCN.

Double-yellows need no sign, by the way, as they apply 24x7.

There will be a new traffic order to establish and define the double-yellows. The previous order should also have the bays you used defined.

But surely if the council has designated that as a parking space, they have sent out conflicting messages.

Well, quite possibly, although the lack of a sign controlling the bay is against this, but there are indeed other examples of barminess on the same street: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/4v1MkBCBE5yfrj2x6
Looks like a bay, doesn't it. However the DYLs bar parking here.

Looking at the earliest GSV view, (2008), the bays are very clearly marked, yet there is no controlling sign. Councils can be very dozy on these sort of things, so you could win at an adjudication, but would have to risk the full PCN penalty to do so. It is almost certain that the council will not give way. They'll just tell you you were by the double-yellow lines. Like so many motorists we see on here, there is general ignorance of what yellow lines cover on a road.

Anyway, see what the others say as I may be wrong, but don't miss any deadlines on the PCN.

BTW, can you please post up all pages of the PCN, so we can check for fatal errors.

The back of the ticket has an 0845 number, which is relevant based on Paul Bateman v Derbyshire County Council (DJ00037-2209, 10 November 2022).

Council photos:

I can’t imagine anyone else taking the time and expense to mark out parking spaces, but if they deny responsibility I wonder whether they have the responsibility for markings made by others on their highways.

It is possible local businesses might have done so, but they've been marked for a lot longer than a year, they're clearly visible in the GSV from 2008: https://maps.app.goo.gl/F37VdueMtg3LFzkK6

LATOR 18 says (my bold):


Ergo the council was duty-bound to remove any ambiguous bay markings, whether officially sanctioned or not, to avoid confusion to road users. The council has defaulted on that duty, ergo the contravention did not occur.

Try writing up a draft representation based on the above, post the draft on here and we'll tidy it up for you.

Why are these markings 'traffic signs'?

Section 64(1) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984:

I knocked this draft out for your perusal:
Here is my draft:
I wish to appeal this PCN on the basis that I fully believed I was in a designated, and clearly delineated parking space.
I have been parking in the car parking spaces on Elevator Road for over a year, and those spaces have been marked for at least 15 years, as evidenced by Google Street View from 2008.
I have always considered these spaces to be legitimate parking spaces, delineated by a painted broken line, as can clearly be seen in the photos you have submitted as evidence.
The extension of the double yellow lines on this road appeared around three weeks ago, and extend so far as to run alongside the last of the parking spaces on this row, in which I parked on the day in question.
I noticed the double yellow lines, but thought that the fact the parking space was still clearly marked, and had not been erased, meant it was still a legitimate space. I would not have parked there otherwise.
I refer you to LATOR 18 (1 c) which states “in a case where the order revokes, amends or alters the application of a previous order, the removal or replacement of existing traffic signs as the authority considers requisite to avoid confusion to road users by signs being left in the wrong positions.”

Further to this, I refer you to the Road Traffic Regulations Act of 1984 which states: “(1)In this Act “traffic sign” means any object or device (whether fixed or portable) for conveying, to traffic on roads or any specified class of traffic, warnings, information, requirements, restrictions or prohibitions of any description—
(a)specified by regulations made by the relevant authority, or
(b)authorised by the relevant authority,
and any line or mark on a road for so conveying such warnings, information, requirements, restrictions or prohibitions.”

Given this, it was incumbent on Trafford MBC to ensure that the delineated parking space was erased at the same time as the double yellow lines were marked to, as LATOR states “avoid confusion”.

Great, thanks.
Just one other thing - I am now self-employed and know from bitter experience just how time-consuming it can be to take a case to a parking tribunal. I know parking tribunals rarely award costs, but wondered whether it is worth establishing from the outset that I want to charge for my time, as it would eat into my hours of employment.

Just to let you know that Trafford MBC have now withdrawn the PCN following my appeal.
Thank you all for your help, once again!