Author Topic: PCN- Barking and Dagenham- 62- Parked with one or more wheels over a footpath  (Read 114 times)

0 Members and 14 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hello Life savers

Just got this PCN yesterday (20th of June, 2026) whilst I was helping one of mate's pregnant wife. The Hazard lights were on and I was already gone for few minutes. Still got the ticket. I requested the officer whether he can cancel it- he said he cant as it has gone to system now. But he put the notes of my circumstances which should be found in their system. I took photo of his badge number and made a short video explaining the situation. He agreed to be on the video as well. May be we can use as evidence or so?

Please find the PCN clicking the following google link:
Google Docs · drive.google.com


Could you please advise- how I go about this?

Much appreciated!!

Regards


Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


You need to set the link to public.


Hi thank you for picking this up. Its now public.

Much appreciated.

Do you think one of these ( exceptions from the London-wide prohibition) applies to your circumstances:

(3)A person shall not be convicted of an offence under this section with respect to a vehicle if he proves to the satisfaction of the court that the vehicle was parked—

(a)in accordance with permission given by a constable in uniform; or

(b)for the purpose of saving life or extinguishing a fire or meeting any other emergency; or

(c)for the purpose of rendering assistance at the scene of an accident or a bona fide breakdown involving one or more vehicles, and—

(i)such assistance could not have been safely or satisfactorily rendered if the vehicle had not been so parked; and

(ii)the vehicle was not left unattended at any time while it was so parked; or

(d)for the purpose of loading or unloading goods [F6for a period not exceeding 20 minutes or such longer period as the council may permit], and—

(i)the loading or unloading of the vehicle could not have been satisfactorily performed if it had not been so parked; and

(ii)the vehicle was not left unattended at any time while it was so parked?

Where exactly is this on Google Maps. Footway parking is indicated at many places on Parsloes Avenue but it's a long road.




Hello both

Thank you for replying. Yes- It definitely does fall on the category b and c (all of it). I was helping a pregnant woman and the car was there only for few minutes with the hazard on. The officer even appeared confused when I asked him- I have even shot a video (and pics-badge number as potential evidence) with him explaining the situation and upon my request he did put a note of this emergency onto the PCN details instantly which could be accessed by the PCN team. He even showed me.

Yes- Parsloes avenue is a long road and has parking box to park which I was unable to do due to the emergency.

Please advise me what I do next.

Much appreciated.

What is the location on Google Maps.

Hi

Not sure what you meant. When you cross the Dagenham heathway station (having station on your left) and take the left after the first signal, the parsloes avenue starts. Look at the bus in the first picture, thats the turn at the signal.

Hope it helps.

Thanks

About here?

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps. · maps.app.goo.gl


OK so there are footway parking bays but the markings don't look good, and the council may have disapplied the footway parking ban here.




Hi

Yes thats the location. Oh okay.The marking does not look. You can park on those box Mon- Sat: 8:30-17:30 I believe.

Let me know my next steps please.

Thank you for looking into it.


To be honest, IMO you would not succeed in convincing an adjudicator on (b) or (c), primarily because you could have parked on the carriageway instead. This is based on reading decisions which, because the adjudicator cannot consider mitigation, at times seem cold and harsh.

But if you thought you were parked in a parking place, then different rules apply.

IMO, I would go for contravention did not occur because you believed you were parked in a parking place covered by the upright traffic signs* restricting use to types of permit holders but also exempting assisted alighting which applied in your case as you were ***********.

Are you local and could you get better photos of the markings please. On GSV it looks like a continuous bay with the 2 signs sitting inside.

What property were you parked outside? The numbers are distinct on GSV which would allow us to pin-point exactly where you were.


Objective:
to shift the focus from exemptions applicable to footway parking to those applicable to parking places;

Also, but perhaps later, to tie them up in knots. Their parking places are not lawful or the yellow line isn't, or maybe both! You cannot have a SYL restricting waiting forming one boundary of a parking place which permits parking when those restrictions cover the same times. And (from reading stamfordman's link) the signs aren't prescribed for use anyway unless the parking place already sits within an area where the footway parking prohibition has been lifted.


*- in the plural. Looks to the casual observer like a long parking place within which sit 2 traffic signs.

Hi Tincombe

Thanks for your input. I was parked in between property numbers 21-23 on that road.

Stamfordman- thank you for sharing this details. I read that thread and it appears they were rejected.

Please let me know about the ground I should prepare for this representation.

Thanks


I was parked in between property numbers 21-23 on that road.

So, no more than 2-3m from an upright traffic sign telling you were in a parking bay!

I suggest reps along these lines:

Contravention did not occur.

On *** I parked in the parking place outside 23/25* Parsloes Avenue. This parking place is reserved for permit holders as can be seen in the GSV snapshot enclosed. You will notice that this traffic sign is not visible in the CEO's photos because they chose to stand at the sign when taking photos.

I accept that I am not a permit holder and therefore on the face of it I was in contravention of this restriction. However, my reason for parking was for the purpose of ******. After delivering her safely(a pun which I suspect would go over their heads), I returned to my car while the CEO was present, as can be seen in your photos. A matter of a couple of minutes, but accept that I was not clock-watching which was a secondary concern: simply helping *** to *** and returning promptly being my objective.

I believe that assisted alighting is an exemption from the permit holder restriction and therefore I was permitted to be so parked.

I cannot understand why the CEO has used the contravention in this case and can only assume that they pressed the wrong button, hence why my representations address what I think they meant.

*- a little bit a licence here..or is it, after all you didn't get a tape measure out!

Based upon your account. You should beef up what you were doing IMO.

There are also the points that our admin identified in a similar location, but maybe that can wait until the next stage as they are unlikely to accept.
The idea is about signage and also that given footway parking is banned in London they sometimes pass a resolution disapplying the ban and it can apply throughout a road.

----------


Dear London Borough of Barking and Dagenham,

I challenge liability for PCN BZ61315872 on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur. Footway parking is permitted on Cartwright Road and there are no signs indicating footway parking is only permitted in marked bays. There is also no rule of law that says footway parking must be within marked bays, indeed there are many areas of London where footway parking is permitted even though there are no bays at all.

Where footway parking is only permitted in marked bays, the council is required to install upright signs compiling to diagrams 667.1 or 668.1 with an auxiliary plate stating "in marked bays", there are no such signs on Cartwright Road.

If footway parking is only permitted in marked bays, the authority has failed to comply with its duties under section 15(5) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974, as a consequence of which the alleged contravention did not occur.

Should the council not be willing to accept this representation, please would you provide a copy of the footway parking resolution for this road.

In any even I further contend that my vehicle was merely stopped and was not parked within the meaning of the legislation. I stopped my car where I did in order to collect my 2 month old baby and grandmother who is disabled (and a blue badge holder). As soon as I walked in I grabbed baby things, opened the door and the civil enforcement officer was standing in front of my car. I asked him not to issue a penalty charge notice at which point he started printing it.

Owing to the brevity of the stop for an amount of time that was purely nominal, I content that my vehicle was not parked, and I note the legislation uses the work "parked" not the word "stopped" (this is not a red route).

It follows that the penalty charge should be cancelled in any event.

Yours faithfully

------

The council apparently rely on:

The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (Charged-For Parking Places) Consolidation Order 2016.
The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (Permit Parking and Waiting Restrictions) (Controlled Parking Zone BEC Extension D) Amendment No. 37 Order 2019.
Map tile Z13.

None of that is a resolution under section 15(4) of the 1974 Act, but even if it were, the council has not erected signs saying footway parking is permitted "in marked bays only" as required by section 15(5), so their case fails on that point, as per Lorna Jennifer Whittick v London Borough of Merton (2160383659, 10 October 2016) and Aliecee Cummings v London Borough of Lewisham (219023696A, 18 July 2019