You can see the difference between the two signs. The 'wrong' one is a blue on white plate whereas the correct sign is purely blue. The correct sign doesn't state 'At other times', because it's not permitted, it states the times which is what's required.
My suggestion would be:
PCN *****
I am making informal representations on the basis that the contravention did not occur and the penalty exceeded the amount permitted in the circumstances of the case.
Firstly, I would say that I hold a Blue Badge which was displayed as required at the time the PCN was issued.
Now I would refer the authority to the sign in their evidence taken by the CEO. This shows two signs found in Schedule 4 of the governing regulations, specifically items 1 in the Part 3 sign table and item 3 in the Part 4 sign timetable. I also refer you to Part 2, the references to 'yellow' and 'white' panel signs and how these are to be arranged when displayed on the same post, as at the location.
The council's yellow sign is prescribed for the purposes of regulating waiting along a length of road. However, the white panel sign, which is prescribed for regulating a parking place which is situated partly off the carriageway, is not prescribed because it includes the words 'At other times' and it is these words which lie at the centre of the council's incorrect signage.
These words are often found within a parking place sign and are permitted but only when they serve to contrast with other times stated in the sign e.g. Pay and Display Mon-Sat 9am - 4pm At other times Permit Holders Z etc.
But this is not what the council have done here. Instead, they have used the words to contrast with the yellow panel waiting restriction which has nothing whatsoever to do with the wording of the parking place sign.
Before this point is rejected, I refer you to the sign combination which can be seen in the background of photo no.2 enclosed, a close-up of which is enclosed as photo no.3. Here you will see a correctly formatted footway parking sign. Again it is mounted in combination with a yellow panel sign but instead of stating 'At other times' and thereby asking the motorist to refer to an unrelated waiting sign, it correctly gives those hours as required. Birkdale is an excellent example of how footway parking with associated waiting restrictions should be signed, Firham Park Avenue is not. In fact Firham Park Avenue is not even a footway parking sign, it's a parking place sign which therefore could not give rise to an alleged footway parking contravention.
But the fundamental nonsense which underpins the council's approach in this matter is that in Birkdale BB holders who are permitted to park on the waiting restriction are forced to do so wholly on the carriageway for 1 hour a day at exactly the time when there is presumably a traffic management rationale for regulating and minimising on-street parking through the waiting restriction.
Similarly for Firham and my PCN which was issued because I had parked in an unlawfully marked parking place with two wheels off the carriageway during the period of a waiting restriction and penalised for doing so during the period of 'At other times' which, for reasons given above, is not a permissible restriction anyway.
I urge the authority to cancel my PCN and advise council colleagues to rectify their signage and examine the underlying rationale as a matter of urgency.
Yes, it could be shortened if it's assumed that they'll reject out of habit. But why not go full blast, at least you've got the basis of formal reps if needed later.
And whether parking is even permitted on the footway anyway hasn't even been touched on.
