Free Traffic Legal Advice

This thread shows the importance of real photos of the alleged contravention. GSV of 2023 shows no yellow line, but the CEO's photo does. So in the months between the GSV camera van coming along in May 2023, and the date of the contravention, the council have painted a yellow line to support the yellow "No Waiting" sign.

Hello everybody. Firstly, I want to thank the experts on here for all the info included in the last 8 posts or so.
I didn't know I could search for the CEO pictures from my PCN details.

In terms of "real photos" - I can only apologise I didn't - and that I did indeed "refer" to the GSV pics as well as the pics from the "similar case" from Oct 2023. I had not had the time to revisit the scene since the date of the PCN (Fri 20th).

So to answer other questions:

Why did I park there?

As I stated in my rather rambling opening post - I have lived locally for many years - albeit I haven't visited the town centre much in the last 5 years or so - I knew that during Covid major temporary changes were made with regard to social distancing for pedewstrians - so all park zones became extended pavements - but I assumed that post-Covid things had returned to "normal" (pre Covid) and the space I parked in always used to be limited stay (30 mins) during the day and then "unlimited during the evening". In addition, I have become accustomed to the "normal" markings that the local Council have for loading bays/disabled bays (both with Painted signs on road alongside the markings) - and taxi ranks being yellow painted lines and yellow painted words on the road) - I parked for around 20 minutes - and when I returned - I was "dumbfounded" as to why I had even got a PCN. I didn't have the foresight there and then to take any photos - especially as a doorman in the pub opposite warned me if I stayed any longer the CEOs would come around again and ticket me again (I had removed the PCN from my windscreen to read it). As it happens - they did reappear within seconds of that warning. I did "ask" where the taxi rank was and they walked off and ignored me.

So - I'm not sure how relevant the following is given the expert posts posted above - but here goes. I did revisit the scene again last night - exactly a week after my PCN - I had to park quite a way away - and as I approached on foot I saw a CEO issuing a ticket - by the time I arrived they had gone - but there were six cars with PCNs - five of them parked in "my" bay - and one on the other side of the road.
In addition - there were temporary signs attached to the posts on the pavement - small signs - not much bigger than A4 size - warning of gulley cleaning and no parking regardless of what the signs allowed!!

I took photos of all the PCNs issue - as well as some of the signs - I also confirmed that yes there is now a single yellow line marked in the bay - and going back to the answer to "why I parked there" - again I was ignorant of the road markings -

I meant to take photos of how the council do mark Loading Bays and taxi ranks - but I forgot to walk around that way - I'll try to link to GSV (hopefully they have not changed!) - but it's probably irrelevant anyway - because this was a "shared bay" - so in theory the rules do allow the council to use simple white markings and no writing on the road - despite the fact that the % of time that it is "free parking" is probably less than 50% of the week - hey ho.

If any of these photos are irrelevant and clogging up the forum - I'm happy if an admin deletes them - if that is possible.

My only point is that it seems obvious that the bay is "misleading" if it generates so many PCNs - and regardless of the outcome of my case, I am intending sending an FOI to EHC requesting info as to how many PCNs have been issued since they changed the use of the bay. Be interesting reading.

I had a read of the Parking Order kindly posted - assuming this is the correct order - and it does seem to be - it does seem strange that the wording of the order doesn't match the restrictions shown on the sign.

"Taxi clearways in Fore Street – effective 6:00pm to 8:00am Monday to Saturday inclusive."

Whereas the sign only shows "no waiting except taxis on Fri and Sat nights"

a more detailed description is at sec 7.(2) on page 11 -

Taxi Clearways as identified and shown on the Restricted Parking Zone plan and detailed
in the key to that plan as taxi clearways may be used for the stopping and waiting of taxis
during the hours of 6:00pm to 8:00am Monday to Saturday inclusive for the purpose of
plying for hire and dropping off or picking up of passengers.


All in all - if EHC have indeed used the wrong act for a "Taxi clearway" or "taxi rank" - would someone offer some guidance as to the wording of my appeal of the PCN please?

Many thanks

Hi - just bumping this requesting final wording for any appeal please.

Is it just a case of putting words together along the lines of the "said contravention" did not occur as the space has not been correctly regulated?

Sorry - don't know the full procedure. I didn't want to make it too much "layman speak" if what is required is "technical".

Many thanks

After nearly two months - the response to my appeal came back - and disappointingly my PCN has not been cancelled - there wasn't really much details as to why it wasn't cancelled - just reiteration of where I parked and my responsibility as a motorist to check all signs.

"I have investigated the circumstances raised in your correspondence and have made the decision to not cancel your notice. The reasons for my decision are set out below, along with the options available to you at this stage.
The bay in which you parked operates as a taxi rank Friday and Saturday 6pm – 8am. This is stated on the sign. At other times the bay offers limited parking. As the bay has a dual restriction, there is no requirement to mark the carriageway with the words ‘taxi bay’, motorists must rely upon the sign adjacent to the bay in use.
The Restricted Parking Zone is indicated as required by the Department of Transport and stipulated in the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions. Local Authorities are required to adhere to these Regulations when signing on-street parking restrictions."

So I guess now it's a case of paying up?

Or do I take to tribunal - with a beefed up defence from the similar case to mine (also on this forum) which was defeated at tribunal?

I do feel that the fact that when I returned a week later and there were so many cars with PCNs on the same street/within the same taxi rank does make me believe that the signage is inadequate or the council are misleading/trapping motorists into getting PCNs.

Any help much appreciated.

Thanks

Thanks for the response - There seems to be some agreement within Hertfordshire that the County are effectively the overall controller but they let the districts do the donkey work incl the enforcement.
I'm not sure I could really appeal to the tribunal based on some minor typos of their Council name.

I'm not sure I do have much chance - but it is hugely frustrating that it clearly appears to be unclear signage - given my very minimal evidence of going back a week later and seeing a whole street of ticketed cars - I cannot really believe all the users of Hertford Town centre are that desperate to "take a chance on free parking" - so as per me, they clearly missed the fairly minimal signage of a "part time" taxi rank - and the clear disparity (difference) to every other taxi Rank in Hertford at present or in the past!

Anyone else have any ideas of whether it's work me taking it to tribunal?

Thanks.

@steamingbanana in our experience as long as you challenge the Notice to Owner within 14 days of the date of issue, the council will reoffer the discount anyway if they reject, so there's little risk in carrying on. That being said, given the wording of paragraph 4(2) of Schedule 7 to the Traffic Management Act 2004, there's a good and arguable basis to contend the contravention cited refers to the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, and clearly the council has not created a hackney stand under that provision based on what we know.

It's also very likely that a formal representation on that ground would result in a failure to consider (because the person writing the rejection has no idea what they're doing).

If you let me know once you get the Notice to Owner, I can draft a formal representation for you.