Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi all.

I received a PCN this afternoon, 21/06/24, for parking on the kerb, next to a sign saying to park on the kerb, whilst clearly displaying a Blue Badge. My question is, are Blue Badge holders not allowed to park on the kerb at the times shown, and have to park fully on the narrow road instead?

I've previously spoken to a couple of CEOs and they have said I could park on the single yellow lines for up to 3 hours whilst displaying a Blue Badge, and I have done on a few occasions, and on this kerb. But today is the first time whilst parked there that I have been given a PCN.

So, should I challenge the PCN? And if yes, any advice on what to write for my challenge would be much appreciated.
Here are the links to my PCN -
Front of PCN
Rear of PCN

Google Streetview link -
Parked here, to the right of the tree

And some of the photos taken by the CEO -
photo 1
photo 2
photo 3

Thanks in advance for any help provided!

CT.

Council photos:













While I don't disagree with HCA on the fact that there does appear to be a contravention, I also think the signage could be clearer and it is worth point this out, so here's my suggestion:



Send this via the council website and keep a screenshot of the confirmation page. In the meantime I'll get hold of the footway parking resolution.

@PMB, what is incorrect about my interpretation of the signs as regards their meaning, however ****-eyed this might be i.e. the waiting restriction relates to vehicles on the carriageway and if it has any traffic management purpose this would be undermined by exempt vehicles parking wholly on the carriageway because an exempt vehicle still represents a potential hazard?

But the signs are there.

The issue is the GP Act which doesn't exempt vehicles displaying BB so, however illogical the outcome, IMO it is the legal position - subject to the extent of the resolution aligning with the sign.

The sign itself does not comply with the regs. However, the symbol is correct. And in any event if the sign is void then surely the blanket prohibition would apply.

The draft seems appropriate for this stage.

Thanks to everyone for the replies.

Especially to @cp8759 for drafting the challenge, which I have now posted on to the council website.
I'll update this thread once I receive a reply.

wait for the NTO that case you found supports the sensible interpretation ans IMO vastly increases your chance or winning

There's a lot of info in the link, seemingly obtained with respect to a 2023 request.

Having trawled through the papers, I cannot find anything which provides for part-time footway parking.

OP, I would put forward the argument along the following lines.

The signs at the location comprise a compliant 'No Waiting' black on yellow traffic sign conveying a waiting restriction for other than for exempted purposes Mon-Sat 8.30-6.30pm and a non-compliant sign disapplying the London-wide footway parking prohibition.

The latter states 'At other times and Sunday'. This is not formatted as specified in the Traffic Signs etc. Regs. As the restriction does not involve parking places, the applicable signs are to be found in Schedule 7 of the regs which prescribe the use of 'white' on 'blue' signs i.e. all writing to be in white on a blue background(as per all parking place signage, Schedule 4 of the regs refers). Instead the council have used a 'shared use' format applicable to parking places - see Section 13 of the Traffic Signs Manual, Chapter 3.

However, the use of the words 'At other times' is permitted although the addition of 'and Sundays' is tautological and therefore questionable(a Sunday being self-evidently a time other than Mon-Sat 8.30-6.30pm).

It is clear that the signs do not in general conform to the prescribed form and therefore it may be argued that they do not adequately convey the restrictions which apply, which is the legal (i.e. Local Authority Traffic Orders etc.) requirement. However, my argument is in respect of the specific conditions which apply in my case.

That I parked on a yellow line displaying a valid disabled person's badge in the prescribed position is not at issue. The CEO issued the PCN because their interpretation of the disapplication of the footway parking prohibition was that this applied only outside of the times given in the no waiting sign i.e. at other times. My interpretation was different.

I believe that in law as I was exempted from the waiting restriction in any event, footway parking was permitted at all times for an exempted motorist or for an exempted purpose e.g. loading. I also looked at the matter intuitively and concluded that it could not have been the council's intention to force exempted motorists to park wholly on the carriageway at a location where the existence of a relaxed footway parking policy showed an overarching traffic management concern as regards the width of the carriageway and available space. If indeed the council's policy is to require disabled motorists to park in the road alongside vehicles of up to 7.5t then this would seem absurd.

I therefore carried out some research on the policy and restrictions and found what appears to be a straightforward policy which is that footway parking has been disapplied 24/7 in this road, and indeed others. The council were well advised and haven't made the mistake of thinking that lifting of the prohibition permits 24/7 parking, it doesn't: it only allows otherwise permitted parking 24/7 e.g. in the case of a part-time waiting restriction waiting on the footway outside of the restricted hours other than for exempted persons and purposes.
It therefore follows that it is not the underlying policy which is at fault, it is officers' subsequent misinterpretation which manifested itself in the design of the 'footway parking' sign.
As regards the legal position (based upon the available evidence of the council's decisions to disapply the prohibition) this is as follows:

Footway parking disapplied 24/7;
Part-time waiting restriction; which means
Motorists displaying a valid BB and other exempted motorists may park with 2 wheels on the footway 24/7.

If the CEO's interpretation is correct then the footway parking sign must be removed and replaced with the standard permissive sign, without timings, and loading restrictions (and sign) put in place which run concurrent with the waiting restriction.

Maybe a bit long, but I thought I'd put down what I consider to be the relevant issues.

My post was more an aide memoir for the next stage!

OP, if you are going with the simple version then IMO you must include that if the authority dispute or disregard the resolution they must explain why in their response. Simply relying upon invalid traffic signs in any rejection would not be sufficient.

Here's my draft reps based on the arguments put forward by @H C Andersen.

It's a bit long, but any advice on what to remove will be much appreciated! I've tried to simplify it, but it wasn't that obvious what I should take out. 

-------------------

I am submitting a formal representation against the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) issued to me, as I believe it was issued based on an incorrect interpretation of the relevant parking regulations.

It is not in dispute that I parked on a yellow line while displaying a valid Blue Badge in accordance with the statutory requirements. The crux of the issue lies in the interpretation of the footway parking prohibition and its interaction with the no-waiting restriction indicated by the sign.

The Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) who issued this PCN appears to have interpreted the disapplication of the footway parking prohibition as applying solely outside the hours specified by the no-waiting sign. However, as a Blue Badge holder, I am legally exempt from the waiting restriction at all times. Consequently, the exemption should extend to footway parking as well, thereby permitting me to park with two wheels on the footway regardless of the time.

It is important to note that I have discussed this matter with several other Civil Enforcement Officers in the area, all of whom have consistently advised that, as a Blue Badge holder, I am permitted to park with two wheels on the footway and that the issuance of a PCN in such circumstances would be incorrect. They have also encouraged me to challenge the PCN, confirming that my understanding of the regulations aligns with standard enforcement practices.

Legally, once an exemption from the waiting restriction is established, it follows that footway parking should be permitted at all times for those exempted, including Blue Badge holders and those engaged in exempted activities such as loading. To interpret otherwise would render the exemption meaningless and would be contrary to both the letter and spirit of the law.

Furthermore, from a traffic management perspective, it is illogical to suggest that the council intends for disabled motorists to be forced to park entirely on the carriageway, particularly in an area where footway parking is generally permitted. Such an interpretation would expose disabled motorists to unnecessary risks by requiring them to park alongside larger vehicles, thus creating safety hazards and undermining the overarching traffic management objectives concerning carriageway width and available space.

My research into the council's policy further substantiates my position. It is evident that the prohibition on footway parking has been expressly disapplied 24/7 on this road and others. The council’s policy is clear: disapplying the prohibition does not grant carte blanche for unrestricted parking; it merely allows parking in accordance with existing restrictions. In the context of a part-time waiting restriction, this permits footway parking outside the restricted hours for those exempted, such as Blue Badge holders.

The issue, therefore, is not with the underlying policy but with the erroneous interpretation by the CEO, which has resulted in the misapplication of the footway parking regulations and the incorrect issuance of this PCN.

To summarize the legal position:
1. The prohibition on footway parking has been disapplied 24/7 at this location.
2. A part-time waiting restriction is in place.
3. As a motorist displaying a valid Blue Badge, I am legally entitled to park with two wheels on the footway at any time.

Additionally, I would like to bring to your attention the precedent set in London Tribunals Case reference 2190057621, where the adjudicator stated that "the local authority may face wasted costs order in the future if they continue to issue PCNs for footway parking to disabled badge holders". Should this PCN not be reviewed and cancelled in light of the clear legal position and consistent advice from other CEOs, I will be compelled to request that the council reimburse any costs incurred as a result of pursuing this appeal to London Tribunals.

Furthermore, I remind the council of its obligation to provide a full and detailed explanation should my representation be rejected. The council must address each of the points I have raised and explain the reasoning behind any decision to uphold the PCN.

If the CEO’s interpretation is correct, then the current footway parking signage is fundamentally flawed and should be removed. It is apparent that the signage in question does not conform to the prescribed form as required by law. Consequently, it may be argued that the signs do not adequately convey the applicable restrictions, failing to meet the legal requirement of clearly communicating the regulations to motorists. It must be replaced with standard permissive signage that excludes any timing restrictions, and loading restrictions should be implemented to align with the waiting restriction.

In light of the foregoing legal arguments, the advice I have received from other CEOs, and the potential for wasted costs orders, I respectfully request that the PCN be reviewed and cancelled.

-------------------------

Thanks in advance for any help given!