Lewisham Footway Parking PCN - Lewisham vs Greenwich - Does Lewisham Have Authority at This Location?

Hi all,

I'd appreciate some opinions before deciding whether to risk the discount and continue this appeal.

I received a Lewisham PCN (Code 62A – parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath) on Creekside, SE8 outside approximately 71–73 Creekside, just north of Berthon Street.

I accept that my vehicle was partly on the footway. My appeal is not that the contravention didn't physically occur.

Instead, my argument is that Lewisham may not have had the legal authority to enforce at this location.

The evidence I've found so far is:

Lewisham's online borough boundary map places the location on the Greenwich side of the borough boundary.
Greenwich's online borough boundary map also places the location within Greenwich.
Greenwich's Road Register contains USRN 20800409 (CREEKSIDE), maintained by Greenwich, with coordinates 537544,177641 to 537569,177520, which appear to include the location of where my vehicle was.
FindMyStreet shows both the Greenwich USRN and a Lewisham USRN for Creekside. Both appear to use the same centreline geometry, making it unclear whether responsibility is split by side of the road or whether there is another explanation.
Lewisham's Highway Register contains the entry: "Creekside | Bdy | 609 | Boundary Rd – maintained by Lewisham south of southern kerb line Berthon Street."

(My vehicle was north of Berthon Street, so the Highway Register seems to indicate its not within their jurisdiction??)

I submitted an informal challenge arguing that Lewisham had not established jurisdiction at that location. The rejection did not address that point and instead consisted almost entirely of a standard explanation that footway parking is prohibited in London.

My questions are:

Is this a legally viable ground of appeal, assuming the footway falls within Greenwich's highway?
Does the Highway Register or USRN information have any real evidential value in determining the enforcement authority?
Has anyone come across similar cases involving boundary roads and highway authority?

I'm also planning to contact both Lewisham and Greenwich Highways to ask them to confirm which authority is responsible for the footway adjacent to 71–73 Creekside and whether they can provide a highway extent plan.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!!!

Are you the registered keeper of the vehicle and with current DVLA details?

Pl post your reps, their response the full PCN and GSV of the location. See the forum instructions as regards posting docs, pl don't attempt to transcribe.

As regards the law in respect of jurisdiction, the Act provides:

1).

(5)References in this Part of this Act to the enforcement authority in relation to such contraventions in Greater London are—

(a)as respects parking, or any matter connected with or relating to parking, on or adjacent to a GLA road, to Transport for London;

(b)as respects parking, or any matter connected with or relating to parking, on or adjacent to a road other than a GLA road, to the London local authority in whose area the road is situated.

Also, have a look at the refuse bins at the properties, whose logo do they carry Greenwich or Lewisham?

Hi Tincombe,
Thanks for your response.
Apologies for the missing info!

PCN details:


My appeal:



PCN appeal response:



And to your bin question, the bins all along that road are Greenwich.

Thanks for your help.

Its the usual Fob-Off letter that totally ignores the key point in your reps. SO, if you are prepared to take them all the way to London Tribunals, you'll need to now wait for the Notice to Owner, submit your reps again, then when rejected, register an appeal with London Tribunals.

Yeah, I'm very disappointed that they didn't respond to my actual points!
Do you think I have a valid case? Do I have a chance of winning this?

Council checker, https://www.gov.uk/find-local-council, with postcode SE8 3DW for 73 Creekside shows council tax for that house is Greenwich as well so game on. Seems like a pretty certain win to me.

The bins are the giveaway on the ground, and the last post's reference in terms of a document.

Are you the registered keeper etc?

I ask because only the keeper may make representations at the next stage.

From what you've said, the CEO is acting without lawful authority, no penalty may be demanded by Lewisham and the PCN is void.

Thanks for the replies!

Tincombe, yep, I am the registered keeper.

Based on your support, I shall fight on!

Must add: my main concerns were the split in responsibility shown on FindMyStreet and the Lewisham stickered lampposts on the footway!

Its the usual Fob-Off letter that totally ignores the key point in your reps. SO, if you are prepared to take them all the way to London Tribunals, you'll need to now wait for the Notice to Owner, submit your reps again, then when rejected, register an appeal with London Tribunals.

Hi, the notice to owner letter has arrived. Do you have any recommendations for how to write my response? Many thanks!

I suggest you write a short submission, and include your original reps as a reference. You need to emphasise that their letter tells you nothing you did not already know, and totally ignores the point made in the representations that your car was not parked with the Borough of Lewisham as their own records show. You therefore again request that the PCN be cancelled, and the person who wrote the original letter of rejection be trained in the use of maps.