Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: cupotea on May 17, 2024, 12:04:30 pm
-
OP, had setting down not been allowed ...it isn't unless the parking places order states that it is, the exemption applies to on-street waiting restrictions not off-street conditions. IMO, the adjudicator misapplied the law, but there were are.
As stamfordman put it, a non-existent exemption to a non-existent restriction.
-
Yes it's an odd situation - a non-existent exemption seems to have been allowed for a non-existent restriction.
Please keep Southwark's pack if you can - may be useful in another case.
-
Thank you both for your help with this (and anyone else, difficult to see on my phone). Very frustrating all things considered. I think it's really underhand the way they go about these things considering the info I provided. Fyi in the massive evidence pack I was sent, printed in colour and in duplicate (great use of my council tax), they themselves stated that the parking areas at all southwark health clubs are classed as off-street, as we had informed them, and therefore had setting down not been allowed I still would've had them on that technicality. As suggested I do feel like complaining but not sure I've got the energy, I imagine it would be months of waiting and just fall on deaf ears.
Thanks again, it's much appreciated.
-
With respect, the finding 'Setting off is permitted on double yellow lines, as is accompanying a vulnerable passenger, such as a young child..' surely only applies only if the DYL are on-street TSRGD markings. If the OP argues that they were parked off-street then this finding couldn't apply IMO unless the order created sich an exemption.
-
The OP could write to Southwark asking where the off-street order applies according to the leisure centre plan.
-
Well done for sticking with it
16 May to 11 Jan, 8 months give or take.
8 months during which you might have changed your habits for fear of falling foul of the council.
8 months, for the best part of which the council was a judge in its own cause.
8 months during which their ignorance of or, even worse, knowledge of but unwillingness to apply, the law has held sway in Southwark.
What do you think they'll do now? Carpet, under and sweep spring to mind.
You might want to leave matters as they are and no-one could blame you. Alternatively, you might want to bring this to the attention of someone in authority and hope that further training is given.
-
This appeal was won on the alighting exemption. Shame the on-street status not tested.
---------------------
Case Details
Case reference 2240467447
Appellant
Authority London Borough of Southwark
VRM DE16 KGG
PCN Details
PCN JK13368358
Contravention date 16 May 2024
Contravention time 17:27:00
Contravention location THE CASTLE LEISURE CENTRE
Penalty amount GBP 130.00
Contravention Parked restricted street during prescribed hours
Referral date -
Decision Date 10 Jan 2025
Adjudicator Anju Kaler
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction
cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.
Reasons
The agreed facts are that the vehicle was at the stated location on double yellow lines and a Penalty Charge Notice was issued.
The Appellant says he was in a hurry to drop off his 8 year old daughter for a swimming lesson and he accompanied her into the leisure centre.
the Civil Enforcement Officer observed the vehicle for 2.37 minutes before issuing the Penalty Charge Notice and saw no sign of activity.
Setting off is permitted on double yellow lines, as is accompanying a vulnerable passenger, such as a young child. That could take a few minutes if a child has to be left at a safe place in care of others. I am satisfied the exemption applied and so allow the appeal.
-
OP, the council are wrong, end of. Read your Highway Code - Traffic Signs.
Some while ago, Cp posted various tribunal decisions on the issue, but second-guessing still abounds!!
In your case IMO it does NOT matter whether an adjudicator accepts your account(that is escorting your 8-year old daughter into the leisure centre and returning immediately), the council are damned by these statements in the NOR:
'...I can confirm that area your vehicle wa(sic) parked in is classed as an on-street location..'
'You have stated that you were under the impression that the practice of assisted alighting is permitted. I can confirm that dropping off passengers for any length of time would not exempt you from the rules that are in force.'
IMO, just register your appeal.
Contravention did not occur;
Procedural impropriety.
You rely upon your formal representations and procedural matters arising from the Notice of Rejection of Representations.
You would add to your formal reps(called 'further representations') which you would submit later after seeing the council's case summary(you could do it now because the case summary is not primary evidence whereas the NoR is, however, I've no doubt that the council might embellish its stupidity in the CS, so wait and bring whatever other damning comments they might make to the adjudicator's attention).
If I were you, I would want this to go the full distance so that you can get the adjudicator's decision in writing on the fundamental issue of what you do on a regular basis being lawful. This should ensure that the council don't revert to their old ways but this wouldn't prevent them issuing PCNs because all a CEO would know is that there's an unattended vehicle on DYL, but at least you could prepare yourself with a standard challenge which includes the decision.
-
This thread has examples an assisted alighting/boarding - Southwark is wrong and badly so. Assistance is an exemption but it must take no longer than necessary.
I also reckon there's something in their off-street order for this location than renders this not on-street. They would have to supply evidence to satisfy an adjudicator.
-
Thanks for the response. It seems their argument is it didn't look like anyone was alighting (as I didn't leave the doors open and engine running?) and they don't believe it's off-street, however I can't find any evidence it is a street (you'd think they would reference the street name in the ticket if it was?). They only refer to the google maps picture I provided but I also provided snips and links from 2 other mapping sites that Southwark themselves use that show double yellows ending outside of the car park. Below are the snips - I've highlighted where I was parked and you can see where the double yellows end on Brook Drive. Yes, there are double yellows marked within the carpark itself but as I say it doesn't appear to be a street but an off-street car park:
(https://i.imgur.com/4pm0eiM.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/LLXOFHk.jpeg)
Would be good to get a second opinion before I go all the way but appreciate your input.
-
This looks like rubbish squared by Southwark - assisted alighting/boarding is an exemption to a no waiting restriction (it isn't no stopping) and this is just flat out wrong by them.
And are they really saying their off-street order doesn't apply in the leisure centre? Where does it apply?
They are trying to buy you off with the discount but I would take this to the tribunal but wait for other views.
-
Morning.
I have finally had a response from Southwark Parking to my representation. I thought I kept a copy but I can't find it but essentially I responded to say:
- I had been dropping my daughter off for her swimming lesson, referencing "assisted boarding and alighting", which they discounted.
- I provided links https://streets.appyway.com/southwark and https://geomap.southwark.gov.uk/connect/analyst/mobile/#/main, which both show yellow lines ending outside the leisure centre but they only reference gmaps in their response.
- I included the link to the Gazette https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2522269 which they said have no bearing on this.
Just to note that I noticed my first name was spelt incorrectly on my V5 which I hadn't noticed previously and which I have since updated so although they reference it in this letter, as I responded with the correct spelling and they flagged this, it's an error on my part not theirs.
Below is their response.
(https://i.imgur.com/WwcrW0s.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/OXYXJ50.jpeg)
Any suggestions?
Thanks.
-
The key is that Southwark has designated its leisure centre car parks with off-street orders and you have been issued with an on-street PCN with the location of a leisure centre. The pictures below certainly look like you were in the centre and not on-street.
If you need to back this up then it is assisted alighting not loading that is the exemption.
This may be the relevant notice of order:
2. The effect of the order will be to provide off-street car parking controls in car parks located within or adjacent to CAMBERWELL LEISURE CENTRE, THE CASTLE LEISURE CENTRE, DULWICH LEISURE CENTRE, PECKHAM PULSE, SEVEN ISLANDS LEISURE CENTRE and SURREY DOCKS WATERSPORTS CENTRE:
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2522269
(https://i.ibb.co/yqx7kZm/sth3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/bRSjkmn/sth2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/nD921TK/sth1.jpg)
-
Hi,
Links below are to the notice to owner I received:
https://imgur.com/WsHNqfT
https://imgur.com/ncjCnjy
https://imgur.com/hPxlCfd
https://imgur.com/H4nNmJP
In order to make a representation would I need to select "The contravention did not occur" as my grounds and then argue my case? The next step on the website then gives further options, the first being "at the time I am supposed to have been in contravention, I was loading and unloading" and then have a box where I can give additional details. At this point would I then just state my original case, that I was dropping my daughter off, or would I go further at this point and state that I don't believe it's on-street parking as there is nothing the suggest this is a road but more likely off-street parking etc - or do I leave those points until a later time?
Bearing in mind when they rejected my initial response that I was only gone for 5 minutes and got the ticket after 3 that, "...as of the end of July 2023, when new enforcement protocols were agreed upon, the CEO only needs to give a 2 minute observation period, instead of the 5 minutes previously given, and if no evidence of loading, and no driver is seen the CEO can issue a PCN to the vehicle under current legislation."
Thanks in advance.
-
Apologies, yes I am still here however the notifications were going to junk mail. I've resolved that now so they will come to my inbox.
I can't remember exactly what I wrote and don't have a note of it but it was along the lines of what was suggested, i.e.
"On Thurs May 16th I took my 8-year old daughter to her lesson at the leisure centre and as normal I parked my car and escorted her to the centre, booked-in, handed her over to one of the instructors and returned directly to my car. I estimate that this took me no more than 5 minutes by which time the PCN had been issued. I can understand why the CEO issued the PCN because the car was unattended, none the less, escorting my daughter is permitted in these circumstances and I should be grateful if the authority would promptly confirm that they have cancelled the PCN."
I finally received a response from Southwark dated June 27th stating the following:
We acknowledge the receipt of your correspondence challenging the issue of the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN)
JK13368358.
We have carefully considered what you have said but we have decided not to cancel the PCN.
You were issued a PCN for parking on a double yellow line. Double yellow lines mean no parking at any time, except to load
or unload. However, the Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) observed your vehicle and saw no loading or unloading taking place.
Because the rule applies 24 hours a day, seven days a week, double yellow lines do not need to be accompanied by a sign.
I have noted from your comments that your were dropping your daughter off to her swimming lesson.
I have also noted from your comments that you were gone for 5 minutes and the PCN was issued within 3 minutes.
Please be advised that as of the end of July 2023, when new enforcement protocols were agreed upon, the CEO only needs
to give a 2 minute observation period, instead of the 5 minutes previously given, and if no evidence of loading, and no driver
is seen the CEO can issue a PCN to the vehicle under current legislation.
If a vehicle is left unattended by the driver, it is considered to be parked which is prohibited on the double yellow lines.
In summary, after reviewing the CEO’s notes and photographic evidence (provided below) I can confirm that this PCN was
correctly issued and remains upheld.
I've missed the chance to pay the reduced amount now anyway so I may as well crack on. Next I should receive a notice to owner at some point and can then take it from there, although I don't know the process.
As you say, cp8759, there doesn't appear to be a restriction showing on https://streets.appyway.com/southwark nor on another system used in Southwark, https://geomap.southwark.gov.uk/connect/analyst/mobile/#/main so that may be proof enough?
Thanks for comments and info.
-
@cupotea here's The London Borough of Southwark (Pedestrian and cycle zones) (Lyndhurst Primary School) Traffic Order 2023 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HVlo8cx8ikYKv3OIoNjP2tG8D9mWSn8O/view)
Are you still with us?
-
@cupotea firstly the exemption for assisted boarding and alighting is very well established in law, here's a few of examples:
Roy Gould v Shepway District Council (SH 05045K, 24 February 2008) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FLhLGP1wFnqPTGDJek3GKXuAUClSxU7i/view)
Wajid Khan v London Borough of Waltham Forest (2160230738, 30 June 2016) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t3IPfXcxF0FkUHrS2N6KDkzrElZ4SVU3/view)
Nasima Begum v London Borough of Redbridge (2220685150, 2 November 2022) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QkJe3v7ZdTObVDGKXdk9V-jEvx3xO8uj/view)
Asim Bhuta v London Borough of Newham (2220099690, 22 March 2022) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VZduk-P1Dujhkgcma1wYsU2rarGkkx2w/view)
Nabil Rohman v City of Westminster (2230560708, 10 February 2024) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sNMXTXDU79DbHX41ugCoA9Ei844QtvhY/view)
Noor Ali v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (2230556595, 23 March 2024) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1l_Jl23NgxEmRdVvG63KB1LPSBcXLJf5z/view)
You'll note the last four had something to do with me.
Also the definition of a road for these purposes can be tediously complicated but in short, yes this could be a road and I suspect it probably is, but in this case it doesn't matter (if you want to know why it's a road, have a read of the last three paragraphs of Nisha Patel v London Borough of Hounslow (2190096099, 13 April 2019) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hPJXsBp3cLjU0nRx29hX4p6M15Y5A09R/view)).
The PCN alleged an on-street contravention, so the restriction is only enforceable if there is an on-street traffic regulation order that creates a waiting restriction at this location. The on-street waiting restriction for Southwark are on https://streets.appyway.com/southwark and it's plain that there are no on-street restrictions where you were parked, the nearest on-street restrictions are the yellow lines and paid parking bays on Brook Drive:
(https://i.imgur.com/Wd0eocM.png)
Of course it is entirely possible if not probable that there is an off-street parking places order designating this area as a car park, but even if there is the council only gets one shot at issuing the PCN and if they've put the wrong contravention code, it's too late for them to fix it now. So basically as long as you don't mess this up, it's all but a guaranteed win in the end.
It's therefore not really a question of giving it a go, it's a question of not being intimidated by the inevitable council rejection. There is a fair chance you will have to take this to the tribunal, but again as long as this is argued properly you are very likely to win.
In the first instance please show us what you sent to the council on 21 May.
-
A pretty high risk way of testing your theory.
Do you really want to test this at the informal stage and, just because they can, have the authority reject and go through the NTO, formal reps etc. stages.
If you want to find out then write to the council and ask for an extract of the relevant traffic order which restricts parking along the front of the leisure centre. Include a diagram if it would help.
-
Thanks again, i'll give that a go.
Then I'm tempted to ask why you parked on them!
As i've said, I don't believe this is a road. I can't paint yellow lines on my drive and start charging anyone who parks on it because I feel like it, I don't think this is any different.
-
I thought there was no such grace period on double yellows.
Then I'm tempted to ask why you parked on them!
Anyway, I'll refer you to this Tribunal decision, short, sharp and to the point:
https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/keycases/Wanambwa%2C%20exemptions%2C%20unloading%20alighting%20distinction%20edited%20version.pdf
YOU don't need to know the legislation and frankly I always recommend that lay owners avoid its use unless required. In this case, Martin Wood's last comment should be taken on board:
It is understandable that the Appellant, as a lay person, focused
on the wrong exemption. It is, however, very surprising that the Council did not
recognise the circumstances for what they were. Had it done so, this matter should
never have needed to get as far as an appeal. I allow this appeal.
Your task is to explain the circumstances - and provide evidence e.g. to the effect that your daughter attended a lesson that day etc. - it is not to refer to X regulation under Y Act.
-
Much appreciated. Out of interest, do you have a link that states we're "entitled to rely upon an exemption to the blanket waiting restriction"? I haven't been able to find anything, I thought there was no such grace period on double yellows. I expect they won't accept that excuse and i'll have to risk it by taking it further. And also with my other query, I don't believe it's a street, it doesn't have a street name and isn't shown on any maps. It's off-street as far as I can tell so i'm not sure it's even a valid code. If I don't mention this in my first response and they reject on whatever basis would it then be too late to raise that point?
-
**intro like on Fridays my daughter has a regular ** lesson at the leisure ** On *** I took my 8-year old daughter to her lesson at the leisure centre and as normal I parked my car and escorted her to the centre, booked-in, handed her over to one of the instructors and returned directly to my car. I estimate that this took me no more than ** minutes by which time the PCN had been issued. I can understand why the CEO issued the PCN because the car was unattended, none the less, escorting my daughter is permitted in these circumstances and I should be grateful if the authority would promptly confirm that they have cancelled the PCN.
...as regards the contravention. I don't think that it's necessary to refer to other matters but if others do then you might want to add to the above.
-
Hi,
I've updated as per the instrcutions, thanks for that. Everything was in doc attached but pcn should also be found here: https://imgur.com/gallery/pcn-jk13368358-2yTT2ly
(https://i.imgur.com/FYbtA6S.jpeg)
Google maps of location here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/4jE9Rchuy5dBKH659
And Southwark council online maps showing details like where bays and lines are can be found: https://streets.appyway.com/southwark & https://geomap.southwark.gov.uk/connect/analyst/mobile/#/main
And finally, yes I dropped her off for her lesson and returned to my car.
Thanks :)
-
Not wishing to be picky, but..
Yes, exactly, I accompanied my 8yr old for approx. 5 mins to her lesson, the ticket was issued within 3 minutes.
..and you left her in safe hands and returned to the car without undue delay?
If so, then you're entitled to rely upon an exemption to the blanket waiting restriction...the CEO wouldn't have known this because you weren't there to explain.
-
Please post up a scan or picture of the PCN. No need to redact anything as this was served on-street or in the car-park. All as per the instructions in the Read This First sticky post (https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/) at the top of this forum.
-
Hello,
Yes, exactly, I accompanied my 8yr old for approx. 5 mins to her lesson, the ticket was issued within 3 minutes.
Thanks,
T
-
To be precise, you didn't drop your daughter off, you accompanied her to the leisure centre because the car was left unattended.
Before setting out the exemptions to the contravention, how old is your daughter, did you take her and return straight away and how long do you estimate you were away from the vehicle?
-
Hi all,
I dropped my daughter off at a leisure centre yesterday and came back to a parking ticket after 5 mins. I've never had one there before and although there are double yellow markings on the floor, and some bays for disabled badge holders (which I was not in) i've often wondered if they could give a ticket there. It's not a street (what defines one?!), they could only give a description of where the car was, "The Castle leisure centre" which is in Elephant and Castle, London.
I've attached photos from a couple of official Southwark council parking websites that don't show this as a street, and from google maps. Please let me know if you need further info. I can't see how this can be valid if this isn't classed as a street?!
Thanks in advance,
T
(https://imgur.com/a/2yTT2ly)
[attachment deleted by admin]