I am handling the appeal at the tribunal against all three PCNs, I have just had this response come back from the council under the EIR (https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/eir-and-access-to-information/guide-to-the-environmental-information-regulations/what-are-the-eir/):We are unable to find a copy of the resolution.
@Carlos CGD it looks like all your neighbours have been conned and can join the "mugged club".
@Carlos CGD well unfortunately this thread wasn't brought to my attention when it started, and I can't reply to most threads as I'm normally swamped with tribunal appeals, but we are where we are.
I've never seen a footway parking resolution from Ealing, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't be able to produce one. I have requested it anyway, and Ealing are often quite quick at coming back to me, so there's no harm in waiting to see if it comes back before the discount expires.
I will not get into the footway parking issue as others have commented extensively. On the subject of "two tickets for the same offence" here is the key case from the London Tribunals (previously PATAS) to quote:
Go into www.londontribunals.gov.uk, select Register of Appeals and then enter the case number 2110189461.
The adjudicator said in essence "A car does not commit a new offence every 24 hours if it hasn't moved in the meantime. It's a continuous contravention".
This might help you to get off one of the PCNs.
Are you or are you not in an area (your side of the road) where ONLY 2-wheeled footway parking is permitted according to the signs in situ?
Were you parked with 4 wheels on the footway?
No point dancing around these objective fundamentals.
That you've done this for decades etc. are subjective comments in support of which you would appear to have no objective evidence.
This is not to say it's not true, but you should recognise the challenge which you would face at adjudication.
@Carlos CGD well unfortunately this thread wasn't brought to my attention when it started, and I can't reply to most threads as I'm normally swamped with tribunal appeals, but we are where we are.
I've never seen a footway parking resolution from Ealing, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't be able to produce one. I have requested it anyway, and Ealing are often quite quick at coming back to me, so there's no harm in waiting to see if it comes back before the discount expires.
Did you ask for a resolution that sets aside the footway parking ban?
I can't but still think there must be a way to liaise on a collective challenge - you won't be happy if you pay and find a neighbour took it to the tribunal and won.
OP, can I try and simplify this issue pl.
Traffic signs indicate that footway parking with 2 wheels is permitted in parts of Darwin Drive.
There are no signs indicating that footway parking is permitted in Darwin Drive with 4 wheels on the footway.
There are 3 pairs of footway parking signs(a pair being footway parking is permitted to one side but not the other).
Darwin Drive house numbers are odd/even on opposite sides of the road.
One pair of signs is situated o/s no. 19 which indicates that from 19 to no. 73 footway parking with two wheels is permitted.
One pair of signs is situated o/s no.73 indicating that beyond this point footway parking is not permitted.
One pair is situated o/s no. 34 which indicates that from no. 34-no. 2 2-wheel footway parking is permitted.
Now for the crunch.....
Your car was parked with 4 wheels on the footway, contrary to the signs' permission, o/s no. ****?
Please confirm and indicate which house number should be inserted in ****.
This isn't to say that 4 wheels is not permitted e.g. plenty of contra indicators that 4-wheel parking is commonplace including a disabled parking place situated wholly on the footway without the benefit of a traffic sign indicating that this is permitted as an exception to the prevailing 2-wheel permission from which it is reasonable to deduce that the prevailing permission IS 4 wheels and not 2.
But let's get the basics in play first pl.
I am, but I think our appeals are at different stages. I have the notice to owner, I believe he is at a level two complaint with the council.
Just to emphasise that the formal appeal process (PCN/NTO/Appeal) is a completely different thing to a complaint to a Council. Both can co-exist, be at different stages and proceed at different speeds.
You asked on the other thread what the benefit would be of getting hold of "a copy of the footway parking resolution made under section 15(4) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 that applies to this road", which Stamfordman recommended, so I'll attempt to explain. For a PCN to be valid, the wording of the PCN needs to follow a set of rules AND you need to have broken a rule, AND that rule needs to have been communicated to you in the language of traffic signs. A lot of cases that we see here are won on because the council messed up one of these 3 bits, so we like to check that the council have done them all correctly. The way pavement parking works is that it's generally allowed, except in London where it's banned, except for a few bits of London where it is officially unbanned by a London Council, which they do by making a formal resolution under section 15(4) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974. The Council then put up signs that match exactly what the resolution says, and you're then allowed to park where the signs say you can. Well, that's the theory, but in practice, we often find that the signs don't match the resolution. If you prove this to a traffic adjudicator, they will tear the ticket up for you. This happens often enough for us to recommend getting hold of the resolution and checking it pretty much every time we see one of those 'you can park on the pavement' signs being relied on by a London Council.
I am, but I think our appeals are at different stages. I have the notice to owner, I believe he is at a level two complaint with the council.
Are you liaising with Martin Blackwell as per the other case I posted?
You have posted a photo of a pair of traffic signs, one indicating the end of a permitted footway parking area, the other the start.
We have no context, no idea where this - and possibly others - are located and therefore their scope.
You'll need to take a few photos pl so that we have a clear idea.
The sign you've posted does NOT restrict footway parking to marked areas and if it applies to you then the council's dead in the water, they just don't know it yet.
Page 174 gives examples of the required sign for parking 'in marked bays'.
You've blanked the location and other details. It's hard to help properly unless you do what we ask in the read this advice.
Did you challenge the PCN at first stage?
What stages are the other PCNs at?
All these PCNs are probably winnable, based on your narrative, but the downside is you'd have to take the council to London Tribunals and risk the full PCN penalty.
The other arrow in your quiver, is to get all the PCN recipients together and send a letter to your local councillor. ALso telephone about this, because it looks like somebody in the enforcement office has gone berserk. It's all about money, you see, the council couldn't care less about the parking.