I write in response to the Notice to Keeper issued in respect of the above PCN.
I make this representation on the basis that the alleged contravention did not occur.
Footway parking is a permitted activity on Hall Place Crescent, evidenced by the presence of multiple marked parking bays which are painted partially on the footway. The existence of such bays necessarily implies that a resolution under section 15(4) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 has been passed to allow footway parking on this road. The question is therefore not whether footway parking is prohibited on Hall Place Crescent in general, but whether any such resolution applies selectively and whether the council can demonstrate that the location where my vehicle was parked falls outside the terms of the resolution.
If the council believes that I contravened the terms of a footway parking resolution that permits parking only in specific areas, it is incumbent on the council to produce a copy of that resolution and to show precisely how it applies to the road in question, including any maps or diagrams referred to in it.
Unless and until the council provides evidence of such a resolution and shows how the location in question falls outside its scope, I contend that the contravention did not occur. It is not for the keeper to prove the existence or content of a traffic resolution; the burden of proof lies squarely with the enforcement authority.
In light of the above, I respectfully request that this PCN be cancelled.
Yours faithfully,
I write in response to the Notice to Keeper issued in respect of the above PCN.
I respectfully submit that the alleged contravention did not occur. Footway parking is clearly permitted on Hall Place Crescent, as evidenced by the marked parking bays that are painted partially on the footway. There are no signs or markings in the vicinity indicating that footway parking is restricted only to the marked bays, nor is there any signage indicating a general prohibition on footway parking on this road.
In areas where footway parking is generally prohibited, but selectively permitted by resolution, the council must ensure that the effect of the resolution is clearly conveyed through signage, in accordance with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD). The absence of such signage in this location leads to a legitimate expectation that footway parking is permitted throughout the road, and not confined strictly to the painted bays.
If the council believes a contravention has occurred, I request that you provide, as part of your response to this representation, a copy of the footway parking resolution under section 15(4) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974, which governs footway parking on this road. It is for the council to demonstrate the legal basis for any restriction, and to show that this restriction was clearly and lawfully conveyed to motorists at the location.
Given the apparent absence of any signage, and the existence of marked bays that imply permission to park partially on the footway, I believe it was entirely reasonable to conclude that footway parking is permitted along this street.
In light of the above, I respectfully request that this PCN be cancelled.
Yours faithfully,
So, you're pinning your hopes not only on the prohibition being disapplied where you were but also that where you were would be a 'marked bay' area in such a resolution. IMO, this is unlikely in itself given your proximity to the dropped footway behind you.
IMO, it's not the authority's task to prove that there isn't a prohibition,More than one adjudicator has stated that where footway parking is permitted on a particular road, the burden shifts on the enforcement authority to show that the vehicle was parked in breach of the underlying resolution.
the contravention occurred in Hall Place Crescent whereas GSV shows that permitted footway parking applies in a discrete section only of Marden Crescent.That would be for Sally Jacobs to argue.
IMO, it's not the authority's task to prove that there isn't a prohibition,More than one adjudicator has stated that where footway parking is permitted on a particular road, the burden shifts on the enforcement authority to show that the vehicle was parked in breach of the underlying resolution.
@cesur can you check those signs are still there and visible?
Draft representation:Dear London Borough of Bexley,
Footway parking is allowed on Hall Place Crescent, there are numerous parking bays painted partly on the footpath and and no signs indicate that footway parking is permitted only within those bays. In the circumstances I contend that the contravention did not occur because there must be a footway parking resolution allowing footway parking on this road, if you believe I have contravened the terms of that resolution then I ask that you supply a copy.
Yours faithfully,
Take a screenshot of the confirmation page. You cannot rely on some other footway parking resolution for some other location, as there is likely a different one for this location, but it's still up to the council to produce it.
Based on @cp8759's documents posted on a similar subject about Bexley council, it doesn't look like this road was applied a resolution, happy to be corrected though if I missed anything.
- Traffic and transportation sub-committee report of 15th September 1994 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pL6p8vmMQZsw7kvwMrKDtN-t-wDX9Bar/view)
- Public Works Committee Agenda of 13 October 1994 (see page 308 for a map of Olron Crescent) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IAs-NoI8XeRuJnntEpICK3sb6ZlyDbJp/view)
- Public Works Committee minutes of 13 October 1994 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Kc6KEwkLyna0NRmQJK0k3T265mldzc1I/view)
- Full council resolution of 11 November 1994 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yWAv0idbw3vViG-5TrQjhp2zDqxeYQdf/view)
You could include:
I believe the contravention may not in case have occurred as you have probably passed a resolution disapplying the footway parking ban on Hall Place Crescent given the presence of such parking elsewhere in the road.
Please confirm the existence of this resolution and its extent in considering my challenge.
You could include:
I believe the contravention may not in case have occurred as you have probably passed a resolution disapplying the footway parking ban on Hall Place Crescent given the presence of such parking elsewhere in the road.
Please confirm the existence of this resolution and its extent in considering my challenge.
The 14-day period for making a risk-free* challenge and payment of the discount ends today, 22 Apr(14 days beginning on 9th, not from 9th).
I'd make simple reps that you understood that parking with 2 wheels on the footway was allowed in the road as you have seen cars doing this on a regular basis. If you are wrong then you apologise and would ask the authority to exercise discretion and cancel as this is your first** PCN.
*- you haven't posted the back of the PCN, so I'm assuming that this provision - which is commonplace- is included.
**- if true.
Are you the registered keeper with current DVLA