3. 10 min grace period case - what was the adjudicator doing?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: 10 min grace period case - what was the adjudicator doing?  (Read 1371 times)

0 Members and 59 Guests are viewing this topic.

10 min grace period case - what was the adjudicator doing?
« on: »
This is an intriguing tribunal case.

It's a case where a PCN was issued just 1 minute after a parking place changed from pay and display to no waiting (and no loading).

Authorities often say the 10 min grace doesn't apply and we beg to differ.

So is Mr Burke unsure of the law and so punted it back to Haringey to tell him or is he playing games? Or what?

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

Case reference   2250215134
Declarant   Ilham Ahmed Aden
Authority   London Borough of Haringey
VRM   SM12EMX
   
PCN Details
PCN   ZN13486355
Contravention date   20 Aug 2024
Contravention time   17:01:00
Contravention location   Topsfield Parade, N8
Penalty amount   GBP 130.00
Contravention   Parked or loading/unloading during a loading ban
   
Referral date   29 Apr 2025
   
Decision Date   16 Oct 2025
Adjudicator   Michael Burke
Appeal decision   Appeal allowed
Direction   cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.

Reasons   On 02.10.25 I adjourned this case, writing in the following terms:
“The Adjudicator directs that if the Enforcement Authority continue to seek enforcement of this penalty charge they set out why they would say the 10-minute grace period allowed by Regulation 5(2) Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions)(England) Regulations 2022 does not apply.”
The Enforcement Authority have failed to respond. In these circumstances they no longer seek enforcement and accordingly I allow the appeal.
 
Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: 10 min grace period case - what was the adjudicator doing?
« Reply #1 on: »
Struggling both to see why this is an issue, and what the purported issue is.

In general, if a party seeks to argue a point of law that the tribunal and the other party do not immediately accept, then they must have an opportunity to argue that point. If a tribunal refuses to hear legal argument, unless there is binding case law on the narrow point that cannot be distinguished, that is a procedural impropriety.

From the summary you have posted, the adjudicator has not batted it back to Haringey as concerns this case - he has upheld the appeal, not adjourned it in order for Haringey to teach him law - but has basically told them to either pony up some cogent legal argument to support their claim that the grace period does not apply, or stop fraudulently issuing mickey mouse parking tickets.

What weight the last part carries, on the basis that decisions of a single adjudicator are not binding on other adjudicators, is another matter, but as sabre rattling goes, I would happily buy the man a pint.
Logged
I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.
Re: 10 min grace period case - what was the adjudicator doing?
« Reply #2 on: »
So why didn't he allow the appeal in the first place is the point.
Logged
Re: 10 min grace period case - what was the adjudicator doing?
« Reply #3 on: »
My bad, missed that.

However, absent bing case law on the narrow point, it appear to be perfectly proper to allow the party purporting to be arguing a point of law to clarify their argument. In a case where the party is a LA who then declined to do so, slam dunk from then on (with that adjudicator at least).

If an individual had made a somewhat cursory and outlandish one-off claim, and was not there to clarify his point, then there would be a question as to whether it was proportionate to adjourn to allow him to expand upon what was almost certainly a load of old tosh.
In this case, the same question would have arisen. As this is seemingly not a one-off issue or "argument", the case for adjourning to allow further opportunity to clarify the argument seems more compelling.

"The law" is rarely black and white, even where it appears to be so - for instance for hundreds of years a penalty in contract law was understood to be a disproportionate deterrent charge, until the Supreme Court clarified that everyone had been wrong for hundreds of years, and that the test was the far more nebulous and subjective question as to whether or not it was unconscionable. To suggest that an adjudicator "does not know the law" because he invited a party to clarify their legal point appears to be somewhat disingenuous.
Logged
I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.
Re: 10 min grace period case - what was the adjudicator doing?
« Reply #4 on: »
Haringey's argument would be that the 10 minute grace rule only applies to vehicles that are in designated parking places, and that as of 5pm, that place ceased to be a designated parking place. Effectively saying that it only applies if there would have been no contravention if the vehicle had been parked 10 minutes later.

Whilst such an argument would require some degree of violence to be enacted on the language of the legislation, Swift J has done worse.
Logged
I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.
Re: 10 min grace period case - what was the adjudicator doing?
« Reply #5 on: »
Yes we are well aware of the changes to the regulations and what this one says.

Again my point is that he hasn't ruled on it - he allowed it because Haringey didn't respond to something we'd argue he should have ruled on in the first place.
Logged
Re: 10 min grace period case - what was the adjudicator doing?
« Reply #6 on: »
So what?

He did not need to rule on the point in order to correctly dispose of the appeal. When he adjourned, in effect he had provisionally ruled on the point, subject to any mind-blowing response from Haringey. If he had explicitly ruled on the point, once again, so what? It would not bind the other adjudicators, and would not preclude the point being reconsidered afresh if Haringey were to deign to produce a substantive argument in a subsequent appeal.

The real issue is that Haringey appear to be issuing PCNs and defending appeals on a point that they are unable and unwilling to substantiate. Yet, you seem to take issue with an individual adjudicator who chose to play with his food, rather than making a seemingly irrelevant ruling on a point of law concerning a great number of cases, without giving Haringey an opportunity to clarify their argument.

If you are expecting individual adjudicator to channel their inner Judge John Deed and run around in the middle of the night gathering evidence to fight widespread injustice, you're in for a disappointment.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2025, 05:57:56 pm by andy_foster »
Logged
I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.
Pages: [1]
« previous next »
  3. 10 min grace period case - what was the adjudicator doing?