Another PCN victory.....

[TVR1]

Dear Hounslow parking,

Thank you for not bothering to read the regulations on how you should actually mark out residents parking bays. I note that they have been the same for the past 10 years and I am currently reviewing any previous tickets that I have paid.

On a more serious note, as before, my advice is challenge any and every PCN (real ones) that you receive. Councils and Parking attendants can and do often get it wrong......

[fizz47]

Some more details please

What point did you appeal against? Useful info to know

[TVR1]

Didn't get to appeal. Simply pointed out that one of the largest local authorities in West London have been marking all residents bays incorrectly. It has been the same way for a good 10 years.

Ticket cancelled.

[Terminator X]

Well done. I appeal every ticket on principle at the very least to keep the fkers busy.

TX.

[TVR1]

Terminator X said:

Well done. I appeal every ticket on principle at the very least to keep the fkers busy.

TX.

Me too, keep up the good work. This time I reckon I have a real spoiler...

[Silver Smudger]

So, just to be clear - What is wrong with the parking bay markings, that one is able to challenge tickets?

[Gareth79]

Silver Smudger said:

So, just to be clear - What is wrong with the parking bay markings, that one is able to challenge tickets?

Thinking from memory, the most common error is that the ends of the bays (perpendicular to the kerb) are single, when they should be double (or vice-versa). Where the ends are doubled, each bay should be marked individually, otherwise it should be single.

Example of an incorrect one (there should be dividers): http://i38.tinypic.com/33lmfig.jpg

Other errors might be related to sizing, lack of signage etc.

[anonymous-user]

Terminator X said:

Well done. I appeal every ticket on principle at the very least to waste public resources and make sure we all pay a bit more tax.

TX.

There, fixed that for you.

[supermono]

Breadvan72 said:

There, fixed that for you.

These councils will waste any left over money anyhow, might as well make them waste it on a job as miserable as they're made parking for us tax paying drivers.

SM

[anonymous-user]

It's your money and my money and every other tax payer's money that you are wasting. Governments, central or local, only have the funds that we give them. Encouraging wasteful expenditure by arguing every parking ticket is a bit anti-social, I think.

[F i F]

Difficult one this, apologies for sitting on the fence; the rules are clear, it's all laid down in Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, plus the Traffic Signs Manual, which tome should be retitled Janet and John do Road Signs.

Yet the Powers That Be continually get it wrong.

Now I have no problem with people appealing tickets where the signs are wrong and they have been misled regarding the situation.

If someone has chanced it, knowing they were going against the spirit of the regs, and on getting a ticket find some loophole to appeal, then that is a matter for their conscience, I don't do that, but each to their own.

I do have a problem with two remaining sides in this equation. Drivers who know the signing is deficient and deliberately just dump vehicles in the knowledge the ticket will be cancelled, because that is taking the mick imo.

Equally I have a problem with some councils who know their signing is deficient, have been repeatedly told as such, but refuse to correct things, and continue ticketing fully aware the majority will just pay up. Again some of these LAs reject the first appeal knowing they will fold if it goes to next stage, I consider this abuse of their position, possibly a legal offence.

[Zeeky]

F i F said:

...

Now I have no problem with people appealing tickets where the signs are wrong and they have been misled regarding the situation.

I believe this is the test for triviality, objectively ascertained, confirmed by the Court of Appeal in R. (on the application of Herron) v Parking Adjudicator [2011] EWCA Civ 905

[Amused2death]

Way, way off topic, but I love the number plate

[Richard C]

Breadvan72 said:

It's your money and my money and every other tax payer's money that you are wasting. Governments, central or local, only have the funds that we give them. Encouraging wasteful expenditure by arguing every parking ticket is a bit anti-social, I think.

I can only assume you work for or your income is dependent on such wasteful Government organisations, central or local.

[daz3210]

F i F said:

Equally I have a problem with some councils who know their signing is deficient, have been repeatedly told as such, but refuse to correct things, and continue ticketing fully aware the majority will just pay up. Again some of these LAs reject the first appeal knowing they will fold if it goes to next stage, I consider this abuse of their position, possibly a legal offence.

Same here.

Local to us (Kirklees Council) there is an area that has habitually been used for parking by many people for as long as I can remember (and one local shop keeper has said at least 40 years). Basically two roads meet behind a raised flower bed, resulting in a triangular piece of tarmac of a size suitable to park two cars.

I received a ticket approximately two years ago for 'parking more than 50cm from the edge of a carriageway'. I was the second car away from the flower bed in this area of tarmac.

I appealed on the basis that there were no marking to indicate that I couldn't park there, and since I had been parking there for 20 years plus, as had others, I had no reason to believe that there was a prohibition to park. I also asked for a definition of the edge of the carriageway.

I received a very non commital letter saying that a long period of illegal parking did not make it right (fair comment if it is actually illegal), but that on this occasion they would rescind the penalty.

I was not happy with the result, apart from the fact I did not have to pay, since I felt the road markings were deficient. I therefore approached one of our local councillors, who copied me in on correspondence in which he suggested that improvements should be made to signage and road markings.

Come forward the two years or so since then, and I have counted at least 35 other vehicles with big yellow stickers on them (presumably parking notices). I know of 8 people who have appealed successfully, but yet the council department responsible still refuse to alter the road markings.

So tell us again, who is wasting our money? The council by not making signs clearer, or those who park (allegedly illegally) and then have the audacity to appeal.

I do of course point out to anyone I see parking there now that the wardens see them as cash cows.

[simoid]

Richard C said:

Breadvan72 said:

It's your money and my money and every other tax payer's money that you are wasting. Governments, central or local, only have the funds that we give them. Encouraging wasteful expenditure by arguing every parking ticket is a bit anti-social, I think.

I can only assume you work for or your income is dependent on such wasteful Government organisations, central or local.

Everyone's net income (after tax) is dependent on wasteful Government organisations.

Just have a think how much time and money is wasted every year rejecting spurious parking appeals...

[F i F]

Zeeky said:

F i F said:

...

Now I have no problem with people appealing tickets where the signs are wrong and they have been misled regarding the situation.

I believe this is the test for triviality, objectively ascertained, confirmed by the Court of Appeal in R. (on the application of Herron) v Parking Adjudicator [2011] EWCA Civ 905

Thanks for that link zeeky, I will have a good read of it.

The devil will be in the detail to explain reasons why as usual; nevertheless common sense suggests that the possibility to drive into several CPZs in one urban area without ever passing a sign to make one aware that you are now in such a zone isn't trivial. I'm not talking about diving around back streets and taking a tortuous route in, just using the main signposted directions to the centre.

There are CPZ signs on one major "trunk" route in, though the signs don't conform to the regulations and lead one to believe that one is entering a "Loading Zone."

Maybe the linked case is different, but it strikes me as one side having to obey the letter of the law, the other side having to make a token near enough effort. Doesn't seem fair.

Edited much later, after a few readings not much to argue about that judgement imo,- fairly common sense stuff.

Aside: I bet Richard Bentley made a few bob from his report.

There is still this situation, LA has departed from the letter, but judged as trivial departure as although signs technically incorrect they convey the correct information.

Motorist parks within bay but leaves wheel a gnat's over the boundary line,, probably ticketed but an equally trivial departure one would suggest.

Edited by F i F on Friday 20th April 15:45

[anonymous-user]

Richard C said:

Breadvan72 said:

It's your money and my money and every other tax payer's money that you are wasting. Governments, central or local, only have the funds that we give them. Encouraging wasteful expenditure by arguing every parking ticket is a bit anti-social, I think.

I can only assume you work for or your income is dependent on such wasteful Government organisations, central or local.

You assume incorrectly.

[sjmmarsh]

Resurrecting this thread...

CPE is coming into force in Stamford next month. A number of residents have been trying to find out how the "no return within" clauses will operate. The answer is that you can't return to the same parking space (a collection of parking bays) but you can park in a different one...

Except...

.. None of the bays are correctly marked with the double lines at the end of the space, which technically means that he whole town centre is just one very large parking space, with all the bays within one huge parking space (legally). So if you live in the town centre, after 1 hour you have no option butto drive right outside it and wait for an hour before you can return.

So correct bay marking is not just about people getting off fines - it is about being clear about who can park where without getting a fine.

Steve

[streaky]

F i F said:

Difficult one this, apologies for sitting on the fence; the rules are clear, it's all laid down in Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, plus the Traffic Signs Manual, which tome should be retitled Janet and John do Road Signs.

Yet the Powers That Be continually get it wrong.

Now I have no problem with people appealing tickets where the signs are wrong and they have been misled regarding the situation.

If someone has chanced it, knowing they were going against the spirit of the regs, and on getting a ticket find some loophole to appeal, then that is a matter for their conscience, I don't do that, but each to their own.

I do have a problem with two remaining sides in this equation. Drivers who know the signing is deficient and deliberately just dump vehicles in the knowledge the ticket will be cancelled, because that is taking the mick imo.

Equally I have a problem with some councils who know their signing is deficient, have been repeatedly told as such, but refuse to correct things, and continue ticketing fully aware the majority will just pay up. Again some of these LAs reject the first appeal knowing they will fold if it goes to next stage, I consider this abuse of their position, possibly a legal offence.

Possibly misfeasance in public office for the continued ticketing, or non-feasance for failing to correct the signing/marking errors.

Streaky