"No waiting" symbol on CPZ signs?
Discussion
This post is directed at anyone who has a better understanding of the legal requirements for signing CPZ restricted times than I do - having read various slightly different interpretations of the rules on various council websites, and having attempted to find a simple explanation in the various documents on the DfT website, I'd rate my own understanding as being "somewhat confused"... Thanks in advance to anyone who can help, even if in doing so you end up showing that the council in question has every right to pursue the parking ticket I'm trying to appeal - at least I'll know for sure where I stand!
My story is this. I'm in dispute with a London council over a parking ticket issued for parking on a single yellow line at 19:36 on a Tuesday, in a CPZ which the council claims has restricted times of 09:00-20:00 Monday-Saturday. Sure enough, checking the council website does confirm the times and days for this particular zone...
However, following the route I took to enter the CPZ, there are no signs to mark entrance into the zone. Nor are there any signs to mark entrance into the neighbouring zone. There was however an entry sign at the boundary to the neighbouring zone of this neighbouring zone (i.e. 2 zones away from where I was actually parked):
[pic]http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y299/twister_uk/entry.jpg[/pic]
The road I parked on consists mainly of pay and display/resident parking bays, with the occasional short stretch of single yellow line here and there. At regular intervals adjacent to the parking bays you will find these signs:
[pic]http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y299/twister_uk/baysigns.jpg[/pic]
Adjacent to the single yellow lines where I parked there was no yellow time plate.
The council have rejected my initial appeal on the grounds that "...unless a time plate at a specific location indicates anything to the contrary the single yellow line restrictions within the zone run concurrently with the controlled parking hours." Fair enough so far.
However, they then continue "...there are signs at the entrances to the zone advising the controlled parking hours." Nope, not at the entrance I used to get into the zone.
"...there are further signs on every street within the zone repeating that information." Well, yes, IF you interpret the parking bay signs shown above as also being indicative of the overall controlled hours of the zone.
However, given the lack of the "no waiting" symbol on these signs, it was my belief that they were referring only to the hours of restriction for the marked bays and not the entire zone, and that the restricted hours for use of the single yellow lines - in the absence of any yellow time plate to the contrary - were those shown on the last sign I passed which displayed the "no waiting" symbol, i.e. the zone entry sign illustrated above...
So, can CPZ restrictions be enforced if the entry signs are missing but there are still signs within the zone which in some way repeat the zone restriction times, even if those repeater signs do not display the "no waiting" symbol, and if the last "no waiting" sign seen en-route to the parking spot showed a different set of restrictions? Basically, just how important is the presence or absence of the "no waiting" symbol on signs within a CPZ?
My story is this. I'm in dispute with a London council over a parking ticket issued for parking on a single yellow line at 19:36 on a Tuesday, in a CPZ which the council claims has restricted times of 09:00-20:00 Monday-Saturday. Sure enough, checking the council website does confirm the times and days for this particular zone...
However, following the route I took to enter the CPZ, there are no signs to mark entrance into the zone. Nor are there any signs to mark entrance into the neighbouring zone. There was however an entry sign at the boundary to the neighbouring zone of this neighbouring zone (i.e. 2 zones away from where I was actually parked):
[pic]http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y299/twister_uk/entry.jpg[/pic]
The road I parked on consists mainly of pay and display/resident parking bays, with the occasional short stretch of single yellow line here and there. At regular intervals adjacent to the parking bays you will find these signs:
[pic]http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y299/twister_uk/baysigns.jpg[/pic]
Adjacent to the single yellow lines where I parked there was no yellow time plate.
The council have rejected my initial appeal on the grounds that "...unless a time plate at a specific location indicates anything to the contrary the single yellow line restrictions within the zone run concurrently with the controlled parking hours." Fair enough so far.
However, they then continue "...there are signs at the entrances to the zone advising the controlled parking hours." Nope, not at the entrance I used to get into the zone.
"...there are further signs on every street within the zone repeating that information." Well, yes, IF you interpret the parking bay signs shown above as also being indicative of the overall controlled hours of the zone.
However, given the lack of the "no waiting" symbol on these signs, it was my belief that they were referring only to the hours of restriction for the marked bays and not the entire zone, and that the restricted hours for use of the single yellow lines - in the absence of any yellow time plate to the contrary - were those shown on the last sign I passed which displayed the "no waiting" symbol, i.e. the zone entry sign illustrated above...
So, can CPZ restrictions be enforced if the entry signs are missing but there are still signs within the zone which in some way repeat the zone restriction times, even if those repeater signs do not display the "no waiting" symbol, and if the last "no waiting" sign seen en-route to the parking spot showed a different set of restrictions? Basically, just how important is the presence or absence of the "no waiting" symbol on signs within a CPZ?
I stand to be corrected, (and probably will be) but if it isn't signed correctly, then no offence. I would suggest getting photos of the signage you went past to get there, in case they decide to suddenly correct their mistake.
DVD will be along in a bit (and he's forgotten more than most will ever learn). I'm sure you'll get a more comprehensive answer than this.
Phil
DVD will be along in a bit (and he's forgotten more than most will ever learn). I'm sure you'll get a more comprehensive answer than this.
Phil
Oh dear Twister, you have my sympathy as I also find it difficult to try and keep abreast of these parking rules and regulations.
In the old days LA made a Traffic Order to cover yellow lines which have to conform to certain standards under Traffic Signs and General Directions 2002, in relation to shape, size and plates. They still have to have an Order in place. Signing failures opened the argument that the restriction was unenforceable.
But along came Schedule 3 Road Traffic Act 1991 which modified the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (dealing with authority for parking)and allowed Local Authorities to obtain an Order, other than excepted roads, as both a permitted parking area and a special parking area. If you do a search under "The Road Traffic (Permitted Parking Area and Special Parking Area)( ..details of your LA...)Order," you may pull it up. The Order will explain the areas involved and may be worth examining for the detail therein. As a result of this Order being granted then it allows LA to enforce waiting restrictions by themselves or contracted firms. It decriminalises the offence of
waiting on a yellow line, removing it from proceedings at a Mags Court and fines recovered as a civil debt.
Now as I understand as a result of the Order then there is no need to have yellow time plates any longer, unless the restriction imposed on that stretch of road is different from that indicated on the Zone Entry sign(ZES). The ZES has to give details of the times and days of the restriction. Your first sign does this i.e. No parking Mon - Sat 0830 -1830 - on the roads specified within the Control Order. But, your second sign indicated where within the Zone parking is allowed - on payment and by residents. Outside these times and places then it is back to the overall Zone restriction which may indicate Meter Zone,Disc Zone, Ticket Zone, Voucher Parking Scheme or Pay and Display.
Now from what you say there is no sign at the entrance to the Zone and if this is the case then I consider that there should be to be legal and you should consider appealing beyond the LA decision.
There is an avenue of appeal beyond what the LA say in the Parking Adjudicator, the Regulations (Statutory Instrument 1918 of 1999) on this are at
www.tinyurl.com/az7zj
You should also visit (for London):
www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk
and
www.parkingticket.co.uk
As I understand it then the rejection by the LA of your submission is a "Notice of rejection of representations" which should have been accompanied by a Notice of Appeal allowing you to put your objections to the independant Adjudicator and this must be done within 28 days of the LA rejection notice.
Inn taking the steps that you have done and will do then the fine(Debt) should not increase whilst the matter is being sorted.
Finally there is a school of thought because yellow lines removed from criminal law where offence has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt to the the civil side where balance of probability only is required, then minor transgressions relating to signing have little significance.
DVD
In the old days LA made a Traffic Order to cover yellow lines which have to conform to certain standards under Traffic Signs and General Directions 2002, in relation to shape, size and plates. They still have to have an Order in place. Signing failures opened the argument that the restriction was unenforceable.
But along came Schedule 3 Road Traffic Act 1991 which modified the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (dealing with authority for parking)and allowed Local Authorities to obtain an Order, other than excepted roads, as both a permitted parking area and a special parking area. If you do a search under "The Road Traffic (Permitted Parking Area and Special Parking Area)( ..details of your LA...)Order," you may pull it up. The Order will explain the areas involved and may be worth examining for the detail therein. As a result of this Order being granted then it allows LA to enforce waiting restrictions by themselves or contracted firms. It decriminalises the offence of
waiting on a yellow line, removing it from proceedings at a Mags Court and fines recovered as a civil debt.
Now as I understand as a result of the Order then there is no need to have yellow time plates any longer, unless the restriction imposed on that stretch of road is different from that indicated on the Zone Entry sign(ZES). The ZES has to give details of the times and days of the restriction. Your first sign does this i.e. No parking Mon - Sat 0830 -1830 - on the roads specified within the Control Order. But, your second sign indicated where within the Zone parking is allowed - on payment and by residents. Outside these times and places then it is back to the overall Zone restriction which may indicate Meter Zone,Disc Zone, Ticket Zone, Voucher Parking Scheme or Pay and Display.
Now from what you say there is no sign at the entrance to the Zone and if this is the case then I consider that there should be to be legal and you should consider appealing beyond the LA decision.
There is an avenue of appeal beyond what the LA say in the Parking Adjudicator, the Regulations (Statutory Instrument 1918 of 1999) on this are at
www.tinyurl.com/az7zj
You should also visit (for London):
www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk
and
www.parkingticket.co.uk
As I understand it then the rejection by the LA of your submission is a "Notice of rejection of representations" which should have been accompanied by a Notice of Appeal allowing you to put your objections to the independant Adjudicator and this must be done within 28 days of the LA rejection notice.
Inn taking the steps that you have done and will do then the fine(Debt) should not increase whilst the matter is being sorted.
Finally there is a school of thought because yellow lines removed from criminal law where offence has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt to the the civil side where balance of probability only is required, then minor transgressions relating to signing have little significance.
DVD
Dwight VanDriver said:
Oh dear Twister, you have my sympathy as I also find it difficult to try and keep abreast of these parking rules and regulations.
Quite. Yet with the councils hiding behind the "it's the responsibility of the driver to be aware of the rules before they park" line, the cynical part of my brain wonders if this confusion has been deliberately engineered into the system to make it easier for the councils to issue tickets...
Dwight VanDriver said:
f you do a search under "The Road Traffic (Permitted Parking Area and Special Parking Area)( ..details of your LA...)Order," you may pull it up.
So far searching for this has only turned up an amendment to the order, not the order itself. But if the language used in the actual order is anything like that in the amendment, I doubt having the full order in front of me would be much use - where's the Campaign for Real English when you need them???
Dwight VanDriver said:
But, your second sign indicated where within the Zone parking is allowed - on payment and by residents. Outside these times and places then it is back to the overall Zone restriction which may indicate Meter Zone,Disc Zone, Ticket Zone, Voucher Parking Scheme or Pay and Display.
So do I take it from this that you believe this second sign does not act as a repeater for the zone restriction, as implied by the council?
Dwight VanDriver said:
Now from what you say there is no sign at the entrance to the Zone and if this is the case then I consider that there should be to be legal and you should consider appealing beyond the LA decision.
Having now visited the area three times since the ticket was issued to check the signs and gather evidence, and each time concentrating solely on searching for any signs relating to the CPZ - something a driver would not be able to do whilst also having to concentrate on the act of driving - I am absolutely convinced that there is no entry sign along the route I took that evening. I also checked some other entry points to the zone, and found these signs:
and
neither of which show the correct restriction times, so even if I had chosen a different route where an entry sign was present it seems likely that I'd have been none the wiser about the actual CPZ times...
Dwight VanDriver said:
You should also visit (for London):
www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk
and
www.parkingticket.co.uk
Already bookmarked, thanks!
Dwight VanDriver said:
As I understand it then the rejection by the LA of your submission is a "Notice of rejection of representations"
Sorry, should have made it clearer in my original post - I'm now at the stage of making a formal appeal to the council, they've only rejected the initial informal appeal at present.
The appeals procedure I think I understand pretty well - this is one area where both the information provided by the council and obtained online has been easy to follow - I'm just trying to figure out if the signs that are present along the road are sufficient to allow the zone restricted times to be enforced, even if the zone entry signs are missing (or, had I followed a different route into the zone, present but incorrect).
Thanks for your comments/advice.
philthy said:
I stand to be corrected, (and probably will be) but if it isn't signed correctly, then no offence. I would suggest getting photos of the signage you went past to get there, in case they decide to suddenly correct their mistake.
Yep, been out a few times taking photos - the cropped versions shown in this thread are just a few of many...
The second sign you show is NOT the sign that has to be used to indicate the entrance to a CPZ, It has to be sign 663 (the first sign you show).
Authority for these bits and pieces that were posted below and I hope it makes sense:
Direction 4, Traffic Signs and General Directions 2004
Intrepretation (definition):
"controlled parking zone" means either -
(a) an area -
(i) in which, except where parking places have been provided, every road has been marked with one or more of the road markings shown in diagrams 1017(single yellow), 1018.1, (Double yellow)1019 (single yellow kerb marker) and 1020.1; double yellow kerb marker) and
(ii) into which each entrance for vehicular traffic has been indicated by the sign shown in diagram 663 (Entrance to Controlled Parking Zone - sign No 1 you show) or 663.1 (Voucher Parking Zone); or
(b) an area -
(i) in which at least one of the signs shown in diagram 640.2A (Prohibition on Goods vehicle over certain weight) has been placed on each side of every road; and
(ii) into which each entrance for vehicular traffic has been indicated by the sign shown in diagram 665 (Entrance to a controlled Zone applying to Goods vehicle on max weight shown);
Reg 7 and then 8(2) states
In accordance with the following provisions of this direction and the provisions of direction 9(Speed limit signs), appropriate signs to which this direction applies shall be placed to indicate the point at which a restriction(CPZ), requirement, prohibition or speed limit applying to traffic on a road (in this direction and in direction 9 called "the relevant road"
begins.
8(3)(a) where the relevant road has only one carriageway, on each side of that carriageway;( unless restriction only applies to one side of c'way then just one.)
26. The sign shown in diagram 663, 663.1, 664(Zone End), 665 or 666 (Zone end HGV) may be placed only at the boundary of a controlled parking zone. (Making your sign 2 a no no.)
The amendment Order that you brought up would refer to the name of the original order from which you should be able to pull up either by name or reference to the Statutory Instrument. Really you should have sight of this Order and it will define the whole area involved and thereby able to determine the entrance points where it should be signed.
Reminder like the appeal to the Adj in making representation to LA 28 day time limit applies.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Saturday 9th July 16:36
Authority for these bits and pieces that were posted below and I hope it makes sense:
Direction 4, Traffic Signs and General Directions 2004
Intrepretation (definition):
"controlled parking zone" means either -
(a) an area -
(i) in which, except where parking places have been provided, every road has been marked with one or more of the road markings shown in diagrams 1017(single yellow), 1018.1, (Double yellow)1019 (single yellow kerb marker) and 1020.1; double yellow kerb marker) and
(ii) into which each entrance for vehicular traffic has been indicated by the sign shown in diagram 663 (Entrance to Controlled Parking Zone - sign No 1 you show) or 663.1 (Voucher Parking Zone); or
(b) an area -
(i) in which at least one of the signs shown in diagram 640.2A (Prohibition on Goods vehicle over certain weight) has been placed on each side of every road; and
(ii) into which each entrance for vehicular traffic has been indicated by the sign shown in diagram 665 (Entrance to a controlled Zone applying to Goods vehicle on max weight shown);
Reg 7 and then 8(2) states
In accordance with the following provisions of this direction and the provisions of direction 9(Speed limit signs), appropriate signs to which this direction applies shall be placed to indicate the point at which a restriction(CPZ), requirement, prohibition or speed limit applying to traffic on a road (in this direction and in direction 9 called "the relevant road"
begins. 8(3)(a) where the relevant road has only one carriageway, on each side of that carriageway;( unless restriction only applies to one side of c'way then just one.)
26. The sign shown in diagram 663, 663.1, 664(Zone End), 665 or 666 (Zone end HGV) may be placed only at the boundary of a controlled parking zone. (Making your sign 2 a no no.)
The amendment Order that you brought up would refer to the name of the original order from which you should be able to pull up either by name or reference to the Statutory Instrument. Really you should have sight of this Order and it will define the whole area involved and thereby able to determine the entrance points where it should be signed.
Reminder like the appeal to the Adj in making representation to LA 28 day time limit applies.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Saturday 9th July 16:36
Thanks again, hope you're still feeling in the mood to offer a bit more of your knowledge...
Yep, this all makes perfect sense, and I've got copies of the PDFs which illustrate the signs/markings. What concerns me though is the council referring to repeater signs within the CPZ - do you think that second sign is sufficient to act as a repeater? It looks like sign 660.7, which seems to be intended only for marking the restricted times of parking places, not for showing the restricted times of single yellows.
I couldn't find a reference to the original order, but the amendment states that the entire borough is designated as a special parking area with the exception of certain roads mentioned - the list of which doesn't include the road I was parked on. However, from the council website I've got maps showing the various CPZ zone boundaries within their area, so provided they're accurate then the entrance points are known.
Dwight VanDriver said:
The second sign you show is NOT the sign that has to be used to indicate the entrance to a CPZ, It has to be sign 663 (the first sign you show).
Authority for these bits and pieces that were posted below and I hope it makes sense:
Yep, this all makes perfect sense, and I've got copies of the PDFs which illustrate the signs/markings. What concerns me though is the council referring to repeater signs within the CPZ - do you think that second sign is sufficient to act as a repeater? It looks like sign 660.7, which seems to be intended only for marking the restricted times of parking places, not for showing the restricted times of single yellows.
Dwight VanDriver said:
The amendment Order that you brought up would refer to the name of the original order from which you should be able to pull up either by name or reference to the Statutory Instrument. Really you should have sight of this Order and it will define the whole area involved and thereby able to determine the entrance points where it should be signed.
I couldn't find a reference to the original order, but the amendment states that the entire borough is designated as a special parking area with the exception of certain roads mentioned - the list of which doesn't include the road I was parked on. However, from the council website I've got maps showing the various CPZ zone boundaries within their area, so provided they're accurate then the entrance points are known.
The second sign you published is 660.7 and is for
"parking place for permit holders with limited waiting permitted by others at specified times".
This being the description in the TSGD's. It is not 663 which is required to mark the entrance to a CZ, recall:
....ii) into which each entrance for vehicular traffic has been indicated by the sign shown in diagram 663 (Entrance to Controlled Parking Zone - sign No 1 you show) or 663.1 (Voucher Parking Zone); ....
Reg 8 which deals with signs that have to be erected at the start of a restriction (CZ) does not list 660.7 either.
Reg 11 dealing with repeater signs does not include a 663 as one which requires a repeater.
If, by saying 660.7 acts as a 663, the LA are trying to pull wool over your eyes as if it was so then in the definition under TSGD that sign would have been mentioned as an OR or an AND ?.
Can you post your LA area and I will see if I can find the original Order.
......and don't forget at the end of the day to post which way your appeal goes.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Sunday 10th July 08:22
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Sunday 10th July 14:40
"parking place for permit holders with limited waiting permitted by others at specified times".
This being the description in the TSGD's. It is not 663 which is required to mark the entrance to a CZ, recall:
....ii) into which each entrance for vehicular traffic has been indicated by the sign shown in diagram 663 (Entrance to Controlled Parking Zone - sign No 1 you show) or 663.1 (Voucher Parking Zone); ....
Reg 8 which deals with signs that have to be erected at the start of a restriction (CZ) does not list 660.7 either.
Reg 11 dealing with repeater signs does not include a 663 as one which requires a repeater.
If, by saying 660.7 acts as a 663, the LA are trying to pull wool over your eyes as if it was so then in the definition under TSGD that sign would have been mentioned as an OR or an AND ?.
Can you post your LA area and I will see if I can find the original Order.
......and don't forget at the end of the day to post which way your appeal goes.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Sunday 10th July 08:22
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Sunday 10th July 14:40
Dwight VanDriver said:
If, by saying 660.7 acts as a 663, the LA are trying to pull wool over your eyes as if it was so then in the definition under TSGD that sign would have been mentioned as an OR or an AND ?.
They're not specifically saying that 660.7 is acting as a repeater, they've only stated that the CPZ restriction times are repeated along each road within the zone - but since the only signs along this particular road which state the zone restriction times are the 660.7's, I'm assuming they'll be the ones they use to justify their claim. But yeah, since I couldn't see anything about repeaters in those bits of the rules I was able to decipher, I was hoping the council were being a bit fuzzy with the truth, so thanks for the reassurance there!
Dwight VanDriver said:
Can you post your LA area and I will see if I can find the original Order.
It's those nice people at Hammersmith and Fulham, specifically Pennard Road in CPZ G - right behind the Shepherds Bush Empire, making it a prime spot for picking off unsuspecting gig-goers who've parked up just in time for doors opening at 7pm...
Dwight VanDriver said:
......and don't forget at the end of the day to post which way your appeal goes.
Oh, no worries there, I always get a bit annoyed with other people when they forget/fail to post a follow-up to threads like this, so I'll definitely be bumping the thread once a decision has been made.
Thanks again for your time and help, I didn't want to go ahead with the formal appeal until I had more confidence in my understanding of the rules - I know that if this appeal fails there's always the PATAS route, which would give me more time to get my facts right, but I'd be happier if it didn't have to go that far...
Twister (apologies to others)
As far as I can make out and understand, Wandsworth started the ball rolling by asking for and were granted Order -
The Road Traffic (Special Parking Areas)(The London Borough of Wandsworth) Order 1993.
You will appreciate that making legislation carries an expense and it is not unusual for others to piggy back to save coppers. Would appear after this order was made Bromley,Hammersmith etc wanted to have the Order so, when Wandsworth wanted to make an amendment they jumped on the bandwagon so as to speak and were granted
The Road Traffic (Special Parking Areas) (London Boroughs of Bromley, Hammersmith and Fulham and Lewisham) (London Borough of Wandsworth) (Amendment) Order 1993
see : http://tinyurl.com/bnkvn
which is what I presume you pulled up and which is the original Order as far as Hammersmith/Fulham are concerned. This makes the whole of Hammersmith and Fulham a Special Parking Area, OTHER THAN ROADS listed at Schedule 3.
The only other reference I can find is a further amendment Order:
The Road Traffic (Special Parking Areas) (London Boroughs of Bromley, Hammersmith and Fulham and Lewisham) (Amendment) Order 1994
which seems to have been brought about by local government boundary change and removes part of Schedule 3 of the 1993 Order to Ealing.
Hope this is now clear? Trying to trace law beats jigsaws!!!!!!!!
If as you say you have yet to make a full representation to LA then do not be surprised if they rebuff and make you go down the PATAS route. From what you say you seem to have a case that the signing does not conform and therefore the Order suspect. I understand that not many appeals to LA are successful - they need the money - but there is more success with the PA.
DVD
DVD
As far as I can make out and understand, Wandsworth started the ball rolling by asking for and were granted Order -
The Road Traffic (Special Parking Areas)(The London Borough of Wandsworth) Order 1993.
You will appreciate that making legislation carries an expense and it is not unusual for others to piggy back to save coppers. Would appear after this order was made Bromley,Hammersmith etc wanted to have the Order so, when Wandsworth wanted to make an amendment they jumped on the bandwagon so as to speak and were granted
The Road Traffic (Special Parking Areas) (London Boroughs of Bromley, Hammersmith and Fulham and Lewisham) (London Borough of Wandsworth) (Amendment) Order 1993
see : http://tinyurl.com/bnkvn
which is what I presume you pulled up and which is the original Order as far as Hammersmith/Fulham are concerned. This makes the whole of Hammersmith and Fulham a Special Parking Area, OTHER THAN ROADS listed at Schedule 3.
The only other reference I can find is a further amendment Order:
The Road Traffic (Special Parking Areas) (London Boroughs of Bromley, Hammersmith and Fulham and Lewisham) (Amendment) Order 1994
which seems to have been brought about by local government boundary change and removes part of Schedule 3 of the 1993 Order to Ealing.
Hope this is now clear? Trying to trace law beats jigsaws!!!!!!!!
If as you say you have yet to make a full representation to LA then do not be surprised if they rebuff and make you go down the PATAS route. From what you say you seem to have a case that the signing does not conform and therefore the Order suspect. I understand that not many appeals to LA are successful - they need the money - but there is more success with the PA.
DVD
DVD
DVD, thanks for explaining the amendment issue, and why so many different LAs were involved in the same traffic order - yep, it all makes sense now!
Anyway, back to the issue of the CPZ signs... remember earlier I said:
Well, having made one final visit prior to returning the formal appeal notice just to make sure I had my facts straight, it turns out that I didn't. Have my facts straight, that is. Because, despite not having seen it in TWO previous visits on foot, or in the TWO previous times I've driven along the stretch of road in question, there IS in fact a CPZ entrance sign.
Game, set, and match to the LA?
Hopefully not. Because the sign is on a one-way road, with its printed side facing AWAY from the oncoming traffic...
The reason I hadn't noticed it in any of the previous recon trips (and remember, for the two previous visits where I was on foot I was able to devote practically all my time to looking for signs, without having to worry about such mundane issues as, ooh, lane discipline, avoiding other vehicles and all the relatively minor things that drivers, for some strange reason, seem to think take priority over scanning every overgrown bush, hedgerow and clump of tree branches looking for the one elusive road sign that will tell them if it's legal or not to park in the area) is that I was retracing the path I took whilst driving, and so was following the roads in the same direction - from that angle all you see is the rear of the sign, which is painted black and so blends in quite nicely with the dark trunks/foliage of the nearby trees.
Now, I know the LA are probably going to reject the formal appeal now that they can claim the signs are present, and I suspect they'll still reject it even when I point out that the sign is facing the wrong way - possibly suggesting that at the time of the parking offence, the sign was correctly oriented and has only recently swung around...
...except that, one month prior to picking up the ticket, I'd met up with a bunch of friends on Shepherds Bush Green for the afternoon and, as usually happens when a bunch of friends get together, a bunch of photos were taken. Some of which clearly show, in the background, the same CPZ entry sign facing the wrong way.
So, whilst I'm a little annoyed to have finally found the sign (although if it takes me three dedicated searches on foot to find the damn thing, how can a driver reasonably be expected to see it?) which means I can't use the lack of entry signs as a defence against the CPZ, the fact that I (luckily) have photographic evidence showing the incorrect orientation of the sign since at least a month prior to the parking ticket means that I'm still quite confident about the whole appeals process, though I do now expect it to go all the way to the PATAS stage.
Anyway, the formal appeal note is going in the post tomorrow, so I'll update this thread once I get a response to that.
Anyway, back to the issue of the CPZ signs... remember earlier I said:
twister said:
Having now visited the area three times since the ticket was issued to check the signs and gather evidence, and each time concentrating solely on searching for any signs relating to the CPZ - something a driver would not be able to do whilst also having to concentrate on the act of driving - I am absolutely convinced that there is no entry sign along the route I took that evening.
Well, having made one final visit prior to returning the formal appeal notice just to make sure I had my facts straight, it turns out that I didn't. Have my facts straight, that is. Because, despite not having seen it in TWO previous visits on foot, or in the TWO previous times I've driven along the stretch of road in question, there IS in fact a CPZ entrance sign.
Game, set, and match to the LA?
Hopefully not. Because the sign is on a one-way road, with its printed side facing AWAY from the oncoming traffic...
The reason I hadn't noticed it in any of the previous recon trips (and remember, for the two previous visits where I was on foot I was able to devote practically all my time to looking for signs, without having to worry about such mundane issues as, ooh, lane discipline, avoiding other vehicles and all the relatively minor things that drivers, for some strange reason, seem to think take priority over scanning every overgrown bush, hedgerow and clump of tree branches looking for the one elusive road sign that will tell them if it's legal or not to park in the area) is that I was retracing the path I took whilst driving, and so was following the roads in the same direction - from that angle all you see is the rear of the sign, which is painted black and so blends in quite nicely with the dark trunks/foliage of the nearby trees.
Now, I know the LA are probably going to reject the formal appeal now that they can claim the signs are present, and I suspect they'll still reject it even when I point out that the sign is facing the wrong way - possibly suggesting that at the time of the parking offence, the sign was correctly oriented and has only recently swung around...
...except that, one month prior to picking up the ticket, I'd met up with a bunch of friends on Shepherds Bush Green for the afternoon and, as usually happens when a bunch of friends get together, a bunch of photos were taken. Some of which clearly show, in the background, the same CPZ entry sign facing the wrong way.
So, whilst I'm a little annoyed to have finally found the sign (although if it takes me three dedicated searches on foot to find the damn thing, how can a driver reasonably be expected to see it?) which means I can't use the lack of entry signs as a defence against the CPZ, the fact that I (luckily) have photographic evidence showing the incorrect orientation of the sign since at least a month prior to the parking ticket means that I'm still quite confident about the whole appeals process, though I do now expect it to go all the way to the PATAS stage.
Anyway, the formal appeal note is going in the post tomorrow, so I'll update this thread once I get a response to that.
Take another photograph (preferably with a 'wet-process' - film - camera) and have a friend hold up that day's nespaper. The change in vegetation from previous photo might be sufficient to illustrate the passage of time. Have your friends write and sign a short statement attesting to the date and location of the earlier photograph and you and whosoever holds up the newspaper should date and sign the back of a print of the latest photo - Streaky
Persist Twister.
Since when has a black board with no legend been authorised as a CPZ sign? TSGD says NO.
Evidence from your friends photos show that this has been a long term defect, not some silly numpty turning it round just overnight sao should have been discovered by LA.
Used to be in the old days LA had bloke going round (Highways Superintendent)ensuring roads, signing etc in order. Amazes me as well that Plod doesn't seem to be involved in reporting these discrepancies as we were.
I digress but in the 70"s a certain night traffic crew from Harrogate (note gemini) once put a report in as to just how many cats eyes were missing on the A.1. between Wetherby and Leeming. Now that's dedication?.
DVD
Since when has a black board with no legend been authorised as a CPZ sign? TSGD says NO.
Evidence from your friends photos show that this has been a long term defect, not some silly numpty turning it round just overnight sao should have been discovered by LA.
Used to be in the old days LA had bloke going round (Highways Superintendent)ensuring roads, signing etc in order. Amazes me as well that Plod doesn't seem to be involved in reporting these discrepancies as we were.
I digress but in the 70"s a certain night traffic crew from Harrogate (note gemini) once put a report in as to just how many cats eyes were missing on the A.1. between Wetherby and Leeming. Now that's dedication?.
DVD
Dwight VanDriver said:
Persist Twister.
I intend to. Even if the worst should happen, and the appeal is rejected by PATAS, at least I'll know that I did everything I could to keep my money out of the hands of the LA, and made them work to get it.
So, with that in mind, the formal appeal notice has been completed and will be in the post later today.
Dwight VanDriver said:
Evidence from your friends photos show that this has been a long term defect, not some silly numpty turning it round just overnight sao should have been discovered by LA.
Mmm, I was concerned that the LA might try using that as a defence, but then I remembered the get-together in April... seeing photos of friends always puts a smile on my face, seeing photos of friends with incorrectly oriented CPZ entry signs in the background just makes the smile that bit wider
mcflurry said:
I read this sign as residents only from 6.30-8pm
I read them that way as well, which is why I wasn't parked in a residents-only bay when I got ticketed... Those signs are adjacent to the parking bays (marked out with white paint), not to the stretches of single yellow lines which are also on the road in question.
I promised to add to this thread again once a decision had been made by the LA, and this morning I found it lying on the doormat with the rest of the post...
...after considering my formal appeal, and performing a site visit, the LA agrees that the CPZ sign is facing the wrong way and that, therefore, the parking ticket should be cancelled
So, three cheers for DVD, your advice has once again proven to be spot on!
...after considering my formal appeal, and performing a site visit, the LA agrees that the CPZ sign is facing the wrong way and that, therefore, the parking ticket should be cancelled
So, three cheers for DVD, your advice has once again proven to be spot on!
Merci beaucoup Twister for your result - delighted.
Tip for others. My experiences seem to show that there is an ever growing laxity by the Authorities in abiding with the letter of the law on such matters and in such circumstances always worth checking whether signing lawful as Twister did.
dvd
Tip for others. My experiences seem to show that there is an ever growing laxity by the Authorities in abiding with the letter of the law on such matters and in such circumstances always worth checking whether signing lawful as Twister did.
dvd
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff