I parked my car with my father's blue disabled badge on a residents' parking bay, but when I returned to the car with my father 30 minutes later I found that I had been given a parking ticket for being parked in a suspended bay. I read the bright yellow notice that was put up to give info on the bay being suspended, but it was attached to the "disabled badge holders" sign, which is the sign for the disabled space behind the resident's space I parked in. There was no yellow notice attached to the Resident's parking only sign, which was the sign relevant to the bay I was in.
Also, when I looked at the sign it contained writing saying that 4 bays were suspended, and gave the codes for those bays, but there are no corresponding codes on the road, so I could not have looked at the spaces and seen which ones they were referring to. In any case I assumed the parking restriction was for disabled spaces on that road.
I am trying to figure out if I am expected to know the parking codes for each individual space on this residential street as it would make no sense if I am. Also, I can't seem to find a copy of the full road traffic act relating to parking. When I found a copy of the 1991 act online it contains many amendments, but not the original acts that are being ammended. Does anyone know the original act I should be looking for that would give information on the type of notice local councils should give of parking suspensions? The parking appeals site has some great info, but is not that detailed.
|
|
First you need to know whether it is a decriminalised parking zone. If this is the case, the council make up their own rules instead of using the Traffic Act, but the good thing about that is that they're not legally enforceable as they are not fines, but penalties for breach of contract in many people's opinion.
|
The whole borough is decriminalised. I believe that in 1994 all parking in London was decriminalised. I do not know the implications on this case of this possibly being a breach of contract, but I will be appealing to the council and if necessary the parking adjudicator.
I am basically trying to make as strong a case as possible before appealing. It's looking good so far.
|
|
forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=30
Good luck!
|
|
Thanks for that guys. I spendt an hour reading through those cases and have posted on that forum too.
|
From what stated signage , which should comply with Traffic Signs and General Directions 2002, was more than confusing.
Photograph the evidence.a.s.a.p. and do as A.S. states and take it all the way to Adjudicator.
dvd
|
Could I just find out if people are familiar with this acronym? The parking suspension sign stated "O/S 23-26" as the bays that were suspended. I am now assuming this is meant to indicate outside or opposite door numbers 23 to 26.
Does this comply with Traffic Signs and General Directions? I have googled it, but the only place this acronym seems to pop up is on local council parking websites. Apart from that it does not seem to be an accepted or widely used acronym. I only found out what "O/S" mean today otherwise I would not have known.
|
You're on the right track with the TSRGDs - they're on the dft website. The way the courts interpret signage is non-compliant with the TSRGDs = no sign. Though obviously PATAS is the tribunal in this case, they should be playing by the same rules as the proper courts.
If you take it as far as PATAS, then some DPE organisations will just not represent themeselves so you win by default -- TfL apparantly often does this.
|
That is unless the TSRGDs clearly state what the sign should read or what accronym it should use and the council were found to be complying with it. If there is such information out there I can't find it. I googled for quite a while but can find little on specific rules and regulations for suspension of bays - signs or otherwise.
I think I have a fairly good case. My appeal letter to the council will be so long I think they might just cancel the PCN to save themselves reading it.
|
There is some case law you might refer to at some stage:
from Pepipoo
?Davies v Heatley [1971] R.T.R 145 Because by s.642 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 traffic signs shall be of the size, colour and type prescribed by regulation, if a sign the contravention of which is an offence contrary to s.36 is not as prescribed by the regulation, no offence is committed if the sign is contravened, even if the sign is clearly recognisable to a reasonable man as a sign of that kind.?
Sign also means road marking. Suggest check this on pepipoo.
|
|
|
|
_COLON_no_upscale()/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/e33e245b6c78f520dbad3a16902e244e/3673ec8094fede89c304980a53330ef2.jpg)
_COLON_no_upscale()/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/1d865fc9133b06c245664241957557da/89ea8b976d62e6bca6837c53b57f1f64.jpg)
_COLON_no_upscale()/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/d9be51de970c4109efbdaadc0b2ee9a4/4b74dca515a7a68cb159b0853bbd6d7c.jpg)
