PATAS week of 25 - 30 June 12

Another good week for motorists and a bad one for NSL / thin client parking section ( Barnet Council )

 

	Appeal	Appeal
June	Allowed	Refused
25	4	4
26	4	0
27	3	0
28	1	1
29	5	0
30	0	1
Totals	17	6

Some of the interesting points to come out this week were:

A motorist had broken down in a loading bay. The appeal was allowed. You do have to question why Barnet Council thought they ought to profit from someone else's misfortune.

An appeal against parking in a disabled bay, inside a CPZ, but outside the zone hours, was refused. Unless there is a sign giving times when a disabled bay is for general use then treat it like a double yellow and park elsewhere. It is generally good practice to find another spot if you can.

An appeal was allowed where a motorist was dropping off their daughter, a baby and a pushchair (again where is the commonsense that this might take longer than 2 minutes and the safety of the baby comes before petty parking rules) and in addition the ticket had not been served because the motorist had finished depositing their passengers and had driven off before the ticket was affixed to the windscreen.

A motorist claimed they were parked on the foot way inside a marked bay designed for the purpose and provided photographs. The council provided a plan of the street showing where the bays were designed to be and photographs of the car as parked. One can only conclude that the motorist can it wrong somehow. Be careful when you park on the pavement, you need to be 100% certain you are inside a pavement parking bay especially in Old Rectory Gardens, Edgware. I have just looked at the road on google and it seems quite clear where you can and cannot pavement park. If this happens to you measure the width of the bay as often they are too narrow and that could be the basis of your appeal.

The 26th saw every motorist win. One claimed to have paid-by-phone and the records produced by NSL/the council were inadequate. For being parked in a residents bay the Traffic Management Order was not produced by NSL/the council. A parking ticket was issued for being on a yellow line but the car was actually in a loading bay. On the final case that day the relevant documents were not produced by NSL/the council.

The 27th saw 3 cases without documents being produced by NSL/the council.

On the 28th a motorist received a ticket for being more than 50cm from the kerb which we all ought to be able to manage to get within and your car is less likely to be hit if it is not sticking out unduly. The ticket was not on the car when the motorist came back. Where do these tickets go, do pranksters steal them, is the glue not very good or does the traffic warden remove the ticket after taking the photograph?

The allowed case that day is a corker. A motorist parked half in a marked out bay and half on a single yellow line. Warden 311 said that was fine and then issued a ticket. That warden may be worth treating with some scepticism int he future if you see him/her. Fortunately the certified copy penalty charge notice had the wrong vehicle registration on it and so it had to be cancelled.

4 of the 5 cases were considered cases i.e. there was real debate. Evidently NSL/the council are not arguing very well.

Remember that it is sensible to appeal three times. Informally on receipt of the ticket on your vehicle, then formally after receiving the Notice to Owner, and then to PATAS if your formal representations are rejected.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance