 |
| The pendulum bridge |
This week started with Barnet Council getting their nose in front at PATAS on Monday, Tuesday & Wednesday but then on Thursday and Friday the superior organisation and argument of motorists saw the pendulum swing back. The score ended up with 37 PCN cancelled and 31 upheld.
Notable cases included one where a Regulation 9 PCN was sent in the post, the only snag being that it should have been a Regulation 10 PCN which has different wording. PCN cancelled.
The double yellow lines stopped at the vehicle. PCN canx.
In another case the photographs were described by the adjudicator as "rather useless" and evidently there wasn't enough other convincing evidence to enable the PCN to live on.
Mr Mustard is rather concerned by Barnet Council's actions in dredging old PCN out of dusty corners of their hard discs and pursuing people who think that the PCN is at an end or who have never heard of it because they aren't the correct person. Here is what the adjudicator said on a really old case:
enforcement authority has referred a statutory declaration made by Mr Foran over a bus lane infringement on 20 April 2011. The Enforcement Notice was sent to a Mr Forcan at the above address on 18 May 2011. It is clear from the letter sent by the son that Mr Foran does not own the vehicle nor does he drive. I am satisfied that if any further action is to be taken the enforcement authority will need to make proper investigation as to where Mr Forcan resides and to ensure they are wholly satisfied as to who is the registered keeper of the vehicle. Bearing in mind the evidence supplied by Mr Foran he should not be sent a further Enforcement Notice as he is not the registered keeper.
In another case a lady was given until the end of the month to pay and then the council reneged on that agreement. This led to the council getting £zero instead of 50%.
The Notice to Owner was not served. PCN canx.
Poor photographs. Case not made out. PCN canx.
PCN not served. Photographs of rear of car only. PCN canx.
Unloading Xmas groceries. PCN canx.
Notice of Rejection of Representations not served. PCN canx.
PCN issued at 16;33 in a 11-12 zone as the council's own photographs showed! PCN canx.
Traffic warden noted that the PCN was both put on the windscreen and handed to the driver. The adjudicator threw it into the waste paper basket!
The council provided inconsistent evidence. PCN canx.
The next case indicates the lengths to which people will go to contest a PCN:
Mr A has appeared in person.
This PCN was issued for the alleged contravention of being parked without payment of the parking charge. It is clear from the evidence produced by Mr A that he did make payment of the parking charge. His mobile telephone records show that he made a call to the number shown on the parking restriction sign at 16:17 on 12 April 2013. The number was 0203 362 2000. Mr A's bank records show that a payment was taken from his account for parking on street that day in the amount of £3. Mr A says that he received verbal confirmation of the payment.
I find on this evidence that the alleged contravention did not occur.
Mr A travelled 410 miles by car from Manchester for the purpose of attending this hearing and also incurred an underground rail fare of £8. He claims the cost of his travel expenses. He says that the cheapest method of travel from Manchester would have been a pre-booked rail fare at a cost of £67. He therefore claims that sum rather than the cost of mileage. He claims a total of £75 including the underground fare.
In Mr A's notice of appeal and in a subsequent letter dated 4 July 2013, he explained that Barclays Bank had been given a unique reference number prior to taking the payment for the parking charge and this reference number was 090605. Mr Cohen says that the Bank explained that this number comes from the beneficiary prior to payment and he submits that the Council has behaved in a wholly unreasonable manner in continuing to resist his appeal having been provided with this further information.
The Council is therefore required to address this application for costs which the Adjudicator is presently minded to award.
Car not more than 50cm from the kerb. PCN canx.
PCN fixed to the vehicle and served by post. Two PCN became zero PCN.
A description of "Ballards Lane" was found to be inadequate due to the length of the street. The notes were also inadequate. PCN canx.
The council didn't prove that the Event Day zone was properly signed.
A number of vouchers were displayed. Following the instructions they were all scratched off with the same arrival time. Apparently they should be scratched off with sequential times but that isn't what the instructions say. PCN canx.
Motorist was in Harpenden just before the PCN was issued. PCN canx.
Unloading a large amount of coin at the bank. PCN canx.
What you can see form these appeals is that the independent adjudicator applies a much more commonsense and reasonable approach to parking than Barnet Council do because the adjudicator does not have a vested interest in your appeal failing; they provide an impartial service. You should keep those appeals coming. We seem to be stuck at around the 75 per week mark and 100 would be much more fun.
Yours appealingly
Miss Feezance
No comments:
Post a Comment