PATAS - w/c 30 june - ex gratia

Four dozen (48) roses

There were 1,166 new Appeals registered at PATAS in this week.

56 of them came from Barnet so that is 5% which is more than one should expect and is a sign that the motorist simply isn't going to roll over and pay when faced with a doubtful PCN.

There were 48 appeals heard and 32 of them went the way of the motorist which is a 67% success rate.

Only 3 appeals of note:

- in Brampton Grove the signs were not clear so the PCN was cancelled.

- a suspension sign was set at an uncommonly low level so that PCN was cancelled.

- A Notice of Rejection was sent out in an unstamped envelope, imagine having to pay the Royal Mail an extra £1 to find out that your PCN was not cancelled. This person didn't want the public purse to bear any further burden for expenses even though the adjudicator though the council's behaviour was borderline unreasonable. The adjudicator suggested the council should make an ex-gratia payment.

Keep those appeals coming.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

Patas - w/c 23 June 14 - bus lanes

Another quiet week at PATAS with 1,206 new cases filed of which 50, that is 4%, were the expected amount for Barnet.

65 Barnet appeals were heard and 50 finished up with cancelled PCN so you can see how worthwhile it can be to appeal.

Only 4 things of note:

- someone was loading (possibly a decorator) and a ladder was in a photo taken by the traffic warden which rather confirmed it

- 3 PCN in the Saracens Event Day Zone were cancelled

- a baby being collected was subject to the boarding exemption as they can't walk themselves from the house to the car

- two bus lanes that were 250m apart were treated as one by the adjudicator who did not agree with the council's argument that they had discrete 9i.e. separate) legal status. The adjudicator will only allow one PCN to stand if you go through 2 stretches of bus lane, which is very fair of them.

Have you got a PATAS form? Then fill it in. 

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

PATAS - w/c 16 June 14 - Which flat?

a random block of flats in Finchley

In this week at PATAS there were 1,191 new Appeals lodged of which 61 or 5% came from Barnet so numbers are up slightly again. Of the 60 Barnet cases that were heard 37 were won which is 62% so keep them coming.

Five cases worth a mention:

- Gervase Road again so be careful where you park there. The PCN was upheld so has to be paid.

- The council in the case summary said that the traffic warden did not refer to the Blue Badge. The adjudicator, always a lawyer and very sharp, said that did not mean that the traffic warden had looked for one. PCN cancelled.

- A motorist denied swearing or spitting at the traffic warden and their PCN was cancelled. Please do not behave in this way to traffic wardens who get the miserable pay rate of £8.20 an hour and are probably put upon by management.

- A motorist was in the process of complying with the payment instructions (whether by voucher, paypoint, meter or PayByPhone is not relevant) and must be given adequate time to comply. PCN cancelled.

- Paperwork sent without a flat number to an address in a block of 40 flats is clearly not good service. What numptie at NSL thought that they should bother PATAS and waste £40 in fees on this case?

Keep those appeals coming. You are all (well lots of you) doing very well and learning stuff.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

PATAS w/c 9 June 2014 - 78% win rate

In this particular week at PATAS there were 1,201 new Appeals registered of which 50, that is 4%, came from Barnet which was, for once, the percentage that you would expect. The peak in Appeals looks to have abated for now.

There were 4 PCN worth a mention.

In Bells Hill the signage on a single yellow line, which for some bizarre reason, operates until late at night and is a favourite trap spot of scooterised traffic wardens, was found to be "not very effective". That is because the sign is around the bend in a side turning and cannot be seen from your car.

A person who displayed their blue badge got a PCN notwithstanding. This was because the traffic warden managed to only photograph part of the windscreen which did not contain the Blue Badge. Don't get a traffic warden to take your wedding photographs as the bride or the groom will be missing from shot. This was, of course, a genuine accident which I have seen happen several times before.

Yew Grove was found to be not clearly marked. I see to recall having seen that location in this blog recently. You know what to do, appeal.

Gervase Rd is a regular feature at PATAS as the road is marked out for pavement parking but all of the necessary signs are not in place and people go astray and park, perfectly safely, with 2 wheels on the kerb where markings are not provided. Usually  the PCN gets cancelled due to lack of clarity but in a very unusual move a Review was requested of a decision lost at that location and the PCN now has to be paid. Just remember that within 14 days of an Appeal decision either party can ask for a Review and although there are usually only about 50 such requests a year your winning case could suddenly be a losing case. I wonder if this motorist had been especially upsetting in some way to NSL or the council?

Keep those appeals coming. the odds are certainly in your favour.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance