PATAS - w/c 8 September 14 - school bags

A slightly busier week at PATAS with 1,019 new Appeals being logged for the whole of London. Barnet accounted for 63 of them which is 6% and a lot more than the 4% they ought to be.

70 Barnet cases were decided and 45 of them, some 64%, went the way of the motorist.

There were four cases worth a mention.

1.  A vehicle parked more than 50cm from the kerb was delivering and evidently couldn't reasonably have done the delivery any other way which led to the PCN being cancelled. When parking do make sure that you are fairly close to the kerb.

2.  The PayByPhone system hung up on a caller and their PCN was cancelled. The outcome of this sort of Appeal is very hard to predict.

3.  A motorist who helped their children in to school with their heavy bags had their PCN cancelled. The time spent doing this must be commensurately short.

4.  Pavement parking was found to be vaguely marked in Barnfield Rd and the PCN was cancelled.

Keep those Appeals coming.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

PATAS - w/c 1 September 14 - 50cm

Another quiet week with fewer than 1,000 new cases across London being registered at PATAS, 935 in fact of which 48, that is 5%, were from Barnet. The Barnet share should only be 4% as that is the percentage of PCN across London that they give out. The extra Appeals imply a greater level of unhappiness with PCN issue.

There were 48 Barnet cases heard this week of which 28, that is 53%, were won. That is Barnet Council's (NSL's) best result for some time but is merely a blip as the following week they lose far more cases than they win.

There are 5 things I want to tell you.

Three PCN were upheld as all of the car was more than 50cm from the kerb. This is how double parking is measured (the traffic warden does it by eye though and could easily be wrong) and it now gets used to generate money from untidy parking. You can park badly, although it is better if you don't, as long as a part of your car is within 50cm of the kerb. That might be a corner of the car or a wing mirror (not the door once opened as some wag recently suggested).

A PCN for a suspended bay was cancelled as the Traffic Management Order said it had to be cancelled by a policeman in uniform. It was only in August 14 that the sign in use was authorised by the Secretary of State so challenge all earlier PCN.

The abbreviations used by the traffic warden when giving you a PCN were not explained and so that PCN was cancelled.

Another PCN was cancelled as the informal challenge (the one in response to the PCN itself) was not responded to. In another case, the formal representations (in response to the Notice to Owner) were not responded to and again the PCN was cancelled.

A car was found to have been cloned. A simple factual matter like that should not end up at PATAS.

Keep those Appeals coming. The system is definitely creaking.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

PATAS - w/c 25 August - stolen car

Another quiet week at PATAS as it was one day short due to the Monday being a Bank Holiday.

There were 899 new Appeals filed for the whole of London of which 47 came from Barnet and that is a run rate of 5% which is higher than the 4% they should represent. Something is going wrong in parking in Barnet.

There were only 25 Barnet appeals heard and of those 14 were good for the motorist so they won 56% of the time, slightly above average.

There are 4 I want to tell you about. the first 3 PCN were cancelled, the final one was upheld.

A nurse practitioner won her appeal inside the Saracens zone. The council really should cut district nurse types some slack as they are doing a valuable job in the community.

Another motorist was told on the phone that their PCN would be cancelled. The adjudicator believed them and therefore made the council do what they said they would do. When you phone up a about a parking ticket you are talking to Capita not NSL and only NSL or the council itself can press the cancellation button. I recommend you tape all your calls to the parking line.

NSL excelled themselves yet again. The DVD they sent of a supposed bus lane contravention was for the wrong car.

A man who had his car stolen with the PCN inside it wanted to pay 50% and was denied. What should have happened is that the unfortunate motorist should have phoned up the parking section with his car registration number and asked for the PCN number and then he could have paid it at the 50% reduced rate.

Keep filing those Appeals.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

PATAS - w/c 18 August 14 - Hot & cross

A quiet week at PATAS without any Saturday hearings (best avoided anyway) as the Monday was a bank holiday. 956 new Appeals were filed of which 60 were from Barnet. This is 6% and is more than a fair share which probably reflects the poor quality of the PCNs and of their processing.

There were 58 Appeals of which 39 (67% or 2/3rds) were won by the motorist.

I'll tell you of one lost Appeal and then of 3 that were won.

The one that was lost related to a yellow line on Good Friday. That is, for parking purposes on yellow lines, a normal day. I expect that the motorist was hot & cross at that PCN and the outcome as it isn't necessary to restrict Bank holiday parking.

Three that were won:

In Ridge Road, NW2 the bay markings were found to be very faded.

In the Lodge Lane Car Park the adjudicator was unhappy with the council for having filed 134 pages of Evidence which was said to be overwhelming for the typical motorist. Having given out the PCN for a PayByPhone bay the council fell over its shoelaces by referring to a meter.

A disabled motorist who didn't display their blue badge clock (but did display the blue badge) was OK as there is no stated requirement in the Traffic Management Order for the clock to be on display.

A quiet week and the next one is even quieter. Time to file some more appeals folks.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

PATAS - w/c 11 August 14 - antisocial parking

In this week at PATAS there were 1,027 new Appeals of which 62 came from parking. As Barnet give out 4% of all PCN they shouldn't really be 6% of Appeals.

57 Barnet cases were considered and 34 PCN, that is 60% were cancelled.

There are seven I want to tell you about, the rest being pretty routine.

1. The motorist had not yet purchased the vehicle which had the PCN. How is it that Barnet Council can't settle a simple ownership question without the matter having to go all the way to PATAS?

2.  Some parking right up to, if not slightly over, a dropped kerb was held to be antisocial but not illegal. Please keep back from dropped kerbs so that residents can exit their drives safely.

3.  A motorist was given a PCN whilst reading the suspended bay sign. They are allowed time to read it and then park elsewhere. The council did not have an approved suspension sign until August so appeal all earlier PCN.

4.  There was poor quality evidence to justify sending out a postal PCN.

5.  There were poor quality photos at night. Photos are not obligatory but they do settle a lot of arguments. If there is no other evidence the PCN may well be cancelled.

6.  A motorist was told their permit was on its way. These have been taking months. It isn't good enough.

7.  Barnet said there wasn't an exemption but their own Traffic Management Order said there was. Oops. Don't take what the council say at face value; check it against the paperwork.

Keep those appeals coming. Motorists are winning more than they lose.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

PATAS - w/c 4 August 14 - mind the gap

hard to find a gap here

In this week at PATAS there were 1,073 new Appeals registered of which 65, that is 6% came from Barnet although they should only account for 4%.

Some 69 Appeals were heard of which 40 led to cancelled PCN which is a 58% win rate for the motorist.

There were 4 cases of note which led to cancelled PCN.

- The sign on the Argos loading bay at North Finchley did not reflect the terms of the Traffic Management Order. Mr Mustard suspects that an old one was exhibited.

- In a case in The Drive (Mr Mustard's patch) both CPZ entry signs were not visible.

- a motorist was served a PCN whilst waiting for a gap in the traffic in order to move off.

- the legend "Loading only" was not marked on the roadway (adjacent to a loading bay). That seems to be the case on a lot of Barnet's loading bays

Keep those Appeals coming.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance