PATAS - w/c 22 Sept 14 - voucher confusion

In this week (sorry for the delay, I have been rather busy) of 22 September 14 there were 1018 new Appeals logged at PATAS and Barnet are still accounting for a disproportionately high percentage of them at 6% (59) when they should only be 4% based upon them issuing 4% of London's PCN. More people fight back in Barnet than most places. Well done.

There were 56 Barnet cases decided upon of which 38 (68%) were won. It is well worth your time to argue.

One case that was lost is worth mentioning as subtle wordings makes all the difference. 

Some shops sell "parking vouchers" for 30 minutes, an hour or 2 hours of parking. These can only be used in pay-to-park bays. The motorist parked in a residents bay for which they should have used a "Visitor voucher" as they are described on the council website. 

That distinction would be subtle enough but what if the printed voucher is actual headed "Visitor Parking Voucher"? - with the word "Visitor" having been made smaller since the last reprint,

then the confusion would be understandable and you can see why no-one would turn the vouchers over to read the small print.

Three cases that were won by the motorist.

1.  The council (NSL) refused to cancel a PCN for a cloned car as the owner (for some unknown reason) had not reported the cloning to the police. there is no need. If you drive a red Ford and the cloned vehicle is a yellow Vauxhall then the fact that the car isn't yours is evident. This motorist came from West Midlands to PATAS at Islington so was clearly serious.

2.  A vehicle was driven away before the issue of a PCN. This can be lead to a postal ticket but not if the photos were at 12:14 and the PCN at 12:18. You would expect the PCN to be first and then the photos. Too odd to stand.

3.  A suspension sign was not on the same post as the time plate. How would you see it otherwise?

Keep those Appeals coming. Can we get them up even higher?

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

PATAS - w/c 15 September 14 - clock watching

Parking tickets can be alarming

In this week at PATAS there were 1,022 Appeals logged across London. Of those 54 came from Barnet which is 5% against the 4% they should be.

47 Appeals were heard and 33 of them were in favour of the motorist. I cannot remember the last time that the council won more than 50% and this means that all motorists really should Appeal to PATAS rather than taking up the 50% offer which is there to tempt you into paying. As long as motorists win more than 50% on average it means that motorists as a pool are better off by challenging to the end rather than paying up. You may be the one paying 100% but that is a reasonable sacrifice on your part for the greater good. The council have to pay c.£40 for every appeal to take place so the costs of this tribunal are at least £100,000 for the costs of the hearing centre as well as paying 45p per PCN issued which is another £74,250 p.a. The more that people appeal the lower the incentive for councils to issue PCN like confetti.

There were three cases worth telling you about.

1.  A PCN for code 30 given to a blue badge holder whose time clock was wrongly set (parked for longer than permitted) should have been for code 01 (on a yellow line) as there was no evidence they had exceeded the time allowed.

2.  A motorist was described as a tall white male by the traffic warden. The motorist turned up at PATAS, had an Indian name and probably wasn't white. The PCN was cancelled.

3.  One car was picked out from a line of them in Victoria Road for pavement parking. It is unusual but the lack of PCN on other cars was taken into account when cancelling this one. The decision may not have told the whole story. Keep off the pavement unless you can clearly park there due to a marked bay being present.

Keep those Appeals coming. The PATAS form is the work of a few minutes to complete.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance