London Tribunals - October 2017

A council can't give this vehicle a PCN

In the month of October 2017 there were 213 Appeal decisions.

Of those 133 were found in favour of the motorist so that is a whopping 62% win rate.

There were 5 cases worthy of note.

Yellow box junction - turning right - 2170423341

This PCN was issued for the alleged contravention of entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited. The alleged contravention occurred in Cricklewood Lane at 3.49pm on 13 May 2017.

Paragraph 7(1) of Part II of Schedule 19 to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 states that no person shall cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles. It is an offence to enter the box without a clear exit and to then stop in the box due to stationary vehicles in front.

Paragraph 7(2) states that this prohibition does not apply to any person causing a vehicle to enter a box junction (other than a box junction at a roundabout) for the purpose of making a right turn out of the box and stopping the vehicle for so long as it is prevented from completing the right turn by oncoming vehicles or other vehicles which are stationary waiting to complete the right turn.

I have reviewed the CCTV footage in this case. I am allowing the appeal because the car stopped within the box to make a right turn out of the box and was prevented from completing the right turn by a stationary vehicle in front which had also made the right turn. Whilst I accept that the van in front had technically completed the right turn, it would make a nonsense of Paragraph 7(2) for the right turn exemption not to apply just because the next vehicle making the right turn manages to clear the box rather than having to stop within it.

The usual council argument is that it is only turning right out of a box, not into it, that forms the exemption. Another adjudicator is not bound by this decision.

Mixed up letters - very mean but the law - 2170419606

The Council's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was parked in Golders Green Road without payment of the parking charge on 16 May 2017. A penalty charge notice was issued at 1055.
　
The Appellant states that he paid for parking until 1111 and produced a text from paybyphone confirming this for location 5885. However, the Council's evidence shows that this was for vehicle registration mark LR05GMZ. However, the Appellant's vehicle was registration mark LR05GNZ.

It is clear, as the Appellant contends in his notice of appeal that he made a simple mistake when entering the vehicle registration mark. However, this is a matter of mitigation only and not a defence to the contravention. As the Adjudicator I have no power to cancel penalties on the basis of mitigation. The Council did reoffer the discounted penalty of £30, but this was not taken up by the Appellant and the Council now seeks the full penalty of £60. I have no power to direct them to accept the discounted penalty.

Although I accept that the Appellant made a simple error, as I am satisfied that the contravention occurred and the penalty charge notice was lawfully issued, I must refuse the appeal.

If the car registration had been provided over the telephone it might have been possible to argue that it was the council's error.

Tilling Road - the wrong sign - 2170429199

A contravention can occur if a vehicle is driven so as to perform a prohibited turn.

There appears to be no dispute that the vehicle was in Tilling Road at its junction with Brentfield Gardens, as shown in the closed circuit television (cctv) images produced by the Enforcement Authority.

The vehicle is seen to turn left when the sign shown in the images clearly indicates ‘no left turn’.

However, in their Notice of Rejection the Enforcement Authority say the sign is a white arrow on a blue sign. This would be a different contravention.

Either the sign is incorrect or the Enforcement Authority have mistaken the location.

The Adjudicator is only able decide an appeal by making findings of fact on the basis of the evidence produced by the parties and applying relevant law.

Considering all the evidence before me carefully I cannot find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, the contravention alleged did occur.

Accordingly this appeal must be allowed.

Both signs are at the location but if the evidence isn't clear the council can lose.

Late for a funeral - not an exemption

This PCN was issued for the alleged contravention of failing to comply with a no entry restriction in Torrington Park at 5.11pm on 7 July 2017.

I have looked at the images submitted by the Council. These show that Mr L’s car was driven through two no entry signs in Torrington Park. There was a no entry sign attached to a post on either side of the traffic island which stated that there was a no entry restriction except for local buses. There was also a Bus Only marking on the road surface. It is clear from the evidence that the alleged contravention did occur.

Mr L appeals on compassionate grounds because he says that he was driving two sons to the funeral of their father and that time was very tight. An Adjudicator has no power to take account of mitigating circumstances when deciding whether to allow or to refuse an appeal. The Council has already considered, and decided not to accept, the mitigating circumstances explained by Mr L.

The adjudicator really had no choice in this case.

Moving traffic - how many days are 28? - 2170469036

The Appellant has not attended and the Authority is not represented.

The Authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was stopped in the box junction when prohibited when in Finchley Road/Bridge Lane on 27 June 2017 at 17.27.

The Appellant's case is that he had anticipated that the exit would be clear.

He also takes a point on the Penalty Charge Notice in relation to the time permitted time for representations to be considered and referred me to the case of Atlas - v Barnet case number 2170053479.

I have considered the evidence and I have allowed this appeal on the truncated period point that an Authority must consider representations. I have copied into this decision the relevant part of the Atlas case.

"Section 4(8)(a) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 provides that A penalty charge notice under this section must [amongst other things] state ... (iii) that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice; ... (v) that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable; (vi) the amount of the increased charge; ... and (viii) that the person on whom the notice is served may be entitled to make representations under paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Act; and (8)(b) requires that they specify the form in which any such representations are to be made.

Paragraph 1(3) of the Schedule provides that the enforcing authority may disregard any such representations which are received by them after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the penalty charge notice in question was served. {effectively 28 days + 2 days}

Mr Atlas correctly points out that in this case the Penalty Charge Notice states: 'The penalty charge of £130 must be paid not later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of this notice. If the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period and no representations have been made, an increased charge of 50% to £195 may be payable and a charge certificate may be issued.'

Mr Atlas submits that this wording is not compliant with the requirements of the 2003 Act and, further, effectively limits the time he has to make representations.

I accept this submission. The wording does not comply with the requirements of the Act and therefore effectively limits the time a recipient has to make representations or, indeed, to pay the full penalty charge before a Charge Certificate is issued."

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed.

More adjudicators disagree with this decision than agree

Keep those Appeals flowing.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance.