Tribunal Appeals - school report 2016 - Barnet Council

The chart above shows the fluctuations in the number of Appeals being decided each month. Generally the Appeal is heard one month after it is lodged. Looking at the last 4 months alone is interesting. Since moving traffic contraventions started in earnest in the summer the number of Appeals has surged forward (January 17 sees a slight drop but probably as the tribunal was closed for 10 days for Xmas & New Year holidays).

Overall PCN issue figures are in the chart below, with comparatives for 2015.

Type	2015	2016
Bus lane	11,601	6,642
Moving traffic	-	39,150
Parking	141,114	149,168
Totals	154,730	196,976

It is very pleasing to see bus lane figures coming down despite the introduction of automatic cameras which miss almost nothing. Motorists have perhaps finally realised that they will be caught so had best stay out of the bus lane. Some people never enter a bus lane as a matter of policy and that may not be a bad policy. If the bus lane is not in operation there probably won't be a queue in the all traffic lane in any event so there is nothing to gain by using the bus lane.

 

Moving traffic (yellow box junctions, banned turns, school zig-zags etc) are the new real money spinner for Barnet Council. The figures are for less than a full year.

It will take a while for the penny to drop that a banned turn, like at Tilling Rd near Brent Cross, which you have been wrongly doing for 20 years, will now cost you £130 a time. Once people realise the numbers will fall a little. New cameras are springing up at every possible location though, as this cash cow is one to be milked, so the numbers may rise before they fall.

 

The biggest problem (success in the eyes of the council) is with yellow box junctions.

 

There needs to be a wholesale change with the way that people drive, so as to avoid PCN, and it will lead to slower journey times across the borough if everyone takes the cautious and correct approach of waiting until the box is clear before they enter it. How to do it is explained on the TfL page here. Note the sparse London traffic a la 1950.

 

School zig zag PCN's are remarkably low. 

 

 

 

24 locations are monitored, so ignoring August (one unlucky person when the school was closed and so Barnet choose not to enforce as no harm is being done) and April as that was when the scheme was just warming up, we have 7 month's data and this equates to a single contravention every 2 days per school. This is hardly a rate of contravention that calls for a six figure sum to be spent on cameras. Those stories of carmaggedon at school drop off and pick up time look likely to have been false news.

 

Remember that a PCN is not a personal attack on you, it is simply an attempt to open your wallet or purse. Officially these are all issued for traffic management purposes. Poppycock.

Appeal results

I nearly forgot.

Of the 2,202 Appeal heard in the year, the motorist won 1,193 of them which is 54% of them against a norm of 48% across London.

966 went the way of the council and 41 were the subject of a request by the adjudicator to just drop it even though the council was legally correct but there was compelling mitigation which an adjudicator cannot allow an Appeal on the basis of, only the council can.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

PATAS - w/c 16 September 13 - armed robbery

Every parking ticket feels like you have been violated.

In this week 48 parking tickets were cancelled and 42 were upheld, the best week for Barnet council in a long time. There was also one ticket recommended for write off.

Notable cancellations were for

- young children alighting

- not started to issue when the motorist drove away

- kerb chevrons in poor repair

- virtually non-existent markings

- miscarriage (yes, our council fight you in these sad circumstances, parking is more important than life itself)

The authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was parked adjacent to a footway which had been lowered to meet the level of the carriageway when in Trinder Road on 26 June 2013 at 10.36.

The Appellant's case is that she was 4 months pregnant and started bleeding; she sought the help of a woman who lived in Trinder Road who called and ambulance. She was taken to Barnet Hospital and miscarried.

I have considered all the evidence and I find that the Appellant's vehicle was parked due to circumstances beyond the control of the Appellant due to the miscarriage of her 4 month baby.

The appeal is allowed.

and of course the Trinder Rd dropped kerb is notorious for having no purpose and now has double yellow lines extended across it to prevent this offence.

- cloned vehicle.

- Bunns Lane - parking on the footway for 7 years.

- loading compost

- 2 minutes to obtain a permit

- Cab driver helping a disabled passenger

- delivering sand

- broken down

- had paid and possessed a pay & display ticket

- confusion about the rights of business permit holders

 

- I was robbed

The allegation in this case is the vehicle was parked in a permit space without displaying a valid permit. Mr. X does not dispute this but says that this was after he had been the victim of an armed robbery and during a time when he was signed off work. He has provided supporting evidence to this effect. He also criticises the quality of the signage.

While Mr. X's personal circumstances at the time may have been particularly difficult, this amounts only to mitigation. The Enforcement Authority may cancel a PCN as a matter of their discretion. The Law does not give Adjudicators the power to allow an appeal which establishes mitigating circumstances only.

The Enforcement Authority have provided copies of photographs taken by the Enforcement Officer which show the time plate relied upon. While in itself this looks clear and adequate, there is no photograph showing the time plate in context with where the vehicle was parked. In the circumstances I do not feel able to say I am satisfied that the signage of restrictions was substantially compliant, clear and adequate and accordingly I allow the appeal.

 

- some nonsense about a clamp which doesn't happen in Barnet

 

- Saracens zone records "not good enough"

 

- given a code 19 PCN in a shared use bay, the wrong code.

 

keep those appeals coming, you can see it is worthwhile and 91 appeals in the week is 2.87% of the number issued which is terrific.

 

Yours appealingly 

Miss Feezance

PATAS 11-16 June / Sandbrook Close

Did NSL wake up yet? No.

	Appeal	Appeal
June	Allowed	Refused
11	10
12	8	1
13	5	3
14	15	3
15	5
16	3
Total	43	7

There were some interesting cases in this week which were mostly in favour of the motorist.

One person claimed they were abroad in the vehicle but the tax disc number had been noted so they weren't.

One person claimed they had broken down but did not turn up to present their argument; perhaps they broke down again; they lost.

Someone else parked on their own approach to their property across the verge which they accessed via a crossover; they lost.

One person claimed to be loading but their delivery paperwork was for the wrong day so they lost.

All the above cases show that you have to be careful with your paperwork if you want to win your case.

One person claimed to be outside the hours of the yellow line when they were inside them. This was in Sandbrook Close. The problem was the same as for Brent Green where the sign plate was held to be confusing. This person won their appeal as the local authority should know better and should put up clear signs. See case no. 2120234187 on the PATAS website.

Barnet Council rescheduled one hearing and then still failed to submit any evidence. PATAS seemed unamused at that event and naturally found in favour of the motorist.

Keep putting those appeals in. Remember you have to submit three (informal,formal and then to PATAS) to be in with a real chance of winning.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance

PATAS w/c 18 June 2012

patas in another language

The Parking and Traffic Appeals Service (PATAS) was established by The Road Traffic Act 1991 to provide the administrative support to the Parking and Traffic Adjudicators. The service continues to provide this support under the Traffic Management Act 2004 and, since 2003, to the Road User Charging Adjudicators.

The adjudicators consider appeals against Penalty Charge Notices issued by the London local authorities (after your representation to the local authority has been rejected)

The list of Barnet cases for the week ahead is:

JM Cars

Mr Leonard Gerber

Mr Terence Fernandes * 3

Mr Anthony Reiff

Mrs Jean Fronek * 2

Mr David Gordon

Mr Libor Olsanic

Saeed Saeed

Mr Sameh Sekim Gerges

Mrs Geeta Jagani

I would like to see how NSL are getting on with their handling of appeals so if you are one of the parties in the above list do please send me an email, missfeezance@gmail.com and tell me about your case and how you got on at PATAS.

Yours appealingly

Miss Feezance