notomob.co.uk

General Category => General No To Mob Discussion => Topic started by: Pat Pending on 19 April, 2012, 09:34:22 PM

Title: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 19 April, 2012, 09:34:22 PM
A friend of mine has recently been issued a PCN for parking his motorcycle on the footpath. He was parked on the Grass verge my question is does this constitute the Footpath? I think it probably does but I would be interested to see what you guys think. I think this may be somewhere near Eastway as he works on the Olympic Farce Park.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 19 April, 2012, 11:41:33 PM
Oh dear. The Chartered institute of shitbags (http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/policylobbying/transport/parkinginlondon/footwayparking.htm) like to include grass verges as part of the footpath for the purposes of tax farming.

 :o
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Nigel W on 20 April, 2012, 05:39:19 AM
Footway Parking - Bikers beware!

"Footway parking is an area where London is different from the rest of the country. Outside London if parking on a footway or verge is prohibited then there must be a sign indicating the prohibition. Inside the Greater London area all footway parking is prohibited unless it is specifically exempted and signs indicate that you may park partially or wholly on the footway................

...........Regardless of whether councils find a way to thwart motorcyclists a word of caution is in order. Don’t leave your motorcycle outside any of the Royal palaces - the police have blown up at least one,  :o  so left, on the grounds that it was suspected of being a terrorist’s vehicle! Care should also be take to ensure that pedestrians cannot injure themselves otherwise the owner of an offending vehicle might find himself the subject of a private prosecution."


http://www.parkingticket.co.uk/sh.html (http://www.parkingticket.co.uk/sh.html)



Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 20 April, 2012, 03:33:04 PM
He tells me they have parked there for three and a half years with no tickets until now.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Coco on 20 April, 2012, 07:29:05 PM
He tells me they have parked there for three and a half years with no tickets until now.

In this case, unless the authority has taken steps to ensure that potential victims were given prior notice of the council's intention to start enforcing, I believe that there could have been an expectation that there would be no enforcement action. I believe that many of the Newham adjudications have upheld this principle, and I think that Nigel will be able to provide more info on this.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Nigel W on 20 April, 2012, 07:38:18 PM
Indeed Coco. Legitimate expectation:

2120130716

".........However I accept Miss Perry's evidence that she and other employees of the dental practice have parked at this location for many years. During the four years that Miss Perry has worked at the practice her car has not been issued with a Penalty Charge Notice until she received three Penalty Charge Notices towards the end of 2011. In those circumstances I find that at the time that she parked her car on 28 th  November 2011 Miss Perry had a legitimate expectation that no Penalty Charge Notice would be issued.

I allow this appeal." 


And again:

2120134353

"The Appellants do not deny that there vehicle was parked with two wheels on the pavement, but say that given the narrowness of the road they have been parking in this way for over 18 years as their neighbours and visitors have. In effect,  they are arguing that pavement parking at this location has been tolerated over a number of years and the Enforcement Authority have not given any warning that that toleration is coming to an end; a legitimate expectation of non enforcement has arisen.

Despite making the point both in their original representations and the notice of appeal, the Enforcement Authority have not addressed it and so I must assume that they do not dispute the claim of toleration over at least 18 years.

There is a line of authorities that do sustain the proposition concerning a legitimate expectation, in particular the decision quoted on PATAS web site under the heading legitimate expectation, Beatt -v- London Borough of Wandsworth case no. 1950092219.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Belplasca on 20 April, 2012, 07:42:43 PM
Plus, looking at that photo, it would seem that the bike was parked on (or, at least, very close to) an area that had been paved (differently from the actual footpath) with blocks that are often used for parking areas...

The argument about different - and differentiating - surfaces has occured in some of the other pavement parking appeals...

Bob
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 20 April, 2012, 08:17:03 PM
That is good news as it would seem it is worth a challenge after all.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 20 April, 2012, 08:51:29 PM
How long do they have to observe the vehicle for as the ticket states 1 minute?
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 20 April, 2012, 09:04:08 PM
That is good news as it would seem it is worth a challenge after all.


Chuffing right it is. Matey's bike is nowhere near the piggin' footpath. Exactly how far across the field does the footpath go? The grass verge bit in the footpath legislation reasonably refers to grass areas directly next to the carriageway as in the example below. Never mind the paved area alluding to it being a parking area, the bike is parked off the footpath, not obstructing it in any way, shape or form. It's in the park FFS. Looking at the reasoning behind the footpath parking ban, To prevent obstruction to pedestrians, Surprisingly, the council are being dicks.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 20 April, 2012, 10:00:16 PM
The said ticket.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 20 April, 2012, 10:21:06 PM
I've just found the location. The bike must have been in Lee Valley Park. On the footpath, my hairy arse!

(http://serve.mysmiley.net/sign/sign0012.gif) (http://www.celebrityfashionarchive.com)
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: jonesy on 21 April, 2012, 12:06:10 AM
I'm on it and checking with people I know to find out if lee valley owns/maintains this bit of land
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Nigel W on 21 April, 2012, 05:56:10 AM
The observation time of 1 min is OK. It is an instant offence.

Post up the reverse side of the PCN please Pat.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 21 April, 2012, 10:58:30 AM
He will do it when he gets in from work later today Nigel.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 21 April, 2012, 06:03:53 PM
Reverse of ticket.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: The Phoenix on 22 April, 2012, 01:08:42 AM
PCN seems ok to me, sorry to say.  Best go with the "legitimate expectation" argument.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Nigel W on 22 April, 2012, 09:37:10 AM
I can reiterate what Phoenix says above. PCN is OK.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 22 April, 2012, 10:21:34 AM
Ok guys thanks for the help it is always best to let other people have a butchers in case there is a loop hole.
I will have a chat with him later today and tell him what to say on his appeal to the PCN, its worth a punt.
Is there any point in mentioning previous cases of legitimate expectation on the first appeal to the LA?
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Nigel W on 22 April, 2012, 10:31:25 AM
He should mention in his reps. that he has been parking there for X amount of time on a regular basis and that no PCN had previously been issued to him.

Also state that, he had a reasonable expectation as a result of his previous parking there, that on the day the PCN was issued he was parking lawfully. He can refer to and quote the Adjudications above.

If he also states that since receiving the PCN he has not parked there since and will not do so in future this should help.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: The Phoenix on 22 April, 2012, 11:12:56 AM
I would also include the "standard" requests re CEO's notes, full photographic evidence to make them work and require of them when and why they have started enforcing this location.  I don't suppose your mate has had any chit-chats with any CEO(s) about allowing him to park there in the past?
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 22 April, 2012, 12:10:17 PM
No chit chats, they just started enforcing after years of ignoring the place. They have started to enforce on the run up to the Olympics we think.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 22 April, 2012, 02:04:30 PM
No chit chats, they just started enforcing after years of ignoring the place. They have started to enforce on the run up to the Olympics when they noticed there was extra money to be had we think.

I'll save you thinking, that's exactly why.

 ;D
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: jonesy on 24 April, 2012, 10:20:12 PM
Ok I have checked with Lee Valley and seen their maps of the area, unfortunately the bit of land which the bike was parked is Hackney's and/or highways the other side of the road beyond the boundary is Lee Valley's
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 25 April, 2012, 06:23:38 PM
Thanks Jonesy.  It was well worth a shot.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: The Phoenix on 29 April, 2012, 03:35:30 PM
Another case:  2110055104
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 29 April, 2012, 04:20:45 PM
Top example Phoenix.

"The main plank of the Appellant's case is that he has been parking in this way for at least three years without complaint or enforcement. The Council does not appear to challenge this. It seems to  me that if the Council allows three years to pass allowing a vehicle to park in this way with no action taken the Council is giving an implied permission to park in this fashion which it cannot revoke without giving some sort of notice. The PCN issued in the present case naturally has that effect and the Appellant cannot park in this position in future. In the circumstances the present Penalty is unenforceable and the Appeal is allowed."

 :aplude:
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 29 April, 2012, 07:52:00 PM
Appeal against this PCN has been sent quoting the three PaTAS cases mentioned and the Legitimate expectation, let us see what the EA comes back with. <_>
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 29 April, 2012, 11:33:38 PM
Something along the lines of them being satisfied, I shouldn't wonder. When you eventually get to PATAS with it, you may want to consider adding a paragraph about how far away from the pavement the bike was, just as a fall back. I'm sure the council will not be able to resist including a condescending lecture about how pavement parking inconveniences pedestrians. Your photo on page 1 has a helpful workman demonstrating where the pavement is and how the bike is probably nearer to Mare Street than Eastway.

(http://serve.mysmiley.net/winking/winking0023.gif) (http://www.mysmiley.net)
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 29 April, 2012, 11:52:15 PM
The picture was sent to the EA with the reasons for cancelling the PCN. The EA involved is Hackney and I do not know if they are better worse or the same as other EA's.  You are quite right about the distance from the footpath though, the only people it may inconvenience are scrotes and toe rags making their way to the bikes to try and nick them or strip bits off them. :bashy:
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 29 April, 2012, 11:56:37 PM
The picture was sent to the EA with the reasons for cancelling the PCN. The EA involved is Hackney and I do not know if they are better worse or the same as other EA's.  You are quite right about the distance from the footpath though, the only people it may inconvenience are scrotes and toe rags making their way to the bikes to try and stick PCNs to them. :bashy:

Too true.

 :-ev-:
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Belplasca on 30 April, 2012, 07:42:51 AM
I'm sure the council will not be able to resist including a condescending lecture about how pavement parking inconveniences pedestrians.

And, if the bike's inconveniencing pedestrians, won't the "Works Entrance" sign inconvenience them even more? What about the redundant roadworks sign skeleton? That's right on the actual pavement, right where someone with less than perfect eyesight might walk into it.

The council's operatives would be far more useful removing things like that...

Bob
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 25 May, 2012, 04:19:52 PM
I just heard the EA have told him to pay the PCN within 14 days as they have rejected his challenge. :(
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 25 May, 2012, 04:47:39 PM
Wow! There's a surprise.

(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-green/greensmilies-029.gif) (http://www.greensmilies.com)
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: DastardlyDick on 25 May, 2012, 11:03:58 PM
Legally/technically, they're probably right. I would have thought that a bit of discretion on the part of the CEO should have been used.
   D'oh - sorry, I forgot, they're not allowed to have discretion!  :bashy:
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 26 May, 2012, 05:24:59 PM
I have told him it was always a long shot, but nothing ventured I suppose. It's not worth trying to go further with this one so I will tell him cough up.  <_>
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: The Phoenix on 01 June, 2012, 10:07:24 PM
Just back from holiday.  Can we see the letter of rejection and letter of appeal?
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 07 June, 2012, 11:23:33 PM
Just back from holiday.  Can we see the letter of rejection and letter of appeal?

No problem I will get it scanned and put up after the week end.
Title: Re: Footpath parking question.
Post by: Pat Pending on 07 June, 2012, 11:24:26 PM
Now here is another Footpath Parking problem!

http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/picture_gallery/2012/06/01/News+%28news%29/9740049.Shopping_police_officers__illegal_parking_caught_on_camera/ (http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/picture_gallery/2012/06/01/News+%28news%29/9740049.Shopping_police_officers__illegal_parking_caught_on_camera/)