Author Topic: You be the Adjudicator!  (Read 3365 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Nigel W

  • Guest
You be the Adjudicator!
« on: 29 February, 2012, 03:41:07 AM »
Two separate Appeals -v- Hounslow same day. One allowed one refused: Which is which?

2120047190 Footway parking (one - four wheels on footway).

"The appellant claims that he has parked at the location in question for many years and has never received a pcn.  He refers to a parking notice which indicates that vehicles should park with wheels on the pavement. He has provided a photograph of the notice".

2120037914 Footway parking (one - four wheels on footway).

"There is no dispute that this vehicle was parked with one or more of its wheels on the public footway.  The appellant explains that he used to live on this road with his wife and that the council permits motorists to park on the footway on it given the carriageway is narrow and obstruction would be caused if they parked on it he stating in support that since the contravention date the council has installed footway parking bays on the road".
 

Offline Robinthehood

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 101
Re: You be the Adjudicator!
« Reply #1 on: 29 February, 2012, 07:50:45 AM »
It is very strange indeed.

This reminds me of a letter one of the Newham businessmen wrote to the MP, he gave me a copy about a month ago. The last paragraph goes:

"The appeals service are inconsistent as a neighbour of ours has had his appeal granted on the grounds he has parked on his forecourt for 15 years, whereas we, with exactly the same circumstances have been rejected and we have parked on ours for 62 years. We have provided employment in this area since 1949, but can see no future if this is to continue"

I feel so sorry for this gentleman because when they first received PCN's after 62 years!!! they didn't know what to do, they told the council their circumstances. Newham council as usual didn't want to know. Sent the normal template with "copy and paste" bits from adjudicators decisions about footway parking.

They own 3 properties, have a dropped kerb installed to drive to their forecourt. There are bollards separating their forecourt from the pavement. In an identical situation, a property in Barking Road, adjudicators decided that the line of bollards kind of indicate a boundary that separates pavement from the forecourt parking area. We saw the Barking road property recently, it is much smaller and no barriers except a few bollards.

Also, around the same time, another business across the road from their property (who hasn't got a dropped kerb installed) were let off with several tickets, because the adjudicator (quite rightly) decided that "Council did not enforce the ban since 1974, therefore they parked their with impunity, and the council cannot issue tickets without giving a warning first".

If nothing else, they should not ignore the "legitimate expectations" bit at least. Looks like not all adjudicators are savvy enough or some are just not aware of all aspects of public law to find that the Newham council has acted "ultra vires" in abusing their discretionary powers by not acting fairly.

I am told by an Administrative Law expert that "an improper use of a statue" is also unlawful. i.e. Councils such as Newham using the Greater London General Powers Act 1974 footway parking ban to issue PCN's for private forecourt parking. The ban was introduced to stop people from parking on real pavements, therefore obstructing pedestrians and damaging council owned pavements.

They turned a blind eye to the ban for 37 years!

As soon as they realised that they can make money out of it by issuing CCTV enforcement, they got very enthusiastic about the footway parking ban >:D

Where is great British justice :(
« Last Edit: 29 February, 2012, 08:11:10 AM by Robinthehood »

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
Re: You be the Adjudicator!
« Reply #2 on: 29 February, 2012, 07:10:53 PM »
I don't know where these two cases happened - which road that is - but I do know that Hounslow do indeed allow pavement parking in some roads but not in others. Therefore I guess that the first PCN Appeal was allowed.

Nigel W

  • Guest
Re: You be the Adjudicator!
« Reply #3 on: 29 February, 2012, 07:32:20 PM »
Dick If you go to:  http://www.patas.gov.uk/default.htm  Click on Register of Appeals. Then click on search under Parking Adjudicators. Enter the 10 digit number for the Appeal. Click on Search. Then click on the Appeal case reference No. You will be able to see the full Appeal Adjudication.

You will find that the top appeal was Refused and the bottom one was Allowed.
« Last Edit: 29 February, 2012, 08:31:15 PM by Nigel W »

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
Re: You be the Adjudicator!
« Reply #4 on: 29 February, 2012, 08:36:21 PM »
You will find that the top appeal was Refused and the bottom one was Allowed.

I'll take your word for it - personally, going by those two paragraphs alone, I'd have allowed both!

Offline Robinthehood

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 101
Re: You be the Adjudicator!
« Reply #5 on: 06 March, 2012, 07:16:27 AM »
2 cases, same road, 2 different adjudicators, 2 completely different views ???

Case Reference:   2120057707
Authority:   Newham
Contravention Date:   10 Nov 2011
Contravention Location:   Gibbins Road
Contravention:   Footway parking (one - four wheels on footway)
Decision Date:   05 Mar 2012
Adjudicator:   Gerald Styles
Appeal Decision:   Allowed

Allowed
Reasons:   
I have viewed  the  cctv clip  from   the  camera car (on which the  GPS  was apparently not set or broken).

I have seen  it show a  number of  cars  on what  I take  to be a forecourt that is not part of the  road.


Wheels  of appellant car we not actually  on or over  the footway  (pavement) so far  as I have been able to see and I have concluded  the  appeal  is properly allowed.


Refused
Case Reference:   2120057762
Appellant:   Miss Kathleen Merritt
Authority:   Newham
Contravention Date:   27 Oct 2011
Contravention Location:   Gibbins Road
Contravention:   Footway parking (one - four wheels on footway)
Decision Date:   05 Mar 2012
Adjudicator:   Christopher Rayner
Appeal Decision:   Refused

Reasons:   1)    Newham council provide photographs and supporting evidence showing Miss Merritt's car, N379JGD, parked on the forecourt to premises in Gibbins Road at 15:05 on 27 October 2011.  They issued a postal penalty charge notice (PCN) to Miss Merritt alleging that her car was parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway.  "Footway parking", as it is often referred to, is prohibited across the whole of London.
      2)    Miss Merritt explains that she was parked in a private forecourt, and that she was paying the owner of the forecourt to allow her to park there.
3)    The photographs show that this may well be privately owned land.  However, the nature of the area is such that it is clear that pedestrians have a right of access to and over it.  As such, it is an area of land on which parking is prohibited, regardless of ownership of the land, or of any formal or informal relationship between the property owner and the motorist.  This is a well established legal principle, confirmed by the Court of Appeal in the case of R (on the application of Dawoo) v Parking and Traffic Appeals Service, [2009] EWCA Civ 1411.  Even accepting Miss Merritt's account, I must refuse this appeal.


 W:T:F:

 


Supporters of the NoToMob

In order to view this object you need Flash Player 9+ support!

Get Adobe Flash player