Thanks so much lamma! Very solid advice - I wished I'd found this out 4 weeks ago when I first got the JBW letter. I have spent the last 24 hours chasing around to find someone to witness the declaration, but finally have it sorted and faxed and have emailed for confirmation. Is this still relevant though as I actually ended up paying the £450 on Monday night in my panic, and now hope to reclaim the money from the council, rather than stopping the bailliffs in their tracks....

Hi there, 3 weeks ago (late March 2010) I received a letter from JBW Group informing me of a traffic violation from August 2009 (driving the wrong way down a one-way; I don't recall doing it, but it is quite possible as the time and place are likely), and asking for payment of about £250. I immediately phoned them up to find out more about the contravention and ask why it was my first notice of it. They said I was to phone Islington council for details. I phoned several times and left at least THREE voicemails over the following weeks, seeking proof of the contravention and trying to understand why I had still never received anything from the council for this. Last week I then received another letter from JBW stating the fine had been increased to £434, and then today I have received another letter "NOTICE OF REMOVAL" saying that they would be sending bailliffs. I have now phoned them again to understand more about this and been told that they will be clamping my car in the morning and sending bailliffs to the door, further increasing the charge. I am enraged as I would obviously have paid the fine in the first 2 weeks IF I HAD KNOWN ABOUT IT. Whilst waiting for the council to return my calls and supply me with basic information that I should always have had I have incurred £200 more fines already! Feeling intimidated by the threat of increased fines in the morning and further inconvenience if my car is clamped, I have now paid the £434 in order to shut JBW Group up, but I would like to know how I can go about reclaiming the money - how do I complain about the lack of service from Islington council? What rights do I have here (if any)? Any help or advice appreciated!

Hi all, I have to say a big THANK YOU to you all for your help! Having appealed using a good deal of copy-and-paste from your comments, I have just received a response to say that ... "I have now thoroughly investigated your case and can confirm that where you were parked is not part of the footway and this is indeed the carriageway. I apologise that you were initially advised otherwise. I have now cancelled the PCN and I apologise for any inconvenience caused. " Thanks again everyone.

Thanks for your help here guys. For clarity it was a Sunday and definitely outside the hours of operation, but either way I'd agree that the signage was misleading. I'd also agree that it wasn't a conventional place to park, but was more a case of "when needs must" as there were no other free spaces on the square at the time (and I didn't want to park illegally on a DYL!). I'll be using your arguments to fight this - thanks again for your help.

Thanks for your thoughts guys. The photos are the CEO’s photos; I didn’t have a camera with me at the time. My problem with the “obstructing a footway” reasoning though is that by walking around my car a pedestrian would have had more direct access to cross to the narrower piece of road (Carthusian St) exiting the square – the pavements are not aligned (you can see this if you swivel the google streetview around to face east up the road). The entire road-area at this junction is raised to pavement-level because people do not cross at right-angles in order to stay on the same northern side of the road. By the reasoning that I got a ticket, surely the white van in the image should have a ticket as well as it is stopping people from crossing over to the area that I parked? Where does the cut-off point come if I had parked further west around the same corner? Enough space to get what through behind my car? A single pedestrian? But what if you’re obese and pushing a double-buggy, I’m sure the council could come up with a reason requiring a 5m gap behind the car if it meant additional revenue for them? Surely this is why they paint double-lines on some areas and single on others? Realistically I couldn’t give a monkeys, it’s not an incredible amount of money and probably easier to pay rather than waste time with a fight… I just begrudge a system that seems to be revenue grabbing rather than actually controlling the roads.

Yes people would have had to walk around the car, in the same way a car will always cause an obstruction parked when parked on a road. Surely if it wasn't intended for parking on they would have put a double-yellow in place?

Yes. Just by the bike, but on the near-side of the fence.

I have recently been given a PCN for contravention code 624 (parking on a footway), but I don’t think it was actually a footway because it was a single yellow line (on a Sunday). Could someone please clarify? Maybe I am wrong, but I thought it would be a double-yellow line if it was not meant to be parked on? I parked opposite 42 Charterhouse Square, London which, when facing it, has a series of Pay and Display bays to the left/West followed by a single yellow line which follows around the corner and all the way up to a black fence (part of the gates leading into the rest of the square). On 6th September I had parked parallel to the single yellow line with my boot to the fence and all 4 wheels on what I considered the “road side” of the line. Here is the googlemap for the area, and if you zoom to streetview level it should be pointing directly at the corner I had parked on. http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=42+Charterhouse+Square+&sll=51.520546,-0.098609&sspn=0.00029,0.0006&ie=UTF8&ll=51.520528,-0.09882&spn=0.00029,0.0006&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=51.520507,-0.098836&panoid=KvZEHJLeTn4pCVWv9hrVMA&cbp=12,25.36,,0,5 Here are the pictures of the contravention… parked.bmp 2.bmp 3.bmp Admittedly due to the angle of those photos you can’t see the single yellow line running the length of my car on the driver’s side, but it is definitely there in the google images. 3 hours later I immediately (6th September) appealed the PCN stating that I considered the vehicle to have been parked on a single-yellow line (on a Sunday) and all 4 wheels were on a public carriageway. I then received a response after 2 weeks stating: Unfortunately I have been unable to complete my investigation yet as I am still awaiting information from another team. As soon as I receive that information I will write back to you with my decision. I expect this to be within 14 days from the date you receive this letter. If you do not hear from me by that time, please contact Parking Appeals at the above address and let us know. In the meantime, I will place this case on hold to stop it progressing any further and will ensure you are not disadvantaged by this delay. Please accept my apologies for any inconvenience this is causing. I have just now received their response stating: The above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) was issued because the vehicle was parked with one ore more wheels on any part of an urban road other than a carriageway (footway parking). I have considered your correspondence and I have also had a site check carried out by another team. It was confirmed that the vehicle was parked on the crossover which is part of the footway. Parking on the pavement is almost always illegal and can pose a danger to pedestrians, especially the disabled, visually impaired and older people. Footway parking ultimately results in higher maintenance costs for the Council. Footways are not designed to take the weight of motor vehicles and, as such, damage to the pavement can occur. I am satisfied the PCN was correctly issued. As the PCN was issued correctly, payment is now due. I have decided that we can accept the discounted amount of £60.00 provided we receive that before 10/10/09. Please bear in mind that on that date the charge will increase to £120.00. If you wish to continue to contest the matter, the next stage is that a Notice to Owner will be sent to the person responsible for the penalty charge. This is a necessary legal step and further correspondence will only delay this process. I am afraid you are unlikely to get a further opportunity to make discounted payment. However, the Notice to Owner will establish liability for the Penalty Charge Notice and the grounds under which representations may be made. If representations are made at this stage and they are rejected, there will be the right of appeal to the independent adjudicator at the Parking & Traffic Appeals Service. You can make a credit or debit card payment on - 020 7527 2000 - at any time. You can also pay on line at Islington Council. If you prefer to pay by cheque, please make it payable to LB Islington and send it to the above address. Please write the PCN number on the back of the cheque. You may also send postal orders (quoting the PCN number). My thoughts on their response: “vehicle was parked on the crossover which is part of the footway” then why does it have a single yellow line on it? “Footways are not designed to take the weight of motor vehicles” ermmm, 2 foot to the right of my parking is the same bricked area that is clearly a drivethrough into the square and obviously intended to be driven on. Now, if I am wrong and it is possible to have single-yellow lines on the pavement and I did actually park on the pavement, then sorry, my mistake, I’ve learned something new. But I am still adamant that I didn’t park on the pavement. Can anyone offer me any advice on this? Many thanks