01 offence, 61/62 not in force?

[spartathisis]

Hi, Received a pcn for the offence of 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours. Pic attached

 

I know it looks bad, but I had parked where the two cars behind were and returned to find it on the pavement! I had left the door unlocked by mistake (luckily nothing of value in car) and returned to find it still unlocked but parked here.

 

kirklees council state that contravention 61/62 (parking on SYL/DYL) are not in force (http://www.kirklees.gov.uk/transport/parking/pdf/ParkingAnnualReport.pdf), would this be correct? Does the SYL extend to cover the pavement?

 

the part where I normally park is an old entrance to an old car park that is now privately owned, i have parked there for some 6 mnths with no problems, not blocking the pavement etc.

 

 

Thanks

 

 

Edited February 14, 2011 by spartathisis
missing text

[spartathisis]

Just thought I will check to see if the line is "T"'d at both ends tomorrow, would this make a difference?

[green_and_mean]

Footway parking is only used in London, outside London the rely on the yellow line restriction. You can appeal on the grounds it was parked by someone without your consent and see if they accept your side of the story. Doesn't your car have a steering lock?

[spartathisis]

yes, but it was literally in a straight line from where i parked it. I know it sounds far fetched, but the silver car behind is owned by a dick that I have had words with re him taking up the space of two cars.

 

So as it stands I have no way out apart from appealing (dont think i'd fall for it )

 

thanks for quick reply

[TheBogsDollocks]

Here is a typical example of how Kirklees draft their traffic orders.

 

http://tro.parking-adjudication.gov.uk/files/KM13.pdf

 

The appeal template letter below is based on what I believe is a flaw. When you look at the definitions given in the order (see paragraph 2 onwards) you will note that it does not define "restricted street" nor "prescribed hours". If you think it appropriate you can use this template or keep it for the next stage. Your choice but if used then keep all formatting for emphasis.

 

I bring to the council's attention that the alleged contravention did not occur. The traffic regulation order fails to define what a “restricted street” is and it does not prescribe that it is a contravention to park in a restricted street during prescribed hours.

 

Contravention code 01 was originally devised by the London Councils and reflected the fact that London council’s traffic orders made specific reference as to what is to be considered “restricted street”. This can be seen in the example below (for reference, Schedule 1 concerned No Waiting restrictions);

 

“restricted street” means any street within the London Borough of Lewisham specified in Schedule 1 (hereinafter referred to as a “scheduled street”) and includes, except where the context otherwise requires, so much of every other street within that London borough which is not a scheduled street or a street specified in Schedule 4 and which joins any scheduled street as lies between the kerb line of the scheduled street and a point 18.29 metres distant therefrom and any reference in this order to any restricted street shall be construed accordingly, provided that the expression “restricted street” shall not for the purposes of this order include–

 

(a) any area on a highway or any place within the London Borough of Lewisham for the time being designated or described as a parking place by any order made or having effect as if made under section 6 or section 45 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984;

 

(b) in its application to a street specified in column (2) of Schedule 5, that length of street which extends 18.29 metres measured in the direction specified in column (3) of that schedule from the kerb line of the scheduled street specified in column (4) of that schedule, and in this definition the expression “kerb line” in relation to a scheduled street shall mean that imaginary line which is the projection of the line formed by the edge of the main carriageway of the scheduled street adjacent to its junction with the side in question of any other street;

 

© any length of street designated as red route;

 

The London boroughs would not go to the trouble of taking great care to specifically define what is a “restricted street” if it served no purpose and was unnecessary. Without a traffic order defining “restricted street” then it is reasonable to apply common language. The commonplace definition of “restricted” is thus; “place limits on, confine, restrain”. Therefore, in essence, the PCN informed me that I parked in a street during hours that the street is subject to parking restraints. It does not however inform me of how the vehicle contravened a particular parking restraint or even what parking restraint was contravened. It is highly important to note that not all parking restrictions prohibit parking (eg: parking place restrictions) and so parking in a restricted street during prescribed hours is not a contravention by default since it can be lawful. It is only a contravention if the traffic order is drafted correctly in the manner exampled above.

 

A street is often subject to a number of differing parking restrictions. For example, one particular parking bay in a street may be restricted to permit holders only between the prescribed hours of 9am to 6pm while another parking bay may be restricted to Pay & Display between the prescribed hours of 8am to 6pm. However, a person who lawfully parks their vehicle in ether bay during the prescribed hours is doing just as my vehicle was also doing, that being, “parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours”. Quite simply, the ground stated on the PCN is not fit for purpose since it does not distinguish between a vehicle that is lawfully parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours and one that is not.

 

The use of this equivocal ground is potentially prejudicial as a person may prepare an appeal focusing on a parking restriction that is not actually relevant to the reason why the PCN was served. For instance, many PCN’s are served upon vehicles that are parked partly in a parking space with either their front or rear end slightly overhanging an adjacent single or double yellow line. Often where this happens a PCN is served upon the vehicle for being “parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours”. However, due to the diverse meaning in plain English of this ground, the recipient of the PCN may wrongly but reasonably assume that they contravened the parking place restriction rather than be aware that they fractionally infringed upon the “No Waiting” yellow line restriction. In the interest of justice a person needs to easily comprehend why their vehicle was not considered lawfully parked so that they can either avoid doing so again or gather the relevant evidence for any subsequent appeal.

 

It must also be remembered that the ground on the PCN will be repeated on the NtO and the owner may not have been the driver. Therefore, unless an NtO is accompanied each and every time by adequate photos of the signage, the owner when applying common language will not be able to deduce with certainty what parking restriction the expression “restricted street “concerns and was allegedly contravened. The general principles of law dictate that a person should not have to decipher the ground stated on a PCN or guess what restriction was allegedly contravened; it should be unequivocal. In a day and age when the UK is host to a wealth of visitors and residents whose first language is not English and when central and local Government both readily advocate the use of plain English on all public forms and documents it is nonsensical to use language on a PCN that is ambiguous or may require a person to refer to the glossary of a far away traffic order to gain a degree of understanding of what they allegedly did wrong.

 

The council may be using the standard contravention codes but it should be remembered that these contravention codes have no statutory authority and cannot be relied upon as a defence as made clear in the key adjudication case between Metrick v Camden (Case no 207034396A).

 

I find the ground of “parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours” to be unsupported as a parking contravention prescribed by the traffic order. The order may prohibit waiting in certain lengths of road at certain times but the order does not define and correlate waiting restrictions with being "restricted street" nor does it define and correlate what is considered "prescribed hours". It is critical to remember that the purpose of a PCN is to encourage people to park lawfully, so it stands to reason that a person needs to know precisely what they did wrong in order to avoid doing so again.The ground given on the PCN is ineffective in conveying what I allegedly did wrong and as such it does not satisfy paragraph 1(e) contained within the Schedule to “The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 and the penalty charge should be cancelled forthwith rather than drag this matter to adjudication.

[spartathisis]

Hi, received a PCN from Kirklees MC, but it has a zero charge? I went to the parking site and found that fotos were taken and the notice cancelled, I contacted them to see why was it issued and why couldnt i park where i had.

 

A few days later a letter came (pointless asking for my email then) telling me to take it as a warning and not to park there again! the space is an old entrance to an old car park, the entrance leads to nowhere and there are no single or double yellows covering the entrance. The letter states that there will be a single painted at some stage in the future so dont park there.

 

Im confused, can I park until they get painted or not? Im not causing an obstruction and a couple of coppers said they had no problem as there was ample space for pedestrians. dont fancy having to pay £3 every day

 

Thanks