residents only parking **Ticket Cancelled by Council**

[mikeymack2002]

Hi everyone looking for some advice, I have not had a ticket here but nearly did till I saw the residents only parking sign.

 

I then looked much more closely at the road markings for this particular bay, please use street view to let me know what you think, as I believe the line markings are non compliant, but cannot find the "legal" markings for this type of bay.

 

I was visiting a friend for a few days and think that the local council are issuing tickets in these bays when they are not compliant.

 

see here please https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.550452,0.728156,3a,75y,162.69h,57.61t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s_4cXHxBSqg49fx1DD0XhMw!2e0?hl=en

 

Any advice will be gratefully received or if anyone can post a link to the "legal" marking's page, as I am struggling to find a good one

 

 

Thx MM

[Jamberson]

They look OK to me. What's non-compliant about them?

[citizenB]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?161113-Correct-markings-for-resident-parking-bays

 

there is some information that might help in the link above.

[mikeymack2002]

They look OK to me. What's non-compliant about them?

 

 

The line marking must be of a particular size and spacing, with correct starting and ending lines, they must conform the standards set by law to be enforceable, also the dividing bays must be of a certain length width and so on, I know in my head there is a site available but for the life of me cannot remember the name,

 

I am out on my particular form of transport and often see irregularities in the way things are done in this town, to give you an idea I also came across this one, this is a pay and display bay consisting of some 20+ plus bays that are the same, plus one added bonus of no pay and display machine please see here https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.524209,0.77928,3a,75y,215.27h,65.34t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sXRDFcZSPpKHd1df5F9a4Yw!2e0?hl=en

 

 

When viewing this one please keep the open area to the left and start at the far end read the signs stating P&D if you can find the machine can you let me know, the reasons for my observations are a friend was issued a PCN and was almost out of time to appeal till I offered advice and noted these irregularities in the particular borough, we do have a few posters from this area that get caught out with these signs/markings. using this one look at one end to see the double white lines at end of carriageway the go to the other end and see a single white line, this makes the ENTIRE bay un-enforceable, this is why most councils offer a discount to pay within say 14 days so the offender does not look to closely at these irregularities plus it's money in the bank for them if the offender does not know the rules regarding these issues.

 

 

MM

[Michael Browne]

For bays with individually marked spaces, the beginning and end of a section of these should have double traverse white lines (which in this case are missing)

 

Bays without individually marked spaces should start and end with a single row of traverse white lines.

 

However, there have been instances where adjudication has dismissed an appeal on this point as 'de minimus'. So going to adjudication based solely/mainly on this ground would be a gamble.

[mikeymack2002]

The appeal is going in a totally different way, and he will win the case, due to the knowledge he now has, I will see how that one goes.

 

 

Michael Browne you are indeed correct but wanted to see the images so to speak, but also the adjudicator is "impartial" and MUST abide on the point of law, this cannot be overridden by the said council so they can use any markings they see fit, or fail to comply with the regulated road markings that ARE there to assist the motorist on where how and when an action they take whilst driving.

 

 

The lines are very important and are used for specific reasons, safety for one, and for informational purposes, if they are wrong then they are wrong,

Did you check out the P&D one yet? quite interesting one, you must pay to stay but where to pay?

 

 

MM

[Michael Browne]

 

 

Michael Browne you are indeed correct but wanted to see the images so to speak, but also the adjudicator is "impartial" and MUST abide on the point of law, this cannot be overridden by the said council so they can use any markings they see fit, or fail to comply with the regulated road markings that ARE there to assist the motorist on where how and when an action they take whilst driving.

 

The lines are very important and are used for specific reasons, safety for one, and for informational purposes, if they are wrong then they are wrong,

 

Whilst you can argue this till the cows come home, the reality is that adjudicators can and do dismiss appeals based on 'minor' discrepancies. For instance, appeals based on missing termination bars for single and double yellow lines now rarely succeed

 

 

Did you check out the P&D one yet? quite interesting one, you must pay to stay but where to pay?

 

Yes, and this is completely different (assuming the situation is still the same as the 2012 GSV view). As well as the two differing traverse lines, there are no timeplates or P&D machines, thus making it impossible for motorists to know if and when they have to pay and without the ticket machine, the ability to pay.

[mikeymack2002]

This is how crazy this council are, they do this so often and get away with it, I don't see why they should, thanks for your input

 

Yes to the last P&D it is still the same, still no machine all signs are the same, how much money have they lost/gained for this discrepancy

 

MM

[Michael Browne]

Yes to the last P&D it is still the same, still no machine all signs are the same, how much money have they lost/gained for this discrepancy

You could always make an FOI request and find out.

[mikeymack2002]

Already done so just waiting to receive the documents.

[Jamberson]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]49525[/ATTACH]

 

DfT diagram 1032 is the one which applies. Yes there should be double markings at the end, and the dimensions of the bay are defined as well.

 

Michael is right about the application of de minimus. It's not correct to assert that adjudicators must slavishly abide by the law. They can use reasonable judgement. Suppose the bay is of the correct size, and I as a motorist, turn up there. I see the bays on the road and the sign saying permit holders only. Am I confused as to what the rules are? An adjudicator may or may not uphold an appeal based on the lack of double lines at the end. He's not compelled to be strict on the law, which is why the de minimus principle exists.

[green_and_mean]

After the Heron High court case any trivial argument like this is likely to fail.

[mikeymack2002]

This is not going to be the defence for this first ticket ever, he has got a real reason for stopping in such a random place he always parks correctly anyway, I have also asked for the councils parking management strategy on enforcement in residential areas after 18:00 in the evening

 

 

MM

[Jamberson]

You'll probably be told that there's no difference in policy before or after 18:00. Where I live CEOs patrol until midnight. Although the different parking restrictions come out of force at various times in the evenings, they will still ticket someone at any time they find them in contravention.

[green_and_mean]

I would have thought after 6pm was the best time to enforce, residents are usually at work during the day and parking spaces less of an issue.

[mikeymack2002]

Hi everyone, an update, I heard back from the issuing Authority today they have clearly stated that the PCN has been cancelled and no further action is being taken this has been confirmed in writing.

 

 

MM

[mikeymack2002]

After the Heron High court case any trivial argument like this is likely to fail.

 

 

Hi everyone, an update, I heard back from the issuing Authority today they have clearly stated that the PCN has been cancelled and no further action is being taken this has been confirmed in writing.

 

 

Driver very surprised but very happy with the result

 

MM

[Jamberson]

What was the appeal based on? Just the road markings being non-compliant?

[mikeymack2002]

No it was that and a medical emergency as well

[Jamberson]

Right. Well then G&M, and myself, were saying that an appeal based on the bays being non-compliant was likely to fail. I would bet you anything that it was the medical emergency which led to the cancellation. But good result in any case.

[mikeymack2002]

like I said too that was not my reason for appealing lol but in the end a ticket was cancelled and that I am pleased with the result .

 

 

Thx All

 

 

MM