Thread: Putting a Council/or/Officer on notice for acting ultra vires regarding issuing unlawfull penalties..

Can anyone write a pro forma letter to a Council reporting a sign/line that is defective, which also puts a council on notice not to issue charges against such an unlawful sign/line.?
This should point out the legallity of such and action and also the ultimate consequences of any unlawfull action by such a Council by issuing an unlawful penalty/act.

Similar Threads:

• High Court Enforcement Officer - Notice of Seizure - Some Advice Please.
• Notice of Seizure by High Court Enforcement Officer
• Putting a Credit Card Co on Notice at Court. How do I do it?
• Notice of Acting - Thought!
• Council tax penalties

Have this line/sign been proved unlawful by an adjudicator?

Who says it's defective? Only the Department of Transport can rule a sign defective. An adjudicators ruling does not in itself make a sign unlawful, most Councils would on having a ruling against a sign write to the Dept of Transport to seek advice and then take the appropriate action.

To meany/greeny.
I say its unlawful, as it does not conform to the Regulations and the law.It is a hybrid of a Parking Bay With Indvidual spaces., drawing P1032-1.
If it dunt comply with that drawing then its just gaffiti on the deck.
As above, the terms that should be used is " Non compliant. " where I have used unlawfull.
This diagram is from the DoT, and what is on the floor does not comply with said drawing, resp ips liqutor.
PPC.
It is a letter pointing out to a council that the offending sign and lines do not conform to the legislation and regulations.
Asking that they note this fact and cease issuing tickets on this bay.

Hi

How long before you think you can get a ruling on this, I am interested as in the west midlands there has been talk of incorrect signage.
Will you need to raise the issue with an adudicator, or go through the court system.

Regards

Andy

I would try and get an adjudication first and then confront the council.
In order to do that you will need to get a pcn first and go thru the system.

Originally Posted by green_and_mean

Who says it's defective? Only the Department of Transport can rule a sign defective.

Not quite.

Higher courts can rule signage defective.

old andrew 2007
You can travel the length and breadth of the UK and find defective signs and lines every where.
I would issue a challege to any Council that within 30 minutes of arriving in thier location have at least 30 instances of non compiant signs/lines
The defects maybe in some peoples eyes only minor, but you take 30 minor gaps in a 50m yellow line of which 15m is missing cos of gaps, thats a lot of missing lines.
Take that over a large town, and you will see miles of gaps in miles of lines.
Which according to the law should not be there.
But the penalties keep rolling in and we either fight the things or just give up and pay up.
My view is " The pen is mightier than the sword, and play these Clown Hall people at thier own game, "

go through the process. the council will in all probability lie and prevaricate to get its way (and your cash). if the adjudicator finds for you proceed.
If the adjudictor makes 'an error' more common than people realise but easily identifiable if you have good english and logic skills then consider Judicial Review. if the council is really bad (and many are, malfeasance in much more common than is generally known IMV) you may want to consider Judicial Review before the adjudicator. Read up of Judicial Review first and the correct protocols.

Originally Posted by 68904

To meany/greeny.
I say its unlawful, as it does not conform to the Regulations and the law.It is a hybrid of a Parking Bay With Indvidual spaces., drawing P1032-1.
If it dunt comply with that drawing then its just gaffiti on the deck.
As above, the terms that should be used is " Non compliant. " where I have used unlawfull.
This diagram is from the DoT, and what is on the floor does not comply with said drawing, resp ips liqutor.
PPC.
It is a letter pointing out to a council that the offending sign and lines do not conform to the legislation and regulations.
Asking that they note this fact and cease issuing tickets on this bay.

Just because some armchair expert considers a bay or sign non compliant doesn't mean it is. For a start only bays installed after the 2002 TRSGD came into force are covered by the regulations within. The Department of Transport can also give authority for variations on markings and signs which would not be apparent to a casual observer. The TRSGD is a very comprehensive book and very few people bother reading all 448 pages before making assumptions of incorrect signage etc. The schedules and directions contained at the back often allow for variations and combinations not at first apparent when looking at the pictures.
There are a lot of so called 'experts' and 'campaigners' about claiming this and that in order to make a few quid from web sites or get their name in the Local Press. Sometimes Councils do make mistakes but a lot of time they are correct but you rarely get the likes of Neil Herron or Barry Segal shouting about their lost adjudications from the roof tops and admitting THEY were wrong those cases and stories just conveniently get forgotten about.
If you have concerns about your local signage by all means express your concerns to the relevant department but that is not what you first suggested, demanding enforcement stops based on a personal opinion about legality is not expressing a concern.

The TSRGD lays it out nice and clearly, the clear revocation of the 1994 regs and the phasing involved.
========================= ====
Citation and commencement
1. This Part of this Instrument -

(a) may be cited -

(i) as the Traffic Signs Regulations 2002, and

(ii) together with Part II below, as the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002; and


(b) shall come into force on 31st January 2003.


Revocations
2. The Traffic Signs Regulations 1994[4] and the Traffic Signs (amendment) Regulations 1995[5] are hereby revoked.

Savings
3. - (1) Subject to paragraph (2), any traffic sign which immediately before the coming into force of these Regulations was placed on or near a road shall be treated as prescribed by these Regulations, notwithstanding any provisions of these Regulations to the contrary, provided that -

(a) it is a sign prescribed, or to be treated as if prescribed, by the 1981 Regulations or by the 1994 Regulations; and

(b) it continues to comply with those Regulations,


as if those Regulations had not been revoked.

(2) Paragraph (1) shall cease to have effect -

(a) on 1st January 2005 in relation to the signs shown in each of the following diagrams -

(i) in the Traffic Signs Regulations 1957[6], diagrams 403 to 405, 412A to 418, 422 to 433, 435 to 459, 468 to 472, and 474 to 495;

(ii) in the Traffic Signs Regulations 1964[7], diagrams 742, 746, 837 and 838;

(iii) in the 1981 Regulations, diagrams 626.1, 627, 628.1, 641, 642.1, 649.2, 653, 734.7, 739.3, 742.1, 742.2, 742.3, 742.4, 742.5, 742.6, 747, 748, 749, 750, 751, 752, 752.1, 753, 753.1, 758, 759, 837.1, 838.1 and 905;

(iv) in the 1994 Regulations, diagrams 618.1 (when varied to include the legend "buses and coaches"), 784, 818.1 (when varied to show a distance greater than 2 miles), 820 (when varied to include the legend "buses and coaches"), 954.1 and 1028.2 (when varied to "COACHES"); and

(v) in the 1994 Regulations, diagrams 958, 959 and 960, in each case when varied to include the legend "& coaches";


(b) on 1st January 2007 in relation to the signs shown in diagrams 622.1A (when varied to show "17T"), 626.2 (when displaying "17T" or "25T"), 1025 and 1025.2 in the 1994 Regulations;

(c) on 1st January 2010 in relation to -

(i) the signals prescribed by regulation 31(3) of the 1981 Regulations;

(ii) the sign shown in diagram 661 in the 1994 Regulations; and

(iii) the signs shown in diagrams 618.1, 618.2, 618.3, 618.3A and 620 in the 1994 Regulations when varied to include the orange badge symbol shown in diagram 661 in those Regulations;


(d) on 1st January 2015 in relation to -

(i) the signs shown in diagrams 728.1, 728.2, 729, 729.1, 729.2, 729.3, 730, 730.1, 732, 732.1, 732.2, 733, 733.1, 734.1, 734.2, 734.3, 734.4, 734.5, 734.6, 734.8, 734.9, 734.10, 736, 736.1, 737.1, 760 and 761 in the 1981 Regulations; and

(ii) the signs shown in diagrams 2308, 2309, 2310, 2311, 2313, 2314, 2315, 2315.1 and 2919 of the 1994 Regulations.



(3) Subject to paragraph (4), portable light signals which do not comply with regulation 35 shall be treated as prescribed by these Regulations if and so long as -

(a) those signals are of the size, colour and type prescribed by regulation 32 of the 1994 Regulations; and

(b) those signals and any apparatus (including the content of all instructions stored in, or executable by them) used in connection with them are the subject of an approval given and for the time being in force under direction 49 of the Traffic Signs General Directions 1994[8].


(4) Paragraph (3) shall cease to have effect on 1st January 2015.

(5) Notwithstanding regulation 2, the 1994 Regulations shall be treated, in relation to a paragraph (6) sign, as remaining in force during the extension period.

(6) In paragraph (5) -

(a) "the extension period" means the period of 12 weeks beginning with the day on which these Regulations come into force; and

(b) "a paragraph (6) sign" is a sign which is of the size, colour and type shown in diagram 547.5, 547.6, 626.2, 629, 639.1A, 642.2, 643, 644, 661, 661.2, 661.3, 780, 780.1, 780.2, 784, 785, 832.10, 864, 872, 2010, 2206, 2207, 2308, 2309, 2919, 2920, 3001, 3001.1, 4002, 7002, 7003, 7007 or 7010 of the 1994 Regulations.

Originally Posted by lamma

The TSRGD lays it out nice and clearly, the clear revocation of the 1994 regs and the phasing involved.
========================= ====
Citation and commencement
1. This Part of this Instrument -

(a) may be cited -

(i) as the Traffic Signs Regulations 2002, and

(ii) together with Part II below, as the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002; and


(b) shall come into force on 31st January 2003.


Revocations
2. The Traffic Signs Regulations 1994[4] and the Traffic Signs (amendment) Regulations 1995[5] are hereby revoked.

Savings
3. - (1) Subject to paragraph (2), any traffic sign which immediately before the coming into force of these Regulations was placed on or near a road shall be treated as prescribed by these Regulations, notwithstanding any provisions of these Regulations to the contrary, provided that -

(a) it is a sign prescribed, or to be treated as if prescribed, by the 1981 Regulations or by the 1994 Regulations; and

(b) it continues to comply with those Regulations,


as if those Regulations had not been revoked.

(2) Paragraph (1) shall cease to have effect -

(a) on 1st January 2005 in relation to the signs shown in each of the following diagrams -

(i) in the Traffic Signs Regulations 1957[6], diagrams 403 to 405, 412A to 418, 422 to 433, 435 to 459, 468 to 472, and 474 to 495;

(ii) in the Traffic Signs Regulations 1964[7], diagrams 742, 746, 837 and 838;

(iii) in the 1981 Regulations, diagrams 626.1, 627, 628.1, 641, 642.1, 649.2, 653, 734.7, 739.3, 742.1, 742.2, 742.3, 742.4, 742.5, 742.6, 747, 748, 749, 750, 751, 752, 752.1, 753, 753.1, 758, 759, 837.1, 838.1 and 905;

(iv) in the 1994 Regulations, diagrams 618.1 (when varied to include the legend "buses and coaches"), 784, 818.1 (when varied to show a distance greater than 2 miles), 820 (when varied to include the legend "buses and coaches"), 954.1 and 1028.2 (when varied to "COACHES"); and

(v) in the 1994 Regulations, diagrams 958, 959 and 960, in each case when varied to include the legend "& coaches";


(b) on 1st January 2007 in relation to the signs shown in diagrams 622.1A (when varied to show "17T"), 626.2 (when displaying "17T" or "25T"), 1025 and 1025.2 in the 1994 Regulations;

(c) on 1st January 2010 in relation to -

(i) the signals prescribed by regulation 31(3) of the 1981 Regulations;

(ii) the sign shown in diagram 661 in the 1994 Regulations; and

(iii) the signs shown in diagrams 618.1, 618.2, 618.3, 618.3A and 620 in the 1994 Regulations when varied to include the orange badge symbol shown in diagram 661 in those Regulations;


(d) on 1st January 2015 in relation to -

(i) the signs shown in diagrams 728.1, 728.2, 729, 729.1, 729.2, 729.3, 730, 730.1, 732, 732.1, 732.2, 733, 733.1, 734.1, 734.2, 734.3, 734.4, 734.5, 734.6, 734.8, 734.9, 734.10, 736, 736.1, 737.1, 760 and 761 in the 1981 Regulations; and

(ii) the signs shown in diagrams 2308, 2309, 2310, 2311, 2313, 2314, 2315, 2315.1 and 2919 of the 1994 Regulations.



(3) Subject to paragraph (4), portable light signals which do not comply with regulation 35 shall be treated as prescribed by these Regulations if and so long as -

(a) those signals are of the size, colour and type prescribed by regulation 32 of the 1994 Regulations; and

(b) those signals and any apparatus (including the content of all instructions stored in, or executable by them) used in connection with them are the subject of an approval given and for the time being in force under direction 49 of the Traffic Signs General Directions 1994[8].


(4) Paragraph (3) shall cease to have effect on 1st January 2015.

(5) Notwithstanding regulation 2, the 1994 Regulations shall be treated, in relation to a paragraph (6) sign, as remaining in force during the extension period.

(6) In paragraph (5) -

(a) "the extension period" means the period of 12 weeks beginning with the day on which these Regulations come into force; and

(b) "a paragraph (6) sign" is a sign which is of the size, colour and type shown in diagram 547.5, 547.6, 626.2, 629, 639.1A, 642.2, 643, 644, 661, 661.2, 661.3, 780, 780.1, 780.2, 784, 785, 832.10, 864, 872, 2010, 2206, 2207, 2308, 2309, 2919, 2920, 3001, 3001.1, 4002, 7002, 7003, 7007 or 7010 of the 1994 Regulations.

.....and your point is??

From the front page of the Wakefield Express;
One for you meany and greeny what have you got to say about this??????
irst story - page 1.
PARKING fines have been
wrongly slapped on motorists
across the city – for the past
two years.
The Express can reveal that potentially
thousands of drivers have forked
out fines that shouldn’t have been
enforced because of a Wakefield
Council blunder.
Under new rules to meet the
Department for Transport regulations, the
council had to replace all existing street
parking signs by January 2005.
Parking fines are not valid where the
old signs are still on display, and this
includes at least four in the city centre
today.
The Express has seen e-mails from
council parking bosses that confirm just
last week wardens were told to stop issuing
tickets on West Parade because the
parking fines imposed were invalid.
Several people have already successfully
appealed against their fines of £45 by
stating the signage was incorrect, making
their tickets null and void. Others have
had their fines written off before going to
the appeal process.
In the space of two months one
motorist has been issued with at least 15
tickets and he has not been made to pay
any of them.
Other e-mails show the council was
made aware of the problems on Southgate
and West Parade in June this year and yet
tickets were still being issued.
It is understood streets still with outdated
signs are Sun Lane, Parliament
Street, Westgate and Westgate End.
A local driving instructor said: “For the
past 12 months I have had free parking
despite getting tickets– I just appeal
against them.
“The signs are not enforceable. For the
council to still take revenue from this
source of income is underhand and
deceitful– until all the signs have been
replaced with the correct ones.”
The council has recently undertaken to
replace the signs and an urgent investigation
into the mistake has now been
launched.
Interim service director for transportation
and highways, Ian Wiper, said: “We
have been made aware of this issue and
are undertaking a review of on-street
parking signs. Any changes required as a
result of that review will be actioned as
soon as possible and we are looking into
the implications of the specific issues
highlighted.
“Road sign design is reviewed periodically
by the Department for Transport and
a change to on-street parking signs did
come into effect in January 2005. The
council made changes to its signage as a
result.
“In relation to appeals against fixed
penalty notices, the council looks at each
one on an individual basis and makes a
decision based on the merits of each
case.”
Anyone wanting to appeal against a
parking ticket issued in the city centre
should e-mail: carparking@wake
field.gov.uk or write to Parking Services,
PO Box 47, Newton Bar, Wakefield,
WF1 2YN.


Another from the Wakefield Express.

http://www.wakefieldexpress.co.u k/news/Motorists-appeal-for-money-back.3623686.jp

What I would say is that by copying in the whole article, you are probably in breach of copyright - which is why you should only publish the link.

And I don't see the need to get personal with green & mean. Either use his correct username or none.

“Some signs still had technical problems like the ‘P’ on them was three inches wide and not four. This was picked up by some motorists. There was no confusion as the sign was still clear, but it was a technicality as it was too small."

Shock horror.......Council 'P' too small!!! I hope every Council in the land learns from this experience and employs someone to go out and measure every 'P' in Town, it's an outrage!!! How much longer are innocent motorists going to have to endure undersize 'P's I can't imagine how many people got tickets through this blatent deception.

G&M,

If the Council wish to enforce the law, they must also follow it.

it is established case law that incorrect signage = no signage = no enforceability. Davis v Heatley is not new - it even pre-dates DPE - so there is no excuse on the part of councils for non-regulation signage.

There is also the issue that the Council has made a declaration,as part of the move to DPE, that all signage is correct.

Yes, I take your point that a reasonable man might accept that there is a parking restriction and respect it; but it fails to have the force of law. There is no test of reasonableness. I further accept the council's intentions with the signing - but once again, no lawful signage = no signage.

Plenty of them issue tickets for a wheel less than 3 inches outside a bay.
the cannot and should not penalise people for trivialities while ignoring their own, and their own are often more than trivial - such as knowingly continuing to enforce when they know that they are non-compliant.

The signs are documented very clearly and there are approved suppliers.
Senior council people are payed a LOT of money - they should get a grip.

I don't know the place but would be stunned if it was just the blue P signs that are in error.

I agree they should be correct and the Council has a duty etc etc but its not exactly part of some huge govt conspiracy to defraud the motorist like some forum members like to make out is it? If you consider how many roadside signs there are in every town over looking a blue P that is a bit small is not that hard to imagine. Imagine the fuss that would be made if the Council was cutting essential services yet advertised a £25k job for a highways engineer responsible for measuring the little man with the sack barrow on all the towns loading bays or the wheel chair on BB bays was up to govt standards

Have to agree with G&M on this - I don't think it's a conspiracy. Personally (based on my limited contacts with our local council) I'd think it's incompetence/laziness.

Taking the example of the incorrectly sized P signs... One would hope that the person responsible for ordering the signs would be aware of the existence of the various regulations and would check them before ordering?

Originally Posted by rscott101

Have to agree with G&M on this - I don't think it's a conspiracy. Personally (based on my limited contacts with our local council) I'd think it's incompetence/laziness.

Taking the example of the incorrectly sized P signs... One would hope that the person responsible for ordering the signs would be aware of the existence of the various regulations and would check them before ordering?

When they bought them they where legal (I assume) the point was they got a memo from the Dept of Transport reminding them to change them to comply with the new TRSGD and a few got over looked. Signs are generally ordered from a few specialist contractors, the council does not usually design them they just order.....10 x No Parking Mon-Fri 6.30-8.30 signs for example and the contractor makes them up to the DoT specs. The problems usually occur because different Council departments are usually responsible, parking for enforcement and highways for signs and lines if you then throw in private contractors for both services you have four different groups each with differing roles that overlap.