Ticketed for non-continuous loading

[CMH]

I was ticketed by Westminster Council for parking on a single yellow line. I was in fact loading my car from a nearby basement.

 

The return journey from the car to the basement took some 3 minutes. Accordingly my car was caught on CCTV unattended (although the boot was open) for 3 minutes 14 seconds. On the CCTV video a friend and I can be seen appearing at 3 minutes 14 seconds with the SCUBA diving kit which we were loading into the car.

 

I challenged the ticket as I was loading, and received a notice of rejection stating that "the CCTV footage shows the vehicle stationary for over 3 minutes, with no evidence of loading taking place. I would like to advise you that CCTV camera operators and Civil Enforcement Officers do not accept the boot of a vehicle being open, as evidence of loading taking place; a PCN may be issued unless they observe continuous loading activity."

 

I intend to appeal, and have read the Jane Packer Flowers adjudication and the Arnold Rosen v Westminster Council adjudication, as well as a number of the cases referred to, notably MACLEOD v WOJKOWSKA. I have also referred to Westminster's website. I therefore will appeal on the following basis. If anybody has anything to add or any suggestions to alter my appeal I would be extremely grateful for your advice.

 

- I was parked on a single yellow line between 8.25 and 8.40am

- There were no loading restrictions in place (no signs, no kerb markings)

- Accordingly I am allowed to load for as long as is necessary at an adjacent building

- Loading includes the journey to and from the place where the goods are located

- The return loading journey took some 3 minutes, and accordingly the vehicle was unattended for that period.

- However the return journey is within the definition of loading, and therefore I was not parked and the contravention did not take place.

- There is no legal principle that states that loading must be 'continuous'. The legal principle is 'as long as necessary'. The loading in this case was necessary, and upon the cessation of loading (some 15 minutes altogether) the vehicle was removed.

 

I intend to support this application with witness statements confirming:

1) That it was necessary to load the SCUBA gear into the vehicle as we were leaving for a SCUBA diving trip

2) That I have SCUBA gear stored within the adjacent building

3) That the return journey from the road to the SCUBA store and back takes some 3 minutes.

 

Any further advice anybody could give me? Thank you

[lamma]

the lied - as usual for Westminster. That court case must be worrying them. Loading does have to continuous (no t breaks or nipping to the loo) but you can't be at the vehicle continuously - you could never load anything then could you ! This 'little logical flaw' is one of their favourites, used to gouge you for money. you can question their training but best of all you can quote the "Jane Packer Flowers" adjudication. http://www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk/user_documents/LOADADJ.pdf which was against Westminster ! So you can add why they have not taken any notice of a PATAS key case in which they were a party. Expect Westminster to force you to the adjudication stage and then drop out a few days before.

[CMH]

Thanks for the information. I actually called them up today, because having read the Flowers case I can't believe that they're even bothering. Nevertheless, they said the PCN stands, and so we go on...