Off street Council owned NON PUBLIC PCN

[chipbutty]

Hi all,

Got past history with this one. But new developments.

Briefly :-

 

Council own only 6 parking spaces in our street. They charge £264.00 per year for a permit to park. Only between the hours of 8.00 a.m to 5.00p.m..

Not one of our local residents have bought a permit in the last 12 years since the council took these spaces over from a private developer."

 

Problem, ...local council have now issued PCN's (code 85) to over 4 residents.

We are challenging of course. Their sign says :-

Image see attached if possible.

It says ' these spaces are for permit holders only. failure to comply may result in a penalty charge notice being issued.'

I have tried to find out if the local council ever obtained an original Traffic Regulation order, but they say they don't know.!! I contacted the dept. for transport direct and asked if this was public information, they confirmed it was.

Does anyone know:

1. Is the sign legal.

2. Where could I search public records for a Traffic order.

3. How to word our challenge.

 

I do know that the council has to have a Road traffic order for their off street parking from the govt guidlines here... Operational Guidance

to Local Authorities:

Parking Policy and Enforcement

 

2.3 Discussions about parking tend to concentrate on enforcement. But all

local authorities need to develop a parking strategy covering on- and offstreet

parking that is linked to local objectives and circumstances. They then

need Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) to put it in place and appropriate

traffic signs and road markings to show the public what the restrictions

mean. This strategy needs to take account of planning policies and transport

powers and consider the appropriate number of total spaces, the balance

between short and long term spaces and the level of charges

 

P.S one of the ticket receivers is disabled but was not showing their blue badge. But they checked the tax disk which clearly states 'disabled'.

Cheers and thanks,

The chipbutty.

 

My comment would be "Well we MAY PAY if we want to" !!!!!

will try and put in the image. here...

[TheBogsDollocks]

You say the 6 parking spaces are in your street but a code 85 PCN is an off street contravention. Please clarify whether the bays are on street or off street.

 

There must be a traffic order to enforce the bays whether on or off street. Demand a copy of the order that regulates those bays from the council's legal department. If there is no traffic order then there is no contravention.

[TheBogsDollocks]

There is a traffic order

 

http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=24160&p=0

 

Can you upload both sides of the PCN as there may well be faults with it.

[chipbutty]

Hi,

Thanks for a speedy reply.

 

Forgive me for not being so clear.

 

I'll try..

Our street is a cul de sac, there was an old school developed on land at the bottom of the street.

The development is for social housing privately tenanced by Guinness heritage trust. the private residents have their own allocated spaces. A small area inside the development was taken on by the council as Guinness didn't want it, they gave the excess 6 parking spaces to the council for (on the original plans) as parking for residents. However the council decided they would try and sell these spaces to residents as off street parking at the rates I mentioned.

It didn't work out their way, as no one paid but have still parked there for 12 years now without problem.

It is only recently that a local councillor has moved into the development and has taken offence.!!!

And is now reporting the locals for parking there.

 

Guinness own the access road to the 6 spaces and allow the council access.

It has been a nightmare it all came to a head when the councillor convinced Guinness to introduce a private parking firm to police their allotted spaces. We are still fighting that but now the 6 council spaces are always full there is a vendetta against us.

 

Hope that helps. I can send you a google reference map if you need.

Cheers and thanks again.

chip.

[TheBogsDollocks]

Yes link us via google and don't forget the PCN (both sides).

[chipbutty]

Hi Thanks a million,

This shows the schedule of charges for the site but what I'm really after is the original proposal to

allow these to go forward. I'm talking tweve years ago for the TRO.

I have an appointment to see the original development plans but they have told me that wont cover TRO's.

cheers and many thanks. I note the charges are now £340 for hours 9am -6pm.

The site for everyones info is COTTEY MEADOW kingsteignton.

Cheers

the chip

[chipbutty]

Cheers will do,

just finishing my "chipbutty" will scan it in and upload.

i will have to hide personal details though ok.

cheers

[buzby]

I've seen a similar situation where a developer provides X number of spaces to the council in axchange for some (unspecified) service. The council can then - as part of their Off Street parking arrangements - enforce those bays and issue PCNs are required. To be valid, they will need a TRO that stipulate the number, location and size of the bays, providing distances from a point of reference. Assuming they can do this, then you need to roll over and pay, or take it to an adjudicator to query it on accuracy and validity. Even if on private land, Council can and do use Off-Street orders to legitimise these spaces that are not otherwise of the 'public road'.

 

If these Council spaces are 'always full' I'm assuming they display valid permits? The Council doesn't sell these spaces, they rent the ability to park there on an annual basis, and payment does not guarantee any particular space, or any right to park if there are no spaces available.

[buzby]

dupe

[buzby]

There is a traffic order

 

http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=24160&p=0

 

Can you upload both sides of the PCN as there may well be faults with it.

 

This is just a scale of Charges, NOT a TRO. (That said, I couldn't see the locus mentioned).

[grockle]

Looks like there is a TRO in place,

 

http://tro.parking-adjudication.gov.uk/default.aspx

 

Click on T101

 

Cottery Meadow is in the list at the bottom of the page.

 

 

grockle

[chipbutty]

Hi Buzby,

 

What do you mean please, "dupe"??

[chipbutty]

Sorry I'll try the pcn image again..

I'm not a techie. just a silver surfer.......

[buzby]

Dupe mean it was a 'duplicate' message and was deleted. Sorry, I cannot read the thumbnails as they're too small - you'll need to upload in standard size.

[chipbutty]

Hi Grockle, et al,

 

That's the baby. Yes it is a GLOBAL order. thanks.

However i'm not putting a spanner in the works but after looking at the ministry document " Operational Guidance

to Local Authorities:

Parking Policy and Enforcement

2.12 Whether or not they have CPE powers, authorities should make sure that

their parking policies are not only appropriate in terms of place and time,

but are properly underpinned by valid, up-to-date Traffic Regulation Orders.

The restrictions need to be made clear to motorists through appropriate

and legal traffic signs and road markings. A parking contravention is

nearly always a breach of a provision of the TRO, which must have been

made under the correct section of the RTRA. A flawed or inadequately

signed order may be unenforceable and can significantly damage both

the aims of enforcement and the public perception of its management.

2.13 Authorities should consult the public on their parking policies as they formulate

or appraise them. They should seek the views of people and businesses with a

range of different parking needs as well as taking into account the views of the

police. Once they have finalised their parking policies, they should make them

available to the public. Explaining the context and the purpose of parking policies

can increase public understanding and acceptance. It can even help public

acceptance of enforcement. Where possible, neighbouring authorities should

work together to ensure a consistent approach to parking policy and its enforcement"

 

I thought they would have to publicise these changes.

I dont think they have at all.

 

However I am most gratefull, I now have the name and contact of their legal section and can ask

probing questions.

I am so grateful to you all.

thanks again.

[buzby]

Looks like there is a TRO in place,

 

http://tro.parking-adjudication.gov.uk/default.aspx

 

Click on T101

 

Cottery Meadow is in the list at the bottom of the page.

 

 

grockle

 

Ta Grockle - got it that time. Yep, a quick glance at the Regulations and Schedule (Enforceable from 5th May 2008) appears to give them the right to charge. However, what distirbs me is that as a TRO it is hardly specific, in that it names the Street and the cost, but from a reading it appears that they claim ALL parking at this locus requires a Parking Permit, not the '6 Spaces' mentioned previously. If there are indeed only 6 spaces available for the Councl to use, these need to be marked and shown as part of the TRO, so that the non-spaces owned by the council can be identified. However, if they actually control all the patking at this locus, then they will not need to, as it will be deemed simply enough to state that all parking in this area requires a Permit, and that the signage on entering this area clearly identifies this. One entering the off-street area. or one each for every bay the order applies to (or a start and end sign if in a line).

 

As for the Disabled user who didn;t show their Badge, it would be easier for them to claim they forgot and ask for the ticket to be cancelled, than try to challenge their right to issue a PCN.

 

As to the 'consultation' this can simply be a small ad in the paper, nothing more, ands do remember they've had these powers for oner 26 months, so the fact they've not ticketed during this period is most unusual!

[chipbutty]

Hi, err not sure how to do a standard size image??

 

I just linked to the .jpg file.

 

I will try and resize my jpg but may need more than a couple of images.. hope thats ok.

trying now.. cheers.

[TheBogsDollocks]

Hi Thanks a million,

This shows the schedule of charges for the site but what I'm really after is the original proposal to

allow these to go forward. I'm talking tweve years ago for the TRO.

I have an appointment to see the original development plans but they have told me that wont cover TRO's.

cheers and many thanks. I note the charges are now £340 for hours 9am -6pm.

The site for everyones info is COTTEY MEADOW kingsteignton.

Cheers

the chip

 

You will need to contact the council's legal services dept as they will have responsibility for drafting any off street traffic order. Originally, when the land was first included in an order there should have been a public notice in the press similar to this one linked below. Ask the council to confirm the date the land became regulated by the council and to provide full copies of any orders or amendment's since this date that concerned this land.

 

http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=24836&p=0

[chipbutty]

Hi, reply to all you super dudes out there,

You are fantastic for helping so much. I cannot do the image resize in paint shop pro without creating a massive Mg file, so I will try and take photos and do it that way.

I have looked at the legal requirements placed on the council regarding correct PCN and it appears

within stat. limits.

I will try doing the photos now. But fear time may be against me. so I will post tomorrow.

Cheers. and great respect.

[TheBogsDollocks]

From reading the PCN can you confirm the time period it advises you are allowed in which to submit an informal representation/challenge?

[chipbutty]

Hi all,

i am trying the images again. one at a time so there will br two posts. ok.

Cheers

[chipbutty]

Hi , image 2

[chipbutty]

Hi image 3....

[chipbutty]

Hi last image.........

 

[chipbutty]

Hi these might duplicate but trying images as attachments..

Cheers