PCN for parking on footpath though signs allowed it

[Selense]

I have just received a PCN for “62- Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway”. The parking signs on the road actually said it was ok to park on the footpath but only in marked bays.

 

I parked on the road but not in the marked bays. Unfortunately I didn’t see the latter bit as other roads adjacent to the road didn’t have the “only in marked bays” bit. I wasn’t parked on a yellow line or anything, neither was I causing an obstruction, I would have caused one if I hadn’t parked on the footpath like other cars as it is a very tiny road.

 

Am I likely to be successful if I appeal this fine on the basis that the sign said it was ok to park on the footpath? Am I right in thinking the offence should be something else like “not parked in marked bays” instead of what they have said?

 

I've only paid a PCN yesterday for turning right where not permitted except by buses due to my taking directions from a friend that only knows the bus route. I'm quite angry at myself as it is.

Any advice will be much appreciated. Thanks.

[TheBogsDollocks]

Ideally we need to see the signage and layout. A link to google streetview will suffice if what is shown is what is still present.

[Selense]

Thanks for your quick response. Please see photos attached. The car in the first photo is another car parked in the bay but partially on the footpath too same as the car in front of the signage at the start of the road. The black landrover is me parked on the footpath too but not in the bay.

 

The google streetview (2009) shows there used to be bay markings where I parked but they've obviously since been removed. And the signage must be new as there aren't any showing on streetview.

 

 

[TheBogsDollocks]

I suggest asking the council to provide a full copy of the resolution made under s.15(4)

 

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&title=general+powers+act+1974&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=3475989&ActiveTextDocId=3476011&filesize=26295

 

It may be that where you parked is actually authorised as footway parking but the council has not marked a bay. It's a long shot but every avenue is worth exploring.

[Selense]

Thanks.

 

I've read the link but I am non the wiser on what s.15(4) means.

 

Hence am I supposed to ask

 

1) "Can you please provide me with a full copy of the resolution made under s.15(4) not designating the spot my car was parked on as a parking bay" or

 

2) "Can you please provide me with a full copy of the resolution made under s.15(4) as the spot my car was parked on is a parking bay as it was designated as such in 2009?"

 

And is it worth also mentioning that parking on the footpath is allowed per the signs and if I should be fined it should be for not being in the bay and the ticket is wrong. (Assuming they cannot now correct it of course). And just maybe the enforcement officer forgot to take a photo.

 

The charge will remain at the reduced rate as long as I appeal within 14 days so it's certainly worth trying.

[Jamberson]

I would caution against writing a letter quoting the PCN number etc, which merely asks for documents. The chances are this will be processed as if it is an appeal, and as no grounds for cancellation are stated, the "appeal" will be rejected. You only have one opportunity to make an informal appeal, so I would say don't risk squandering it.

 

You can get hold of the documents you need - try phoning, emailing (don't give a PCN number) or dropping into the office. Once you have your evidence, then you can put pen to paper properly.

 

As I read it, the section means that a highway authority may "by resolution" permit footway parking. So, if there been a resolution to that effect, then the document will presumably show whether the place you parked is included - and therefore if you are allowed to park there (with or without bay markings).

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

You only have one opportunity to make an informal appeal, so I would say don't risk squandering it.

 

Are you sure? I thought you can send any number of informal representations until the NTO is issued and the LA have a statutory authority to consider them.

[Jamberson]

News to me Bernie - I'm not saying you're wrong, but why can't someone just stall the system by perpetually writing back, and thus not getting an NTO at all? Surely the first informal will be responded to with a decision letter which (if rejected) states "you now have two options" - ie, pay or wait for NTO. Subsequent letters just get standard replies reitterating that, no?

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

why can't someone just stall the system by perpetually writing back, and thus not getting an NTO at all?

 

Because ultimately that would be seen as vexatious and in any event, there is no obligation to reset the clock on the 28 days