Towed by LBHF in un-enforceable CPZ!

[edwardishere]

Hello.

 

I parked my car on a single yellow line in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham at 6:45pm on Tuesday last week. The single yellow had has no signage/plate. I went to the cinema and when I came back my car was gone. It had been towed by LBHF. I was parked in the CPZ “S” which apparently has restrictions in force from Monday to Saturday 9.00am to 8.00pm. The signage indicating a controlled parking zone was not readable as the times on both signs when I entered the alleged CPZ had been blacked out photos are here...

 

http://www.e1.ee/CPZ-Entrance-Left-side.jpg

 

http://www.e1.ee/CPZ-Entrance-right-side.jpg

 

My contravention was ‘Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours’

 

I have used their online form for challenging PCNs and wrote the following:

 

I am writing to challenge the Penalty Charge Notice HZ********.

 

On 2/10/2012 my vehicle was issued with a Penalty Charge Notice for the reason ‘Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours’.

 

The signage indicating a controlled parking zone was not readable and therefore the alleged contravention did not occur.

 

Thankfully I have photographic evidence of the controlled parking zone signage that clearly shows the signs are not fit for purpose.

 

I have uploaded the said photographs to this online form for your reference.

 

I would advise the council to immediately cancel this PCN as it is un-enforceable.

 

I should like to request a full refund for the PCN of £65.00 and a full refund for the removal fee of £200.

 

Thank you for your time.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

I recovered my car and paid the £265 that night.

 

My question is have I used the correct method of challenging the PCN by using the online form and will that be enough to challenge the towing fee also?

 

Also do you think I would win if it went to an adjudicator with the evidence before you? Thank you so much for your time.

 

Edward.

[vax2002]

The document on the traffic sign post ?? what does it say ?

[edwardishere]

The document on the traffic sign post ?? what does it say ?

 

Nothing important its to do with a shop's planing application.

 

All the best,

 

Edward

[vax2002]

read it, planning, well you would need some way of showing the signs have been like that for a while....As obviously they will say you did it..

Edited October 8, 2012 by vax2002

[edwardishere]

read it, planning, well ypu would need some way of showing the signs have been like that for a while....

 

Would it not be for them to prove that the signs where not like that at the time I was issued the PCN? I took photos the night my car wast towed and the morning after?

[vax2002]

No, it should be, but what passes for justice went under the carpet long ago .

They will just argue that the signs have been defaced and in absence of this you should have not parked.

You can try it, but without some evidence that they were in that condition prior to you parking IMO you will be wasting time.

It may be a better approach to study for some impropriety in the ticket and towing documentation.

[edwardishere]

No, it should be, but what passes for justice went under the carpet long ago .

They will just argue that the signs have been defaced and in absence of this you should have not parked.

You can try it, but without some evidence that they were in that condition prior to you parking IMO you will be wasting time.

It may be a better approach to study for some impropriety in the ticket and towing documentation.

 

Well I think the signs have been like that for ages will see if they are on google street view. I can not believe that they would expect a reasonable person to be able to understand that signage. Does anyone have any other suggestions as to how I should approach this appeal?

 

Many thanks,

 

Edward

[dw190]

Well I think the signs have been like that for ages will see if they are on google street view. I can not believe that they would expect a reasonable person to be able to understand that signage. Does anyone have any other suggestions as to how I should approach this appeal?

 

Many thanks,

 

Edward

 

Keep an eye on the signs in the future. See how long they remain like that after you have sent your appeal.

[vax2002]

IMO The adjudicate will say that the signs are two separate signs in two marked boxes, the first ordering that no waiting is allowed, the second giving exception or grant from the above displayed order of controlled zone.

In absence of the second sign,or removal of the limitation of prescribed hours the first sign is enforce.

If they had done all the sign, you might have an argument.

You may be lucky, they may be on a good day, the worst case is you pay the full amount without reduction.

[TheBogsDollocks]

If those are the signs intended to convey the no waiting restriction then your appeal seems justified to me. Expect to play the long game though as councils rarely admit any faults with signage. It might be wise to phone the council to ensure your online appeal was received and registered. These online methods are not always reliable.

[edwardishere]

I am happy to report that LBHF accepted my challenge and will refund the full amount. This did not go to adjudicator. Thank you for all your help.

 

In case it might prove useful to someone in the future, below is the letter I would have sent to the adjudicator should it have come to it…

 

Dear Sirs,

 

A Penalty Charge Notice (hereinafter referred to as PCN) was issued on ** October 2012 at **:** to vehicle ******* of which I am the registered keeper and owner.

 

I have no dispute with the fact that my vehicle was parked in this location on the date and time as stated or that the PCN was issued.

 

The PCN was issued for the alleged contravention ‘Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours’.

I assert that there was no indication that any regulations applied and that I did not believe any regulations applied.

I am challenging the PCN and the removal of my vehicle on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur because the Controlled Parking Zone (hereinafter referred to as CPZ) was unlawfully signed and therefore the local authority where not be permitted to enforce penalties.

 

The definition of a CPZ is to be found in the interpretation section (section 4) of The Traffic Signs Regulations 2002 as "an area (i) in which except where parking places have been provided, every road has been marked with one or more of the road markings shown in diagrams 1017, 1018.2, 1019 and 1020.1; and (ii) into which each entrance for vehicular traffic has been indicated by the sign shown in diagram 663 or 663.1". The alternative definition of a CPZ given in the Regulations is not relevant to my case.

 

It would follow from that definition that if a CPZ is unlawfully signed, the local authority are not be permitted to enforce penalties in respect of "road markings shown in diagrams 1017, 1018.2, 1019 and 1020.1, which are, in general terms, the yellow line roadside markings denoting a restricted street and consequently the alleged contravention could not occur.

 

It is for the authority to establish the right to make a charge. The burden is not, under the statutory provisions, placed upon myself to establish that I was not liable. However, I understand that I must produce some material – there is clearly an evidential burden – to establish that my claim has merit and therefore I have included photographic evidence.

 

The photograph labeled ‘A’ shows a view of the sign at the start of the CPZ on the left hand side of the carriageway that a motorist would see as they left The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and entered The London Borough of Hammersmith using the Fulham Road. This photograph was taken the night my car was removed.

 

The photograph labeled ‘B’ shows a view of the sign at the start of the CPZ on the right hand side of the carriageway that a motorist would see as they left The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and entered The London Borough of Hammersmith using the Fulham Road. This photograph was taken the night my car was removed.

 

The photograph labeled ‘C’ shows a view of the sign at the start of the CPZ on the left hand side of the carriageway that a motorist would see as they left The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and entered The London Borough of Hammersmith using the Fulham Road. This photograph was taken in daylight the morning after my car was removed in order to shows the state of the sign more clearly.

 

The photograph labeled ‘D’ shows a view of the sign at the start of the CPZ on the right hand side of the carriageway that a driver would see as they left The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and entered The London Borough of Hammersmith using the Fulham Road. This photograph was taken in daylight the morning after my car was removed in order to shows the state of the sign more clearly.

 

It must be remembered that the motorist has to rapidly take in and digest the message given by the signs whilst on the move, and it is crucial that the signs should be prominent, clear and unambiguous. This was not the case with the signage at the start of the CPZ that a driver would see as they left The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and entered The London Borough of Hammersmith using the Fulham Road and a reasonable motorist could deduce that there was not any indication that any regulations applied to a single yellow line without a plate.

 

The Council has not complied with its duty under regulation 18 of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedures) (England & Wales) Regulations 1996 to provide and maintain signs giving adequate information of the restriction.

 

I would like to request a refund for the PCN of £65.00 and a full refund for the removal fee of £200.

 

Documents enclosed for your consideration are:

 

Photograph A

Photograph B

Photograph C

Photograph D

 

A Map of the CPZ’s of The London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham annotated to show where my car was parked and the CPZ entrance signage shown in the photographic evidence.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

****** ******