PCN code 01 just a little advise please.

[green_and_mean]

I can't seem to view the link by the way is just the same as what's written?

 

google 'traffic signs manual chapter 3'

[adhkar]

so how do I phrase this appeal?

 

dear sir or madam I was recently served a PCN for parking on a single yellowline during restricted hour's. I'd like to challenge this as I was parked on school entrance markings with a board stating that the restricted hour's were mon-fri 8am-5pm. as there was no separate time plate indicating that there was a different restriction for the single yellow line I parked there assuming it was safe to do so.

in my opinion it is not clear to me as a driver that there is a separate restriction on the single yellow line even though it is in a controlled zone and had a separate time plate indicating the single yellow line times of restrictions been in place I would not have parked there.

 

would add the traffic signs manual bit here? If you could help I'd really appreciate it as I'm really unsure how tho word this appeal correctly.

[adhkar]

so this is my appeal, should i reference the patas case or not?

 

Dear sir/madam,

I recently received a PCN for parking on a single yellow line during hours of restriction. I would like to appeal this as I was parked on school entrance markings which were clearly signed as NO STOPPING, MON-FRI 8AM-5PM,as I was parking on a Friday evening which was not restricted by the sign I assumed it was safe to do so as there was no separate time plate for the single yellow line indicating different operational hours. In my opinion there should be a separate sign plate indicating the restrictions of the single yellow line so as to be very clear to drivers that even though stopping is allowed waiting or parking is not due to the CPZ.

I would also like to bring your attention to the TRAFFIC SIGNS MANUAL CHAPTER 3, PAGE 79, SECTION 9.17 which states:

However it would be helpful to drivers to provide a sign (except where the restriction is no waiting at any time) as a reminder that waiting restrictions apply during times when the prohibition of stopping does not. The sign could be co-located with diagram 642.2A. this also applies within a controlled parking zone where upright signs are normally dispensed with (see para 12.2)

I would hope that you will agree that there was a degree of confusion which is why the car was parked during restricted hours, had a clear sign been placed stating the restrictions clearly then I would not be arguing this case and would have paid or rather not have parked there in the first place.

I would like to request that you use your discretion and allow my appeal as this was a genuine misunderstanding and one which I am in no way in a rush to repeat.

Kind regards…

 

your input is highly appreciated, thank you

[green_and_mean]

Yes include the PATAS case and state its an example of numerous cases where the adjudicator has found in appealants favour, it may help convince them the odds are in your favour if they decide to reject.

[adhkar]

thank you green and mean I'll do that I know I keep saying it but I really do appreciate all the help.

[adhkar]

so my formal appeal was declined too, what should one write in the PATAS form, I'm kind of at a loss as they haven't referred to the PATAS case or the traffic signs manual chapter. I can type up the rejection letter if anyone wishes to read it.

[Jamberson]

What explanation did they include in their rejection letter?

[adhkar]

a copy of the letter they sent, i would have taken a picture but i smashed the screen on my phone yesterday

 

we have carefully considered what you say but we have decided not to cancel your penalty charge notice.

 

you were given a PCN for parking on a single yellow line at a time when you were not allowed to park there. you were allowed to park to unload but the CEO watched your vehicle and saw no loading or unloading taking place.

 

the vehicle was parked on a yellow line within CPZ, where the restricted times were 8am-6:30pm monday to saturday, as the vehicle was parked at 8:26, this resulted in a PCN being served.

 

Here are the main rules about yellow lines:

yellow lines mean no parking except to load or unload. for double yellow lines, the rule applies 24 hours a day, seven days a week. for single yellow lines, the rule applies during the times shown on the sign.

the signs governing SYL are not always nearby. inside a CPZ the information may be on a CPZ sign instead. CPZ signs are like border crossing signs: you will have passed one as you entered the zone.

yellow stripes on the kerb mean that you are not allowed to park, even to load or unload, at certain times. a double kerb stripe means the rule appleis 24/7. a single kerb stripe means the rule applies some of the time (the sign shows the times). if no days are shown on the sign the rule applies 7 days a week.

[adhkar]

it's basically a repeat of the last rejection notice that they sent out with a little more info on yellow lines added in.

[green_and_mean]

Add in procedural impropriety as they have not actually addressed your appeal. All they have done is explained why the PCN was issued they have made no mention of the school sign or why they ignored govt. guidance on signage. Several cases have been won on the failure to consider recently its a strong point on its own but with the dodgy signage you have a good case.

[adhkar]

so what should i write to PATAS?

 

i would like to appeal first and foremost on the grounds that i believe the signage was misleading which caused my husband to park there in the first place. due to a lack of SYL sign he did not realise that additional restrictions were in force also. i would like to also point out that i believe that the council has acted vexatiously as they have ignored the questions i have asked in my formal appeal and have just reiterated what they wrote in the first rejection letter. they have not explained why they have chosen to ignore government guidelines on signage, or the fact that there was even a school restriction sign there which could have caused the confusion. it as if they have not read my appeal and have just carried on with you were on a SYL so you must pay. they haven't tried to understand the situation behind why the car was parked there which was due to misleading signage. thank you i hope you will understand my point.

 

that's what ive come up with but i'm not that happy with it if i'm honest i've written better in the past but my head seems to be empty.

[green_and_mean]

You just need to make it sound more professional, try adding the references to the traffic signs manual and prior PATAS cases for starters.

[adhkar]

second try...

 

I would like to make an appeal first and foremost on the grounds that i believe the signage was misleading as there was a school markings sign saying no parking MON-FRI 8am-5pm as my husband parked there on saturday at 3am on his way back from work he looked at the signage available and thought it was safe to do so, he did not realise that the SYL had different time restrictions as there was no signage in the area nor on the same pole to indicate otherwise. Also it being 3am he didn't actually notice the SYL due to it being dark. the signage to indicate the school markings is large and easily visible to motorists and on it's own without further signage in the immediate vicinity is rather misleading in my opinion. as the the government guidelines themselves state: TRAFFIC SIGNS MANUAL CHAPTER 3, PAGE 79, SECTION 9.17 which states:

However it would be helpful to drivers to provide a sign (except where the restriction is no waiting at any time) as a reminder that waiting restrictions apply during times when the prohibition of stopping does not. The sign could be co-located with diagram 642.2A. this also applies within a controlled parking zone where upright signs are normally dispensed with (see para 12.2)

 

furthermore i think the council are acting vexatiously as they have replied to my appeals in a very standard manner just reiterating what they wrote in the first rejection notice without commenting or even acknowledging the fact that there is a school sign there. not once do they mention it in either letters nor do they comment on why they felt there was no need for additional signage as my whole appeal rests on lack of misleading signage. instead they have just given me the standard response of this is what a SYL is for and what the regulations are that govern it.

 

also previous PATAS cases have been won on the same basis of lack of signage as an example is PATAS case 2110111533 in which the adjudicator states:The Appellant parked his vehicle at a location where there are two types of restriction in force: the no stopping prohibition applying to the school entrance markings during the times indicated on the sign; and the underlying no waiting restriction indicated by the presence of a single yellow lone. The sign relied on by the appellant applies to the zig zag markings only, not to the yellow line whose operational hours are ( according to the Council, but there seems no reason to doubt it) indicated by Controlled Zone signage located at the boundary of the Zone in question - which might well be some distance away.

 

This case is a classic example of the confusion that very often arises when a length of carriageway is at some times subject to a school entrance restriction and at other times subject to a standard waiting restriction. There is nothing unlawful about such an arrangement; indeed it is not at all uncommon. However what can so easily happen is that the motorist's attention is drawn to the very large school entrance sign which the motorist then assumes is the only restriction in force. The effect of the underlying single yellow line is easily overlooked particularly where, as in this case, the line is not plated because it is within a controlled parking zone.

 

I am firmly of the view that a Council that wishes to operate this combination of restrictions must ensure that they are indicated clearly and correctly. The latest edition (2008) of Chapter 3 of the Traffic Signs Manual specifically deals with this situation at paragraph 9.17:-

 

"Where both the KEEP CLEAR marking and the mandatory sign to diagram 642.2A are used on a road that is subject to a prohibition of waiting the latter should be independently signed, with the yellow line to diagram 1017 or 1018 running behind the KEEP CLEAR marking ...As waiting restriction signs are spaced at approximately 60 m intervals...it is possible there might not be such a sign alongside the KEEP CLEAR marking. However it would be helpful to drivers to provide a sign (except where the restriction is no waiting at any time ) as a reminder that waiting restrictions apply during the period when the prohibition of stopping does not. The sign could be co-located with diagram 642.2A. This also applies within a controlled parking zone where upright signs are normally dispensed with..." ( emphasis added)

 

The Traffic Signs Manual is not law as such. However it is very detailed official guidance from the Department for Transport and I take the view that where issues of clarity of signage arise a failure by a Council to follow its recommendations (particularly one as specific and pertinent as the one set out above) places on them a heavy evidential burden to demonstrate that despite the non-compliance the signage is nevertheless clear. In the present case I am not satisfied that it is; and in my view this is a case where, CPZ or no, for clarity a time plate is required on the same post as the school entrance sign The Appeal is therefore allowed.

[adhkar]

too much

[adhkar]

no body have any opinion on the draft appeal to PATAS? i really do want to get it typed up and sent off ASAP. advise much appreciated

[adhkar]

which box do i tick for grounds of appeal? contravention did not occur? none of them really seem to apply in my opinion.

[adhkar]

Hi again I have my PATAS hearing on Thursday and just received councils evidence pack. Is there anything I need to take with me or do I just turn up and give my point of view?

[Jamberson]

Just turn up. You might want to take the documents with you, so you can look at them if you need to, but basically you just need to speak to the person hearing the case. They will have read your appeal and will just ask questions in order to make a decision.

[green_and_mean]

Take copies of your evidence also ie the traffic signs manual and print outs of past cases won on this point.

[adhkar]

I'm feeling very much life in going to lose the appeal but I've got no choice but to go through with it now. In your experience how long does it take? Will it be OK to take my almost 3 year old with me as there's no one I can leave her with.

[green_and_mean]

I've never been but hear its fairly informal so taking a child should be ok, take something to keep them occupied it will annoy the adjudicator if your attention is being distracted by the child. It wont take long you are the only person arguing so its up to you how long you take to put your case. Be confident you have a better than 50/50 chance of getting the PCN cancelled. Just be clear you were mislead by the big yellow sign, the Council failed in its duty to CLEARLY sign the restriction due to not following govt produced guidance. Do not highlight the fact that you live nearby it may make him think you should know the hours better.

[adhkar]

The council have put that I live on that road in their evidence and that I would have been aware of the restrictions in place.

I knew they would but hey ho I'll find out on Thursday then this bloody mess can be put to rest.

I can't thank you guys enough and whatever the outcome I'll update again on Thursday hopefully.

[green_and_mean]

I appreciate that its in the evidence but there is no need to draw attention to it. You could point out that you usually park in a permit bay which has its own time plate, there is no connection between parking bay hours and yellow lines sometimes they are the same sometimes they are different.

[adhkar]

Thank you green and mean, looks like I've got a session with Google trying to find past similar cases any tips on how to find them would be appreciated.

[Jamberson]

I've been to a few. They typically take 20 minutes to half an hour. Your child should be allowed in (I guess the person hearing the case will have to consent, so you'd better ask first) but it's going to be a bit awkward if she is making a noise or distracting the adjudicator. There should be some spare seats, but maybe not child-sized. Can she sit quietly in a pushchair, do you think? It would be better if you could get someone there to look after her, but if you can't, you can't. (Out of interest, is the hearing in a building like a hotel? They might have someone there who could keep an eye on her while you're inside.)

 

There's no reason to think you will lose, but even if you do, you've lost nothing really as there will be nothing extra to pay - you'll just be where you are at today. Only the council can lose really.