Your parking ticket may be unlawful

[un1boy]

Guys

 

I got my parking ticket wothdrawn because the camera they used to take the evidence had the date as 2006!!

 

God knows how many other tickets were issued like this over the years!!

[Howard0181]

I have seen many PCN's which refer to RTA 1991 Section 66 Schedule 3 (as amended).

 

My PCN only refers to RTA 1991 - Section 66 and Schedule 6 as amended.

 

Does this alter anything?

[dw190]

The RTA 1991 refers to London. As other Councils follow suit in the lucrative DPE short ammendments are passed/rushed through Parliament extending the Act to them.

[traceyrmj]

help! i got a parking ticket i have challenged it as it lists my car as grey when it is blue, they have replied that the grounds i supplied have not been accepted as grounds to cancel the PCN.

i ahve been trying to find the exact wording of what has to appear on a PCN to make it legally valid. sureley if colour of vehicle is there and they have the wrong colour i can challenge? also the ticket says "date of notice" and that the car "was seen on (date)" no date of issue. anywhere! anyoen got the exact wording so i can fight this? i have looked at RTA section 66 and that just says why they can issue a ticket not what the ticket has to have on it... help please!

[Pliny the Penuriosus]

I have put this here as Neil Herron is one of the driving forces behind the Metric Martyrs. A mod may wish to give it it's own prominent thread

 

“Monumental victory for Metric Martyrs as the European Commission and the Government abandon enforced Metrication Programme"

...the pound, ounce, yard, foot, the mile and the pint have been saved!"

The European Commission’s Industry Commissioner Gunther Verheugen quietly announced in a meeting on 2nd May 2007 that "dual marking" of goods in imperial and metric will 'continue indefinitely'.

Following intense lobbying by the Metric Martyrs Campaign and excellent work with US business by the British Weights and Measures Association, Commissioner Verheugen agreed thatimperial measurements are 'good for business.'

The Metric Martyrs submission to the European Commission’s Metrication Consultation can be seen here

We do forgive Conservative MEP Giles Chichester for attempting to claim all the credit for what has undoubtedly been a team effort. The Conservative MEP's press release is copied below at the end of this release. I hope that he will join us with his Conservative colleagues to support the request for a Royal Pardon and a public acknowledgement of the Metric Martyrs' patriotic stand.

Papers also released under the Freedom of Information Act to the Metric Martyrs by the Department for Trade and Industry also indicate that the Government and the DtI have performed a screeching u- turn (quietly behind the scenes!) and abandoned plans to abolish imperial measures after 2009. The papers also reveal how concerned they were about the consequences of losing the case back in 2001.

This result represents a monumental victory for the Metric Martyrs who have campaigned tirelessly from their Sunderland office against enforced metrication since the two Sunderland traders, Steve Thoburn and Neil Herron, were first targeted by the authorities way back in 2000.

It is now apparent that the persecution of Steve Thoburn (and subsequently 4 other traders whose cases to the High Court were consolidated into the Thoburn appeal) was politically motivated but the resistance that their defiant stand created forced all the other local authorities to back off and they have been held at bay for 7 years.

Indeed, further information received from a European Commission insider confirms this. He states:

"In fact, the Commission were never that interested in banning dual weight marking - the UK government "gold-plated" the directive and our zealous Trading Standards offices did the rest. But the acknowledgement of imperial measures may be linked to Monday's EU/US summit in Washinton, where both sides agreed to strive for a common transatlantic market, described as the biggest deregulation move in history. Trade is currently worth 2.25-trillion euros a year."

It must be remembered that Steve Thoburn always dual-priced and had metric scales.

The Metric Martyrs saw their convictions upheld at the Court of Appeal when Lord Justice Laws ( who hailed from Easington Lane not far from Sunderland and whose mother and sister bought bananas by the pound from Steve) delivered a 'bizarre constitutional' verdict that established the primacy of EU law.

Tragically, Steve died in his wife’s arms of a massive heart attack only days after learning that his appeal to the European Court of Human Rights had been rejected.

He had vowed to continue to defy the ‘law’ and continued serving his customers ‘the way they wanted to be served.’

Metric Martyrs Campaign Director, and former fishmonger, Neil Herron states:

“This is a monumental victory for the Metric Martyrs and all who have supported the campaign. It has been ‘People Power’ that has forced the European Commission and the Government to abandon the enforced metrication programme.

We have saved the pint, the mile, the yard, the foot as well as pounds and ounces.

We have stood toe to toe with the Council, Government and the EU and won … and shown others that you can stop the tide of EU legislation.

Steve Thoburn was the man who drew the line in the sand.

All that remains now for the campaign is to insist on a Royal Pardon to quash the criminal conviction that Steve took with him to the grave.

He should never have been prosecuted and ALL the authorities knew that it should never have happened.

The public had never wanted or asked for imperial measures to be abolished and no political party had ever put it in their manifesto that they intended to criminalise the use of imperial measures.

The name of Steve Thoburn will be chiselled into the pages of the history books.

The day they seized his scales was the beginning of the end of the EU.”

ENDS

CONTACT:

Neil Herron

Campaign Director

Metric Martyrs Defence Fund

12 Frederick Street

Sunderland

SR1 1NA

Tel. 0191 565 7143 or 0191 514 4606

Mob. 07776 202045

SUPPORT THE DRIVE FOR STEVE'S ROYAL PARDON HERE

www.metricmartyrs.co.uk

e-mail: [email protected]

FURTHER INFORMATION:

The full background behind the European Commission, the Government and the DtI’s decision to surrender can be seen here

Below is MEP Giles Chichester's e-mail press release:

Release: Immediate

Date: 3rd May 2007

Issued by: Conservatives in the European Parliament

Giles Chichester MEP, tel: +32 (0) 2 28 45296

No more metric martyrs after Conservative lobbying pays offEnd of EU inspired metrication after Commission agrees imperial measurements are good for business

Brussels, 3 May 2007 -- The threat to miles, yards and pints is off the agenda after Giles Chichester MEP, Conservative Industry Spokesman, got confirmation from Industry Commissioner Verheugen that "dual marking" of goods in imperial and metric will 'continue indefinitely'.

Following intense lobbying by the Conservatives, Commissioner Verheugen agreed that it was good news for British and European industry to keep imperial measurements as it would make it easier for them to sell to the United States.

Giles Chichester says: "After saving the crown on the British pint, I am happy the Conservatives have persuaded the Commission that it is good not only for international business but for the British people that traditional measurements are kept. I just hope there won't be any more need for metric martyrs and that the government will avoid forcing metrication down the public's throat."

Giles Chichester originally got a derogation from dual marking in the Units of Measurement Directive 1999. Commissioner Verheugen told the Industry, Research and Energy Committee on Wednesday 2nd May that he would bring forward a proposal to make the derogation permanent.

ENDS

For further information, please contact: Giles Chichester MEP, tel: +32 (0) 2 28 45296; [email protected]

Conservative Press Office: Peter Wilding - tel: + 32 (0) 2 2831138 or +32 (0) 473 861762; [email protected]

[rogerebaker]

help! i got a parking ticket i have challenged it as it lists my car as grey when it is blue, they have replied that the grounds i supplied have not been accepted as grounds to cancel the PCN.

i ahve been trying to find the exact wording of what has to appear on a PCN to make it legally valid. sureley if colour of vehicle is there and they have the wrong colour i can challenge? also the ticket says "date of notice" and that the car "was seen on (date)" no date of issue. anywhere! anyoen got the exact wording so i can fight this? i have looked at RTA section 66 and that just says why they can issue a ticket not what the ticket has to have on it... help please!

 

(3) A penalty charge notice must state—

(a) the grounds on which the parking attendant believes that a penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle;

(b) the amount of the penalty charge which is payable;

© that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice;

(d) that if the penalty charge is paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the notice, the amount of the penalty charge will be reduced by the specified proportion;

(e) that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, a notice to owner may be served by the London authority on the person appearing to them to be the owner of the vehicle;

(f) the address to which payment of the penalty charge must be sent.

[traceyrmj]

thanks roger seems ill have to pay it then, ahh well live and learn

[rogerebaker]

You give up to easily.

 

See if you can scan the PCN on here.

 

If not write exactly whats written on it here

 

They may well be other errors

 

In my experience the councils I have dealt with seem incapable of getting the complete process correct.

[veilside01702]

Hi everyone...

I got a PCN yesterday at 13.55 to 13.58, in a side road with a sign saying :-

No loading between 8 - 9.30 am and 4.30 - 6pm...

the PCN says : - Contravention code: 01 " Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours".

Yet the idiot who issued the ticket obviously didn't read the sign less than 10 feet from my car....

Is this grounds to get the PCN thrown out?

Is this contravention the same as parked on double yellow lines??

As the car dealer opposite had 2 cars on double yellow lines and didn't get a single ticket!!

I have written letter and also put :- I respectfully ask for the enforcement dept to speak to their wardens and explain the meaning of the signs to save further unlawfully issued notices being issued."

Cheers...

Russ

[Guest xipetotec46]

If you weren't loading was you parked on a Double yellow line?, give us more info so we may try to help.

[veilside01702]

The weird thing is that the street is a small residential street that has no markings appart from double yellow lines at one end, where it meets the A13 London Road. The sign is actually on the double yellow lines right on the corner about 20 feet from the end of them. This is the only sign in the entire street. There are no bays marked on the road at all, just some old worn out remnants of yellow lines. There are bays on the A13 round the corner that are for deliveries. I believe that the sign was put in the wrong place as it is new!

I think it should have been next to the other bays.....

Even so, I was not parked on the yellow lines or in any marked bays....

I thought and still do that I was parked in a residential street with no restrictions!

I will get some pics tomorrow and post them....

Russ

[Guest xipetotec46]

No signs are required for double yellow they mean no parking whatever the time of day unless there are double yellow lines with kerb markings which are loading restriction times or no loading these require signs and so do single yellow lines

[un1boy]

thanks roger seems ill have to pay it then, ahh well live and learn

 

Ask them toprovide you with evidence proving the date and time they allege you were parked there.

 

Then, check that over - mine got withdrawnw because the date on each photo from the camera was 2006, not 2007!

[jeanne3li]

If it does not say "date of issue" anywhere on the ticket then it is unenforcable. Make representations to this effect

Hey,

 

I have been reading the comments posted about parking fines and have checked my ticket for any flaws. The only flaw I can see is the fact that instead of Date of Issue, it says Date of Notice. Does this still make it unenforceable?

 

This is about 6th parking fine in 8 months!! The attendant clocked the car at 0933 and then waited 5 minutes to issue the fine. The zone is a residential 0930-1730 area pay & display with a no return in 4 hours.

 

PLUS the parking has gone up 60 pence per hour, making it a wapping £1.80 to park for 1 hour!

 

Please advise!

[patdavies]

The only flaw I can see is the fact that instead of Date of Issue, it says Date of Notice. Does this still make it unenforceable?

 

 

No it doesn't. As long as it has date of notice or date of issue and date seen or date of contravention then the dates are valid.

[jeanne3li]

Hey,

 

Thank you for your input.

 

I am just so angry that she was obviously waiting at the car the whole time and when my boyfriend came out just as she was printing the ticket, to explain he is getting a ticket, she just shrugged him off.

 

Surely they need to give you more time for loading, well more than 5 minutes?

[kopite71]

Hey,

 

 

 

my boyfriend came out just as she was printing the ticket, to explain he is getting a ticket, she just shrugged him off. quote]

 

Just drive off without saying anything to them next time.

 

If it's not served on the vehicle or given to the driver.

 

It's unenforceable.

[kopite71]

Hey,

 

Thank you for your input.

 

I am just so angry that she was obviously waiting at the car the whole time and when my boyfriend came out just as she was printing the ticket, to explain he is getting a ticket, she just shrugged him off.

 

Surely they need to give you more time for loading, well more than 5 minutes?

 

Next time just drive off without saying anything.

 

If it's not served on the vehicle or given to the driver.

 

It's unenforceable.

[Pliny the Penuriosus]

Next time just drive off without saying anything.

 

If it's not served on the vehicle or given to the driver.

 

It's unenforceable.

 

Correct & this was recenly confirmed by the Courts

 

Judge backs motorist who drove away to avoid a parking ticket | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited

[diction]

Hi chaps

 

Here is my vehicle committing an alleged 'contravention'

 

 

Here is the PCN that resulted

 

 

I really can't see much wrong with the ticket having read this forum. But seven hours reading may have left me a bit jaded. Now to the crux of my problem -

 

this next picture is of the timeplate right where my car was parked -

 

 

I am fully aware that a 2003 Act (I think) removed the need for 'At any time'. In fact, no timeplate at all, and I would never have parked there, cos as pointed out above by xipetotec46, no signs are required for double yellows. They mean 24/7/365.

 

However, there is a timeplate. And I checked it before I left my vehicle. The alleged contravention took place early on a Sunday morning. The church car park was full cos it was Palm Sunday.

 

Once I got the ticket, I consulted the internet and Highway Code and discovered that road markings are only a guide (which I always knew anyway) as in this quote

 

“Yellow (or red) lines can only give a guide to the restrictions and controls in force and signs, nearby or at a zone entry, must be consulted.”

 

This is precisely what I did do. Do I have a case of oversigning??

 

I should add my first two appeals have been rejected by the Council but then they reject every appeal even if the ticket was written in Swahili.

[dw190]

 

I really can't see much wrong with the ticket having read this forum. But seven hours reading may have left me a bit jaded. Now to the crux of my problem -

 

 

The address for payment is not shown on the notice itself or advised from the notice. Only reference is made on the Payment Slip which does not form part of the notice. See Bury v McArthur.

 

(3) A penalty charge notice must state—

• (a) the grounds on which the parking attendant believes that a penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle;

• (b) the amount of the penalty charge which is payable;

• © that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice;

• (d) that if the penalty charge is paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the notice, the amount of the penalty charge will be reduced by the specified proportion;

• (e) that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, a notice to owner may be served by the London authority on the person appearing to them to be the owner of the vehicle;

• (f) the address to which payment of the penalty charge must be sent.

[Guest xipetotec46]

Yes the address must be on the other side of the PCN can you post the other side of the PCN.

It seems you may have a case if the sign says no parking between XXX and XXX and you did not park within those times then there is no contravention. the PCN should be cancelled. take a picture with the Dubyells in the foreground and the sign at the back and then proceed to Adjudication.

[diction]

Yes, the address is definitely on the other side with very clear instructions how to pay by post, in person, or on the internet. They make it very easy for obvious reasons.

 

I haven't found anything directly relating to double yellow lines being incorrectly signed (cos basically they do not need signing).

 

But all over the borough, double yellows have the Mon-Sat 8am-6.30pm restriction. This is obviously from when the double yellows were a single yellow. They did not take the signs down. I bet this was deliberate. Many people would have been misled by this the same as me. The sign is the authority, not the road marking. (This is the same council who plastered car windscreens with PCN's for parking on school markings (term time and school hours only) at 8.30pm on a Saturday night!)

 

I am going to use the principles of oversignage I found here;

 

http://www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk/user_documents/grimwood145.pdf

 

I quote "The Council are under a duty to provide adequate and clear signage of any restrictions. In most appeals where this question arises, the issue is whether the signs in place were adequate or visible. This however is a case of "oversigning". "

 

It has nothing to do with yellow lines or my case, but the sentiment must surely apply to all signs on our roads and I suspect a lot of people could benefit from such an adjudication.

 

btw, would it be worth pursuing the lack of a correct t-bar terminator? According to the pics I have seen, there should be a 150mm line extending towards the kerb at perpendicular. Or would this be considered a 'triviality'.

[dw190]

Yes, the address is definitely on the other side with very clear instructions how to pay by post, in person, or on the internet. They make it very easy for obvious reasons.

 

I haven't found anything directly relating to double yellow lines being incorrectly signed (cos basically they do not need signing).

 

But all over the borough, double yellows have the Mon-Sat 8am-6.30pm restriction. This is obviously from when the double yellows were a single yellow. They did not take the signs down. I bet this was deliberate. Many people would have been misled by this the same as me. The sign is the authority, not the road marking. (This is the same council who plastered car windscreens with PCN's for parking on school markings (term time and school hours only) at 8.30pm on a Saturday night!)

 

I am going to use the principles of oversignage I found here;

 

http://www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk/user_documents/grimwood145.pdf

 

I quote "The Council are under a duty to provide adequate and clear signage of any restrictions. In most appeals where this question arises, the issue is whether the signs in place were adequate or visible. This however is a case of "oversigning". "

 

It has nothing to do with yellow lines or my case, but the sentiment must surely apply to all signs on our roads and I suspect a lot of people could benefit from such an adjudication.

 

btw, would it be worth pursuing the lack of a correct t-bar terminator? According to the pics I have seen, there should be a 150mm line extending towards the kerb at perpendicular. Or would this be considered a 'triviality'.

 

I dont think your getting the point about the address for payment (or a message directing you to the address) being on the notice. The payment slip is not part of the notice, neither is the back but, it would be ok if within the notice it referred you to the back for payment methods.

 

The above notice does not make any reference to how or where to pay. Reference is made on the "Tear off Slip" which does not form part of the PCN.

 

Here is a snippit fron the circular. It can be found here:

http://www.parking-appeals.gov.uk/about/circulars/Wording%20of%20PCN.pdf

 

 

 

completely different date. In Bury, a motorist will search in vain for a “Date of

Notice” or “Date of Issue” on the face of the PCN. A date is necessary because the 28

day period begins with “the date of the notice”. In my view, if Parliament had

intended the date of contravention to be the starting point for the relevant periods, it

would have said so. The specimen PCN in the Guidance specifically shows a “Date of

Issue” at the top. The tear off slip is not part of the PCN and may be detached. The

Bury PCN does not comply with section 66(3)©, nor was it modelled on the

Guidance. There is a serious possibility that real prejudice could be caused as a

consequence of this omission - because of potential uncertainty as to when the 28 day

period begins. The same reasoning applies to “the period of 14 days beginning with

the date of the notice” referred to in section 66(3)(d).

[diction]

I hope I am not missing something here. On the PCN itself under where it says Contravention code 01, the third paragraph states "Please see overleaf for details of how to pay ........" and on the back are full details and addresses of how to pay.

 

This is all above the Payment slip.