Islington Suspended bay - Obstructed sign

[royalblue1878]

Hi all,

I am wondering if this is appealable.

It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and it was rejected.

There was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van.

The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st.

I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st.

I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car.

When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder. 

I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day.

I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took.

There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space.

I would count those as 3 bays?

In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read.

In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van.

I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo.

I have pasted the appeal and rejection below.

Many thanks for looking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

This is my appeal statement:

As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st.

I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached.

When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension.

There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st.

I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached.

I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week.

I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there.

I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice.

As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted.

Many thanks.

 

This is the text from the rejection:

Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space.

I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street.

I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended.

The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief.

The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations.

Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements.

Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted.

I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes.

Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN.

Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. 

Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN:

You should now choose one of the following options:
Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024.

After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable.
Or
Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge.

Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to.

The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge.

If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.

 

Gee st pdf.pdf

[Homer67]

It was worth an appeal which has been rejected, as these escalate quickly to enforcement I would be paying it now and putting it down to experience

[Mycathasfleas]

 

You are lucky because you are in London and there is a centralised and accessible appeals centre which also puts searchable results on its website. I've used them several times. Always turning up in person and was ruled in favour every time. 

The link to the tribunal is https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat

First port of call is the local authority appeals process. I only had one from Islington, regarding a skip (not mine) blocking a space but they wanted me to pay for the meter it was parked on. Illogical, I know. 

I found that the case you make to the council does not have to be the same as that made to the tribunal. The local authority almost never turns up on the day even if you have chosen to attend. Wear a suit and call the lawyer Sir or Ma'am. 

As regards case preparation. The tribunal publishes results and summaries online. Have a read through and you may find cases that apply to your circumstances. The procedure is pretty well explained. 

The adjudicators are often helpful. For example, I turned up with a folder of evidence about a bus lane. But the adjudicator spotted that there had been one failed delivery to keeper. Apparently the authority was not allowed a second attempt before proceeding to enforcement. But they did so, and the case was dismissed in thirty seconds. 

Double check the council response. On one of mine Harrow put the wrong date and wrong location video for a bus lane. In another Kensington withdrew at the last minute because the parking wardens had been at lunch and didn't suspend a bay until after I parked. I made them pay £170 for my trouble. 

On that last thing. You almost never get awarded costs even if it is uncontested or the council is wrong. But you have seven days to apply to the tribunal. (Check that in case it has changed) 

 

[royalblue1878]

One thing I notice from the council rejection is that it states:

'The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief.'

Then he states:

Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted.

I would take from above that  he/she is admitting the suspension warning was not clearly visible?

 

Question for you Mycathasfleas

Is it possible to pay the reduced amount first and then appeal the PCN afterwards using the tribunal?

[dx100uk]

worth a punt, but just remember 'view obstruction' comes down to things like bushes and trees etc,

not when a sign that was put up, then in the said area whatever it was that required said bay hides the sign. they cant see into in future .

You have 28 days to challenge a PCN.

If you do it within 14 days and your challenge is rejected, you may only have to pay 50% of the PCN sum.

Check the ticket - there are different rules for some types of PCN.

You will not have to pay the PCN if your informal challenge is accepted.

 

[Mycathasfleas]

I think dx100uk has it correct.

Your can reduce the penalty by challenging early.

However I have read similar questions about betting both ways in paying first then appealing.

My understanding is that you are not allowed.

The reduction is a 50% gift from the authority to encourage prompt payment and presumably to get motorists to swallow a lower cost. But once you pay, the right to appeal is lost. 

I've never tried it myself. But I lived in the capital and love a good fight over these things.

I even won at Kensington and Chelsea "Moneybox Junction"

Good luck 

[royalblue1878]

Just had a look at the results of cases by the parking tribunal and it seems that you can indeed pay the fine and appeal later.

In these cases where the appeal was found in favour of the motorist the council was ordered to repay the penalty charge.

I have a few days to do some more research to make sure, so will do that for now.

Although these cases were where the car had ben towed away.

They got a refund for the PCN and removal charge.

I guess they had no choice to pay other wise they wouldn't get the car back.

More checking required!

Is an online challenge to the PCN a formal challenge?

If not I would have to wait for a notice to owner?

Does the notice to owner still give the 14 day discount?