Parking Tickets

[less2303]

An interesting issue is emerging within the Decriminalised Parking Enforcement system. This is the part of the Road Traffic Act 1991 which enables local councils to operate thier own parking regime.

 

If you have been issued with a parking ticket and still have the original PCN (the ticket that gets attached to your windscreen), check the following points:

 

1. At the top of the ticket there must be the words "Date Of Issue", simply date or date of offence is not acceptable

 

2. The ticket must not refer to an "offence", the correct term is "contravention"

 

Either of these points render the PCN unenforceable according to Section 66(3) of the RTA1991.

 

This originally came to light in May 2005 when NPAS ruled against Bury Council on the above points (NPAS are the independant parking adjudicators even though they are solely funded by 60p from each PCN - but thats another story)

 

Despite NPAS sending out an urgent memo to all local authorities regarding this some councils have STILL not changed the wording, leaving themselves open to potentially having to refund millions.

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

 

Apparently, it has been challenged successfully a number of times!!

 

Both of the following contain more information:

 

 

http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=845&ArticleID=1444414

 

http://neilherron.blogspot.com/

[ethank]

Under the 1991 Act, they must also clearly identified as a Parking Attendant. ie. If they are nor wearing a hat, or epaulettes then they cannot issue a ticket.

[seylectric]

Again this has been covered in several thread on this site, we really could do with a seperate section for things like this

[Lorraine]

Yes it was mentioned, but this is regarding parking tickets not the warden!!! with or without his hat!!!

 

I also have heard that if the yellow lines are broken - there is something in the law about the lines have to be together/connected! if this is not the case, the ticket is not valid either.

[seylectric]

I also have heard that if the yellow lines are broken - there is something in the law about the lines have to be together/connected! if this is not the case, the ticket is not valid either.

 

Correct. Although I have tried in vain for years to find out if this includes d/y lines that are broken because they go over a storm drain or grid.

 

I think ethank's post is relevant, it's another way of not having to pay because the ticket was wrongly issued.

[bitbob]

have a look at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/023113ba.gif and the rest of the act. Permitted variants are NONE, so if they are not this size or broken, as far as i can tell they are unenforcable. You would not believe how many places have 'wrong' yellow lines:lol: , fine for tickets but not so great if they tow your car, you still have to get it back:-x .....the above act relates to all road signs & gives diagrams .....a bit long winded but worth at least a couple hours of your time.

 

Mike

[seylectric]

Great post, the good thing about this is you can successfully challenge a parking ticket, but as you said it doesn't help if you have been towed.

 

There has to be a flaw somewhere regarding the laws about towing a vehicle because you might be totally innocent but are having the punishment imposed on you before you have had the chance to clear yourself via appeal etc. It's a disgrace.

 

Our local council have decided that you will be ticketed (or towed) for parking on a footpath (even partly) or more than 12 inches out from the kerb - I'm told that they even carry rulers to check. It gets more ridiculous every day, I mean how is a visitor to know there is a local by-law stating that you can't park more than 12 inches from the kerb?

 

There are many websites and books giving information about what is legal and what isn't but nobody seems to be quite sure how or why they can introduce these by-laws (without signage) or why they can "legally" tow you without a chance to defend yourself or without even having to inform you in advance that they will do so.

[lee6370]

ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

As for the broken lines it only applies is you park between a broken line, if you park on any part of a yellow line broken or not, then you are parked illegally.

[seylectric]

ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

As for the broken lines it only applies is you park between a broken line, if you park on any part of a yellow line broken or not, then you are parked illegally.

 

The point here is that it's grossly unfair of councils to penalise people for not obeying local by-laws if they don't know those by-laws exist, especially if there is no way of knowing if there are no signs up. Do you check every by-law of every locality you enter? Of course you don't! Should you be reasonably expected to? Of course you shouldn't! But councils are using this sort of thing simply to make money out of people and for that there IS no excuse.

 

As for the broken double (or single) yellow lines issue, sorry but you are incorrect. The law states that the line has to be solid, i.e. unbroken. If it isn't it's not a legal yellow line and can't (or shouldn't) be enforced, where you are parked on it is irrelevant.

[bitbob]

ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

As for the broken lines it only applies is you park between a broken line, if you park on any part of a yellow line broken or not, then you are parked illegally.

 

Yep, that appears to be incorrect, check the link further up, if the yellow lines vary from that pictured on link, as there are permitted variants NONE then the roads markings must be to the specifications in the Act.

 

That may not stop a ticket being issued or being towed but i assume costs i.e towing/release charges, preparation of defence case & possibility damages etc could be claimed in a law court as would for defending (& winning your case) a speeding / section 172 offence.

[seylectric]

Yep, that appears to be incorrect, check the link further up, if the yellow lines vary from that pictured on link, as there are permitted variants NONE then the roads markings must be to the specifications in the Act.

 

That may not stop a ticket being issued or being towed but i assume costs i.e towing/release charges, preparation of defence case & possibility damages etc could be claimed in a law court as would for defending (& winning your case) a speeding / section 172 offence.

 

There are many known cases which have been won and costs/refunds/compensation made due to incorrect signage - this includes broken double yellow lines simply because the relevant act, whatever it is (I'm not looking again! ) does not provide for variations from the general rule. the general rule in this case is of course, that it must be a SOLID yellow line.

 

Technicaly it's possible that every yellow line in the country is invalid because they have to be a certain width too, with a certain sized gap in between ands a certain distance from the kerb.

 

There are actually three acceptable widths:

 

100mm is the standard width, 75mm can be used in areas where the speed limit is less than 40mph (so expect these to be the most common) and 50mm in "environmentally sensitive areas". So the yellow line has to be EXACTLY this width. Again the law doesn't officially permit any deviation from this so if a "75mm" line is 74 or 76mm ALONG IT'S WHOLE LENGTH it's invalid! Hey, we didn't make the rules!

[dw190]

Davies v Heatley [1971] R.T.R 145

Because by s.64(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 traffic signs shall be of the size, colour and type prescribed by regulation, if a sign the contravention of which is an offence contrary to s.36 is not as prescribed by the regulation, no offence is committed if the sign is contravened, even if the sign is clearly recognisable to a reasonable man as a sign of that kind.

 

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

Any part of the lines from T-Bar to T-Bar broken or damaged render the lines as non compliant. They must be continuous.

 

So the councils should not issue any tickets if any of their lines or signs (which incidently are one of the same in RT law) are not as prescribed.

[seylectric]

Thank you for that, exactly my point.

 

And as I said, we don't make the rules!

[lee6370]

Easy, i was only saying.

 

You are all refering to the regulations that tell you what the lines should look like, there width, etc. but they are allowed to be within a variant, can't remeber what it is off my head but something like 30% of what you are all reading.

 

As for the broken line part this is also covered, in the regulations under variations, and it is allowed to be broken but if a certain percentage is missing over a given distance then it doesn't apply otherwise it's still a yellow line and you can't park on it.

 

Think about it, if what you are saying is true then 90% of yellow lines don't count, you have taken one part of the law and made it apply to your argument, and fair play thats what most layers do but the fact is there are other parts of the regulations that render you're argument invalid.

 

and don't have a go at me, i'm only telling you what the regulations are.

[seylectric]

Easy, i was only saying.

 

You are all refering to the regulations that tell you what the lines should look like, there width, etc. but they are allowed to be within a variant, can't remeber what it is off my head but something like 30% of what you are all reading.

 

As for the broken line part this is also covered, in the regulations under variations, and it is allowed to be broken but if a certain percentage is missing over a given distance then it doesn't apply otherwise it's still a yellow line and you can't park on it.

 

Think about it, if what you are saying is true then 90% of yellow lines don't count, you have taken one part of the law and made it apply to your argument, and fair play thats what most layers do but the fact is there are other parts of the regulations that render you're argument invalid.

 

and don't have a go at me, i'm only telling you what the regulations are.

 

 

Nobody's having a go at you specifically, just challenging the information.

 

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 diagram 1018.1 below shows the permitted size of double yellow lines. Note the wording in the table below which reads: Permitted variants: NONE

 

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/023113ba.gif

 

It is true, you have it there in black and white from the government, and yes, probably 90% of all lines are invalid. As I said, we don't make the rules but all I'm saying is that if you are giving statements like "something like a 30% variance" then you need to back it up otherwise the information becomes misleading, and it could be important to somebody so it's important to get it right. The same applies for broken lines or gaps in the lines, there are no regulations allowing any variants, a solid yellow line has to be just that - solid. If I'm wrong I will hold my hands up but please post the relevant regs if they exist because I can't find any!

 

Don't take it personally, it's otherwise a very good and informative thread but if you are goping to make statement and quote them as fact at least do ytour research and back them up..

[bitbob]

I think you are correct with the tolerance allowance (for road signs, i think 10%) i remember reading it, will have a look later at the Act and post the relevant part if i find it.

[seylectric]

Yes, there is an allowance for the size of road signs.

 

It's not a set percentage but varies dependant on certain factors although I'm not sure what those factors are off the top of my head.

[bitbob]

Think about it, if what you are saying is true then 90% of yellow lines don't count, you have taken one part of the law and made it apply to your argument, and fair play thats what most layers do but the fact is there are other parts of the regulations that render you're argument invalid.

 

That 90% figure cannot be far off if you consider Holyhead town, the only 'correct' yellow lines as far as i can tell from the Regs in Holyhead (town centre) are those which surround the police & court building!!!!!!

[bitbob]

Variation of Dimensions 12 (10) ...Table 2 as yellow lines are Schedule 6 markings.

 

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#11

 

Table 2 Diagrams in Schedule 6 - All dimensions

 

Item Dimensions shown in diagrams Permitted variations

 

1. 1.3 metres or more

 

(i) Up to 15% of the dimension where the varied dimension is greater than the specified dimension; or

 

(ii) Up to 10% of the dimension where the varied dimension is less than the specified dimension

 

2. 300 millimetres or more, but less than 3 metres

 

(i) Up to 20% of the dimension where the varied dimension is greater than the specified dimension; or

 

(ii) Up to 10% of the dimension where the varied dimension is less than the specified dimension

 

3. 50 millimetres or more but less than 300 millimetres

 

(i) Up to 30% of the dimension where the varied dimension is greater than the specified dimension; or

 

(ii) Up to 10% of the dimension where the varied dimension is less than the specified dimension

[deemacperth]

Have a read.

 

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#sch19pII2

 

 

This then explains the changes:

 

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/page/dft_roads_508278.pdf

 

Be warned, not bedtime reading.

[bitbob]

Thanks, for the info on the updates.

 

I am sure the three sizes allowed for Yellow lines, in brackets on diagram, correspond to limits under 40mph, sensitive areas and one other situation....if you know the three situations please let me know ......i know i have seen it in writing but i can't find it now.

 

.....oh there it is in Seylectric's post further up.......do you recall were the info came from?

[bitbob]

 

There are actually three acceptable widths:

 

100mm is the standard width, 75mm can be used in areas where the speed limit is less than 40mph (so expect these to be the most common) and 50mm in "environmentally sensitive areas". So the yellow line has to be EXACTLY this width. Again the law doesn't officially permit any deviation from this so if a "75mm" line is 74 or 76mm ALONG IT'S WHOLE LENGTH it's invalid! Hey, we didn't make the rules!

 

I guess it all means that yellow lines in areas under 40 mph must be between 130 - 67.5mm (+30%/-10% of 100mm & 75mm) to be enforcable (not inc sensitive areas) considering the allowable tolerance (permitted variations) for Sch. 6 marking in the regs.

 

But don't forget the bars on the ends there is only one size for these and the tolerances would mean they have to be no more than 195mm or no less than 135mm (+30%/-10% of 150mm) from the edge of the continuous yellow line.

[seylectric]

Contradicts the other regs I mentioned then. So one lot says variations are not permitted, another says they are. Which are to be taken as legally correct?

 

 

 

 

 

*wanders away quietly.....*

[bitbob]

Permitted Variations & Permitted Variants....slight difference in wording.

 

So you could have permitted variations of permitted variants......i.e. allowed tolerance of the different allowed sizes.

 

had me thinking it contradicted itself for a while:confused: .

[Azazal23]

Cheers, ive just sent the guy a letter asking fo all the relevent documenation, that should stall em for a while. the guy said himself all the docs where in transit awaiting to be archived, probably lost in other words.