November 25, 2007
Well, the first anniversary of this website went unmarked on November 12th. I was so busy preparing for the next few weeks that I didn’t have time for retrospection. That will have to wait for the Christmas break now.
The postal strike played havoc with applications for appeal and at one stage PATAS were receiving mail posted one month previously. Many people were served Charge Certificates by over eager councils because appeal applications were not received on time.
From my point of view it means that I have delayed appeals all stacked up between now and Christmas. Read the rest of this entry »
November 6, 2007
Finally, after many unsuccessful attempts we have managed to get an Adjudicator to rule on the wording of an Islington moving traffic PCN. The appeal was allowed. All Islington moving traffic PCNs issued since early December 2006 are unlawful.
The Adjudicator’s reasons were simple. If the legislation says something must be stated on the PCN then it is a mandatory requirement. Ignore it or modify it at your peril.
This was no snap decision either. The Adjudicator reserved his decision so that he could go away and think about it and, presumably, consult his colleagues.
The implication is that Islington, Hillingdon and Waltham Forest PCNs are unlawful and can be challenged on the basis of their wording. Read the rest of this entry »
August 7, 2007
When I first started this blog I never really thought that I would join the ranks of the “real-time” bloggers, but so much is happening this week that I feel a need to document it as it unfolds.
Last month was a downer with all pending appeals cancelled, but this week I have two appeals that are definitely being contested. On Wednesday (8th Aug) we are up against Transport for London (TfL) and on Friday (10th Aug) we take on Islington.
The TfL appeal concerns the box junction at Battersea Bridge Road and Westbridge Road. This is being contested on four grounds:
- The confusing and ambiguous wording of the PCN renders it invalid
- The Wording of the Notice of Rejection does not conform to the legislation
- The yellow box marking does not conform to the legislation
- The contravention was unavoidable due to “unforeseen obstruction”.
TfL have not submitted anything to counter our arguments for points 1 and 2. They have strongly defended point 3, and would appear to be leaving the video evidence to speak for itself in support of point 4.
The Islington appeal concerns the box junction in Liverpool Road. That’s not really important because this is a test case to determine whether the wording of the Islington Moving Traffic PCN is lawful or not.
Experience has shown that previously, this kind of case would have ended up as a ‘no contest’. The fact that Islington Parking Dept has the courage to defend its actions does seem to confirm the commitment to put its house in order following the appointment of a Parking Advocate.
On top of this there are challenges taking shape against Ealing, Hammersmith and Fulham, and Waltham Forest.
Next instalment tomorrow…
January 3, 2007
If a box junction is to be enforced then it should comply with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 (usually abbreviated to TSRGD). However, if the Local Authority can demonstrate good reason why it is impossible to comply fully with TSRGD, and justify the need for the box junction, then the Secretary of State for Transport can, in exceptional circumstances, specifically authorise the use of a non compliant junction.
If there was a handful of such authorised junctions in the London area then you might believe the above statement, but just look at the list that has been authorised since enforcement began, particularly in 2006. It looks like Transport for London order authorisations by the container load and the Department for Transport (DfT) just rubber stamp them.
It would appear that TSRGD compliant box junctions are becoming the exception rather than the rule. The cynics amongst us might even suspect the DfT is being complicit in allowing Local Authorities to tax farm junctions that present drivers with difficulties.
Judge for yourself; the list is as follows:
Read the rest of this entry »