DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 79120--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets PCN Brady St code 01
DIR By: Jamran
Date: July 1, 2025, 1:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> Please post their letter of rejection to the NtO
> Their letter seems to be tosh on the subject of the Blue
Badge. A Blue Badge holder may not be able to drive, but
provided the car was used to convey the BB holder to the parking
location, then that is OK. If you can explain more about this,
then it might be worth taking them to London Tribunals,
otherwise pay the discount. They are correct re the clock, I
think.
>
> My elderly mother held a BB and I used to use it when we took
her out and parked, then returned to the car and took her home.
This is entirely lawful.
>
--- End Quote ---
What information do you require? I’m in the same situation as
yourself. My elderly mother is the blue badge holder. She lives
with us and I’m her carer. I only make use of the badge when she
is with me.
#Post#: 79125--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets PCN Brady St code 01
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: July 1, 2025, 2:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Where are your reps?
#Post#: 79132--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets PCN Brady St code 01
DIR By: Jamran
Date: July 1, 2025, 2:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Here’s my reps for the nto
I parked at approximately [time] in a bay governed by the sign
shown in the attached image. During that time, the bay permitted
Blue Badge holders to park without time restriction (within the
07:00–19:00 pay and display/business permit hours), which I
correctly interpreted, so I displayed my valid Blue Badge.
However, after 19:00, the bay becomes restricted as a single
yellow line, and Blue Badge holders may only park for up to 3
hours provided a parking clock is also displayed. I was unaware
of this transition. As a result, while my badge was clearly
displayed, I did not display the clock, not realising the
restriction had changed.
I returned to my car at 20:00 to find the PCN issued at 19:27 —
just 27 minutes after the restriction changed, and well within
the allowed 3-hour Blue Badge exemption.
⸻
Grounds for Challenge
⸻
1. Signage is Confusing and Inadequate
The signage (see photo) is not sufficiently clear about the
change in restrictions after 19:00. It primarily highlights
pay-by-phone and permit holder regulations, with a small yellow
sign above referring to Mon–Sat “Midnight–7am, 7pm–Midnight”
restrictions.
The bay is physically marked as a parking bay — yet after 19:00
it reverts to single yellow line restrictions. A driver seeing a
parking bay with signs referencing parking and pay-by-phone
would not expect a sudden switch to a yellow-line rule after
7pm. This is ambiguous and fails to adequately convey the
transition in restriction type.
This contravenes Regulation 18 of The Local Authorities’ Traffic
Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, which
states:
“The order-making authority shall take such steps as are
necessary to secure adequate information as to the effect of the
order is made available to persons using the road.”
As established in Camden v. The Parking Adjudicator (Moses LJ),
signage must clearly convey the operational rules to the
reasonable driver. In this case, it does not.
⸻
2. Badge Was Valid, and Contravention Was Technical and
Non-Prejudicial
Under the Blue Badge Scheme Guidance (DfT, 2011), badge holders
may park on single yellow lines for up to 3 hours if no
obstruction is caused and the badge and time clock are
displayed. I fully complied with the spirit and function of this
exemption — I was parked for less than 3 hours, caused no
obstruction, and displayed my valid badge.
My sole omission was not displaying the clock — a technical
oversight, made due to the misleading signage and
misunderstanding of the restriction switch. There was no attempt
to evade restrictions or overstay.
Adjudicators have accepted in many similar cases — such as Case
2110072817 (PATAS) — that minor omissions (like not displaying
the clock where the badge is shown and no overstay has occurred)
can render enforcement disproportionate, especially where no
public interest is served by penalising the motorist.
⸻
3. Procedural Impropriety – Failure to Consider Representations
My initial informal representations were rejected with a
template response that failed to address the specific grounds I
raised. This breaches Paragraph 85 of the Traffic Management Act
2004 Operational Guidance, which requires that authorities:
“give proper consideration to the representations and respond to
the motorist’s points.”
This amounts to a procedural impropriety, which is grounds for
cancellation.
⸻
4. Proportionality
The PCN does not serve a deterrent or regulatory function in
this case. The badge was valid. The duration was lawful. The
mistake — not displaying the clock — did not result in overstay
or abuse of the scheme.
It is disproportionate to penalise a disabled badge holder for a
technical oversight caused by unclear signage.
⸻
Conclusion
I respectfully request the cancellation of this PCN on the
following grounds:
•
restriction clearly.
•
omitted the clock — a technical, not substantive, contravention.
•
•
appeal.
•
the intent of the Blue Badge Scheme.
If this appeal is rejected, I request a full and reasoned
response to each point raised and intend to take the matter to
the independent adjudicator if necessary.
#Post#: 79138--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets PCN Brady St code 01
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: July 1, 2025, 3:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The problem with your reps is you continually refer to "my valid
Blue Badge", "my badge" etc. But it's not your BB it is your
mothers, so that made them accuse you of BB misuse. You should
have told them the full story.
#Post#: 79141--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets PCN Brady St code 01
DIR By: Jamran
Date: July 1, 2025, 3:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> The problem with your reps is you continually refer to "my
valid Blue Badge", "my badge" etc. But it's not your BB it is
your mothers, so that made them accuse you of BB misuse. You
should have told them the full story.
>
--- End Quote ---
Agreed. The pitfalls of using AI! However, I’m sure I edited it
before submitting. Is there any way I can get ahold of my reps
from TH now?
#Post#: 79145--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets PCN Brady St code 01
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: July 1, 2025, 4:02 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
This doesn't change the facts. You were parked where and when
you were not entitled.
Whether the badge was being used improperly is not the issue.
You were obliged to display the clock. IMO, you would have been
in a better, but not necessarily winning, position had you
displayed the clock and set it for the quarter-hour when you
parked and then pleaded confusion as to when it should have been
set. But you didn't.
Their NOR doesn't contain any silver bullet errors IMO.
Appealing and therefore rejecting the discount would be a gamble
IMO. Yes, it's possible that the restricted hours are incorrect,
but how would establish this before the discount expires?
#Post#: 79148--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets PCN Brady St code 01
DIR By: Jamran
Date: July 1, 2025, 4:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> This doesn't change the facts. You were parked where and when
you were not entitled.
>
> Whether the badge was being used improperly is not the issue.
You were obliged to display the clock. IMO, you would have been
in a better, but not necessarily winning, position had you
displayed the clock and set it for the quarter-hour when you
parked and then pleaded confusion as to when it should have been
set. But you didn't.
>
> Their NOR doesn't contain any silver bullet errors IMO.
>
> Appealing and therefore rejecting the discount would be a
gamble IMO. Yes, it's possible that the restricted hours are
incorrect, but how would establish this before the discount
expires?
>
--- End Quote ---
Is there any grounds with the signage being confusing? Also, the
council failed to apply any discretion for a vehicle with a
disabled blue badge holder? They don’t really address these
points I raised in their NOJ.
#Post#: 79168--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets PCN Brady St code 01
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: July 2, 2025, 4:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c78f895e5274a0ebfec719b/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-03.pdf
See p171 which gives examples of the form of traffic signs to be
used where waiting restrictions and parking apply in the same
length of street. IMO, the sign which is shown in GSV is an
exemplar. IMO, the ad hoc 'market day' only sign above would not
persuade an adjudicator that the signage of yellow line and
traffic sign was confusing.
As regards discretion, this is a matter for the council only.
They've decided not to exercise in your favour which is their
choice. An adjudicator may not interfere with their decision.
Wait for others who might have other more prospectively positive
points.
#Post#: 79294--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets PCN Brady St code 01
DIR By: Jamran
Date: July 2, 2025, 12:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
>
HTML https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c78f895e5274a0ebfec719b/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-03.pdf
>
> See p171 which gives examples of the form of traffic signs to
be used where waiting restrictions and parking apply in the same
length of street. IMO, the sign which is shown in GSV is an
exemplar. IMO, the ad hoc 'market day' only sign above would not
persuade an adjudicator that the signage of yellow line and
traffic sign was confusing.
>
> As regards discretion, this is a matter for the council only.
They've decided not to exercise in your favour which is their
choice. An adjudicator may not interfere with their decision.
>
> Wait for others who might have other more prospectively
positive points.
>
--- End Quote ---
One may argue that Permit/p&d parking in peak times then no
parking at all in off peaks is arguably far from the norm as
well as confusing to the average person.
Apart from there I’ve never come across such a restriction.
With regards to their refusal for discretion, I’m sure their own
cancellation policy states that discretion be allowed to blue
badge holders? I’ll try dig it up
#Post#: 79298--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets PCN Brady St code 01
DIR By: Jamran
Date: July 2, 2025, 1:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Found one document regarding cancellation of PCN for blue badge
holders
HTML https://democracy.towerhamlets.gov.uk/documents/s89346/5.1%20CPZ%20Parking%20Policy%20Review.pdf#:~:text=3%20There%20are%20restrictions%20that%20Blue%20Badge,will%20be%20liable%20for%20Penalty%20Charge%20Notices.&text=4%20Currently%2C%20Tower%20Hamlets'%20policy%20requires%20the,Badge%20but%20that%20is%20still%20in%20contravention.
HTML https://www.scribd.com/document/553208338/Tower-Hamlets-Council-Policy-Cancellation-of-PCNs
Page 6 of this link states the follliwing:
“When in a place that requires a permit, scratchcard, pay &
display ticket, Disabled Person's Badge or any other item to be
displayed in the vehicle, that item must be displayed so that
all details are clearly visible. If a CEO cannot see all the
details then a PCN may be issued. It is not a defence against a
PCN simply to possess an item. If the item can be produced with
the representations, however, and was valid at the time of the
contravention then the Council will consider using its
discretion to cancel the PCN. In general, discretion will only
be applied once.
This policy does not apply to multi-vehicle permits or Disabled
Person's Badges if they are not visible in the vehicle as they
could be in use elsewhere.”
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 9
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page