DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 71038--------------------------------------------------
Hackney Council Council, CODE 62, parked with one or more wheels
over footpath
DIR By: Extramask
Date: May 12, 2025, 8:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I recently received a PCN from Hackney Council for parking my
motorcycle outside my block. This situation is concerning for
several reasons:
I have been parking in this location for over 12 years without
any previous issues or PCNs.
The parking spot is part of my building block, not on the public
footpath. There is a clear demarcation between the building area
and public footpath, shown by different pavement types and
colors. And my bike was not parked on the footpath it was parked
in the area which is part of the building next to my bin shed.
I had two bikes parked on the same private pavement belonging to
my building. Oddly, only one received a PCN, though both were
parked on different sides of the bin shed.
The property in question is located at 9 Dunn Street, E8 2DG.
I would like to appeal this PCN but need guidance on how to
structure my challenge effectively.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 71047--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council Council, CODE 62, parked with one or more
wheels over footpath
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: May 12, 2025, 8:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The rule about this is whether there is public access not
whether the area is private.
But legitimate expectation is also a factor if they're enforcing
when not for some time before.
Did you challenge the PCN as you have an NTO. If so post your
challenge and their rejection.
#Post#: 71052--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council Council, CODE 62, parked with one or more
wheels over footpath
DIR By: Extramask
Date: May 12, 2025, 9:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: stamfordman link ---
>
> The rule about this is whether there is public access not
whether the area is private.
>
> But legitimate expectation is also a factor if they're
enforcing when not for some time before.
>
> Did you challenge the PCN as you have an NTO. If so post your
challenge and their rejection.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thank you for your prompt reply.
I haven't challenged the PCN yet. I couldn't find the sticker on
my bike - it might have been removed by someone or blown away by
the wind. I'm only taking action now because I received the PCN
by post.
Regarding public access, I'm not sure how this is relevant in my
case. There was no restriction to public access to my bin shed.
My understanding was that private ground is equivalent to a
private driveway. I've been parking in the same spot for over 10
years without ever receiving a PCN until now.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 71057--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council Council, CODE 62, parked with one or more
wheels over footpath
DIR By: sx4
Date: May 12, 2025, 9:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The old argument about if it public or private.
If members of the public have access to walk across the land
where your bike is parked the council can give you a pcn, but if
it was fenced or posts with a chain it is classed as private
land .
A case in my local area which went to the traffic penalty
tribunal was decided in favour of the council.
The appelent used to park his bike on the pavement outside his
house and he produced land registry documents to show his cellar
went under the pavement so he was actually parked on top of his
cellar (his land ) but the adjudicator came to the judgement
that even though he owned the cellar under the pavement, the
council maintained and the public had access to walk across the
land .
#Post#: 71079--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council Council, CODE 62, parked with one or more
wheels over footpath
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: May 12, 2025, 11:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
R (on application of Dawood) v The Parking Adjudicator & Anr
is the key case, which has a very close resemblance to yours.
See
London Tribunals Key Cases
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/keycases/Dawood%20Footway%20Parking%20Sedley%20LJ%20permission%20refused.pdf
also
HTML https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/legal-updates/penalised-for-parking-on-your-own-land/5104843.article
and
HTML https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/6518693738ec0e5e5246b085
However, 10 years without a PCN certainly gives rise to the
defence of 'legitimate expectation' that the prohibition would
not be enforced.
#Post#: 71129--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council Council, CODE 62, parked with one or more
wheels over footpath
DIR By: Extramask
Date: May 12, 2025, 4:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: sx4 link ---
>
> The old argument about if it public or private.
> If members of the public have access to walk across the land
where your bike is parked the council can give you a pcn, but if
it was fenced or posts with a chain it is classed as private
land .
> A case in my local area which went to the traffic penalty
tribunal was decided in favour of the council.
> The appelent used to park his bike on the pavement outside his
house and he produced land registry documents to show his cellar
went under the pavement so he was actually parked on top of his
cellar (his land ) but the adjudicator came to the judgement
that even though he owned the cellar under the pavement, the
council maintained and the public had access to walk across the
land .
>
--- End Quote ---
Yeah, I just reviewd the case you're talking about. Indeed there
are similarities with my case. Bottom line is if you see my
illustrated photo, my scooter was parked next to my bin shed
which it doesnt not restrict right of passage in anyway...
#Post#: 71130--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council Council, CODE 62, parked with one or more
wheels over footpath
DIR By: Extramask
Date: May 12, 2025, 4:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: John U.K. link ---
>
> R (on application of Dawood) v The Parking Adjudicator & Anr
>
> is the key case, which has a very close resemblance to yours.
See
>
> London Tribunals Key Cases
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/keycases/Dawood%20Footway%20Parking%20Sedley%20LJ%20permission%20refused.pdf
>
> also
>
>
HTML https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/legal-updates/penalised-for-parking-on-your-own-land/5104843.article
>
> and
>
>
HTML https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/6518693738ec0e5e5246b085
>
> However, 10 years without a PCN certainly gives rise to the
defence of 'legitimate expectation' that the prohibition would
not be enforced.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks for the information and links. In the case "the court
stated that the control of parking extends to any section of
road or street that the public habitually and freely passes
over".
Coming back into my case I belive I have commited no offence. My
scooter was parked next to my bin shed. Regardless of my bike
bing parked there or not there was no free passage on the
private ground as there was a fence on one side and a bin shed
next to it. So to argue by parking my scooter on that spot I've
restricted the public habitually and freely passes over doesnt
make sense.
Have a look my illustrated photo and please let me if I am
missing something?
#Post#: 71135--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council Council, CODE 62, parked with one or more
wheels over footpath
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: May 12, 2025, 5:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hackney has started charging for m/c parking so this may have
something to do with it.
You have an excellent case for legitimate expectation added to
stating it's off the public access area as who wants to root
around your bins apart from the local foxes.
#Post#: 71141--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council Council, CODE 62, parked with one or more
wheels over footpath
DIR By: sx4
Date: May 12, 2025, 5:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Where was the bike that was ticketed parked, if it was where the
one with the blue box on the back I would agree with you that
the public would have no need to access that point. But where
the red bike in the last photo is less certain that public don’t
have access as it is alongside the footpath in your diagram.
Who maintains that bit of land your bike is parked , if council
it is their land and they won’t give way easily.
#Post#: 71249--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council Council, CODE 62, parked with one or more
wheels over footpath
DIR By: Extramask
Date: May 13, 2025, 7:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: stamfordman link ---
>
> Hackney has started charging for m/c parking so this may have
something to do with it.
>
> You have an excellent case for legitimate expectation added to
stating it's off the public access area as who wants to root
around your bins apart from the local foxes.
>
--- End Quote ---
Dear Hackney Council,
I am writing to formally appeal the Penalty Charge Notice issued
for parking my scooter outside my block at Dunn Street, E8 2DG.
I believe the PCN has been erroneously issued, and I would like
to present the following points for your consideration:
1. Legitimacy of the Parking Location
For over 10 years, I have parked my scooter in this specific
spot without any prior issues or notices. This long-standing
practice has established a legitimate expectation that parking
in this location is acceptable. The site in question is clearly
part of my building’s property and is not on the public
footpath.
2. Private Property and Demarcation from Public Footpath
The area where my motorcycle was parked is distinctly separate
from the public footpath; the pavement type and color change at
the boundary between the two. My vehicle was parked on the side
of the property that falls within the private grounds, next to
my bin shed. With a fence on one side and the bin shed adjacent,
there is no free passage for the public at that precise spot. As
such, it is difficult to understand how parking here could be
construed as restricting public access.
3. Inconsistent Enforcement
On the day in question, two scooters belonging to me were
parked on the same private pavement belonging to my building.
Only one of the scooters received a PCN, even though they were
both parked on private property—albeit on opposite sides of the
bin shed. This inconsistent enforcement further raises concerns
about the justification for issuing the PCN.
4. No Obstruction of Public Access:
The area in question is inherently restricted by a fence and bin
shed, rendering it inaccessible for public passage. Parking my
scooter here did not impede any “habitual or free passage” by
the public, as there is no rationale for pedestrian access to
this secluded spot—save local foxes rummaging near the bins.
In light of the above reasons, I respectfully request a review
of this matter and cancellation of the PCN. I believe that a
thorough reassessment of the facts will confirm that my parking
location, being part of private property and not interfering
with public access, does not warrant a penalty.
Thank you for your time and prompt attention to this appeal. I
look forward to your favorable response.
Yours sincerely,
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page