DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 87686--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brent, code 16 parked in a permit zone on event day,
Windermere Avenue, on street parking bay
DIR By: mrmustard
Date: August 29, 2025, 9:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The way I see this the zone entry signs apply to everywhere
except marked bays.
The OP was in a marked bay outside the shops.
There was no sign within the bay and is therefore unrestricted.
In order to issue a PCN the CEO (traffic warden) strolled along
the road past the end of the bay to lamp-post 25 which is
opposite Thirlemere Gardens and therefore does not apply to the
bay.
The council cannot prove there is a a contravention as they have
not adequately signed it in line with legal requirements.
Sit and wait for the Notice to Owner.
#Post#: 87688--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brent, code 16 parked in a permit zone on event day,
Windermere Avenue, on street parking bay
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: August 29, 2025, 9:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, you didn't post the whole of their rejection(less your
personal details) because you left out the date it was issued
therefore we've no way of knowing whether the discount is still
on offer.
Even so, discounted payments are re-offered regularly with
unsuccessful formal reps.
#Post#: 87692--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brent, code 16 parked in a permit zone on event day,
Windermere Avenue, on street parking bay
DIR By: user334232
Date: August 29, 2025, 9:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So are we in agreement I should proceed and challenge the
council?
#Post#: 87694--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brent, code 16 parked in a permit zone on event day,
Windermere Avenue, on street parking bay
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: August 29, 2025, 9:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What's the date of their rejection?
#Post#: 87720--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brent, code 16 parked in a permit zone on event day,
Windermere Avenue, on street parking bay
DIR By: user334232
Date: August 29, 2025, 12:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry I missed this. They rejected on the 27th August 2025
#Post#: 87722--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brent, code 16 parked in a permit zone on event day,
Windermere Avenue, on street parking bay
DIR By: user334232
Date: August 29, 2025, 1:02 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Here’s the PDF without my name and personal details
#Post#: 87741--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brent, code 16 parked in a permit zone on event day,
Windermere Avenue, on street parking bay
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: August 29, 2025, 3:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I had a quick Look on the tribunal database and found a couple
of refused case in this zone.
But both leave questions as to whether the adjudicators knew
what they were doing.
-----------
Case reference 2240583583
Appellant Doctors Plus Ltd
Authority London Borough of Brent
VRM LD20 OHX
PCN Details
PCN BT22624618
Contravention date 25 Jul 2024
Contravention time 10:20:00
Contravention location Dollis Hill Lane
Penalty amount GBP 130.00
Contravention Parked in permit space without a valid permit
Referral date -
Decision Date 02 Apr 2025
Adjudicator Philippa Alderson
Appeal decision Appeal refused
Direction Full penalty charge notice amount stated to be paid
within 28 days.
1. Reasons The Appellant is appealing a PCN issued in respect of
parking during a parking/loading ban at the location.
2. The Council relies upon the contemporaneous evidence of the
Civil Enforcement Officer, a copy of the PCN, a copy of the
relevant legislation and correspondence.
3. The driver contends that the signage indicating the
restrictions was inadequate. He says that he entered Dollis Hill
Lane from the A4088 end. He contends that there was no visible
signage, approaching the restriction from this direction,
indicating the nature of the bay restrictions. He contends that
there was no signage indicating which days were "match days" or
informing drivers where this information may be obtained. He
contends that subsequently he has identified one relevant sign
but this was on the opposite side of the road and turned to face
the pavement.
4. I have carefully considered all the evidence in this matter
5. The CEO’s photographs show the vehicle parked and unattended
in what appears to be a multi-vehicle bay at the location. It is
parked at the end of the bay, the broken bay markings being
visible to the rear of the vehicle. The CEO has provided a
photograph of the signage relied upon by the Council. This
signage indicates that parking is permitted for specified "EV"
permit holders in marked bays on event days, 10am - midnight.
The photograph is close-up of the signage and the wider context
of the location cannot be established. The sign is not readily
visible in any of the photographs taken of the vehicle by the
CEO.
6. However, in one of the photographs taken by the CEO, the back
of a sign is visible some way down the road behind the vehicle,
on the same side of the road. In addition, a separate bay is
also visible just before this sign. Having carefully considered
and compared the CEO's photographs and the further photographic
evidence provided at Enclosure H, I find that this sign is the
Wembley Stadium Permit Zone signage, which indicates a No
parking restriction on event days, between 10am and midnight,
save for "permit holders in marked bays". This signage is on the
right of the carriageway and I am satisfied, having considered
the evidence contained in Enclosure H, that there is another
sign on the left of the carriageway, which would be readily
visible to a driver entering that zone. Given the direction in
which the parked vehicle is facing, I find it likely that this
signage was passed by the driver prior to parking. In addition,
the Council's photographs of the entry point signage are
annotated, "Dollis Hill Lane near the junction of A4088" and I
therefore find it likely that these photographs shows the
signage on the route taken by the driver, who contends that he
entered from the A4088 "end".
7. I am satisfied that a driver is on notice, by way of the
Permit Zone entry point signage, that all bay parking at the
location is reserved for permit holders. There is no requirement
for each bay to be individually signed. The onus is on drivers
to then inform themselves as to whether an event is taking
place.
8. I am satisfied to the requisite standard that a contravention
has taken place and that no statutory ground of appeal or
exemption has taken place.
9. I must therefore refuse this appeal.
--------
Case reference 2230372311
Appellant Sarah Wickenden
Authority London Borough of Brent
VRM FL14 KUW
PCN Details
PCN BT19158131
Contravention date 22 Apr 2023
Contravention time 10:53:00
Contravention location Grasmere Avenue
Penalty amount GBP 130.00
Contravention Parked in permit space without a valid permit
Referral date -
Decision Date 28 Sep 2023
Adjudicator John Lane
Appeal decision Appeal refused
Direction Full penalty charge notice amount stated to be paid
within 28 days.
Reasons The issue of this appeal is whether the said vehicle was
parked in a permit holders’ only parking place without clearly
displaying a valid permit or having a virtual permit.
I accept that the civil enforcement officer checked all the
vehicle’s windows, was sufficiently close to take photographs. A
penalty notice can be seen affixed to the vehicle.
The administrative practicalities of the parking scheme require
a vehicle’s owner, at all times it waits in a bay or space, to
pay for that time and display proof of that by way of a ticket
or voucher or meter reading. With telephone payments the vehicle
registration mark (VRM) and location requirements must be
correct. Should the telephone or display requirements be omitted
then a contravention occurs. The Scheme imposes owner liability.
That implies that the owner may be liable even if he did not
know about the contravention, which in turn implies liability
without fault. An Adjudicator must balance any decision between
fairness and administrative practicality. Sometimes the latter
overrides the former. A Scheme requires that parked vehicles pay
for their waiting time and that the payment is visibly displayed
or duly made by ‘phone. Should either requirement be absent then
a contravention occurs. I find that this principle must also
apply to permit parking spaces.
The appellant has stated there were no signs on the side of the
road where the vehicle was parked to indicate there were
restrictions there. The appellant has provided evidence of a
screenshot.
The evidence in this case leads me to conclude that the
appellant’s vehicle was parked in a permit parking area.
The sign must face the motorist much like the signs at the
entrances to a controlled parking zone.
The evidence leads me to conclude that the appellant’s vehicle
was parked in an area behind the sign and therefore in
contravention.
The evidence leads me to conclude that a contravention occurred.
The circumstances described by the appellant are mitigating
circumstances or extenuating factors. They do not amount to a
ground of appeal. Mitigation moderates the seriousness of
something but does not amount to a full ground of appeal.
The local authority has clearly considered the relevant
circumstances but has chosen not to exercise their discretion in
the appellant’s favour. Mitigation is the province of the local
authority. An Adjudicator may only cancel a penalty charge
notice if a ground of appeal has been established. An
Adjudicator may not exercise their discretion and cancel or
reduce a fixed penalty when mitigating circumstances and not a
ground of appeal has been established. Mitigation is for the
local authority. An Adjudicator is not permitted to mitigate a
fixed penalty, a penalty fixed by law.
I have to find that t was entitled to issue the penalty notice.
I am satisfied that the penalty notice expressed the correct
penalty amount, fixed by law. It did not therefore exceed the
relevant amount in all the circumstances.
A procedural impropriety is a failure by the enforcement
authority to observe any requirement imposed upon it by the
Traffic Management Act 2004, the Civil Enforcement of Parking
Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations
2007 and the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions
(England) General Regulations 2007 in relation to the imposition
or recovery of a penalty charge or other sum.
I am not persuaded that the local authority has failed to
observe a requirement of the legislation.
In those circumstances, as I find that no ground of appeal
#Post#: 87743--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brent, code 16 parked in a permit zone on event day,
Windermere Avenue, on street parking bay
DIR By: user334232
Date: August 29, 2025, 3:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So… I’m ****** and should just pay now?
#Post#: 87747--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brent, code 16 parked in a permit zone on event day,
Windermere Avenue, on street parking bay
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: August 29, 2025, 4:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
No, the decision is not relevant:
The evidence in this case leads me to conclude that the
appellant’s vehicle was parked in a permit parking area.
The sign must face the motorist much like the signs at the
entrances to a controlled parking zone.
This case refers to a PERMIT PARKING AREA, a TOTALLY different
legal structure from where you were parked.
"permit parking area”
an area—
(a)
into which each entrance for vehicular traffic has been
indicated by the sign provided for at item 5 of the sign table
in Part 3 of Schedule 5
Have a look at a PPA sign yourself!
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/5
#Post#: 87748--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brent, code 16 parked in a permit zone on event day,
Windermere Avenue, on street parking bay
DIR By: user334232
Date: August 29, 2025, 4:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So I can wait 28 (now 26) days and send another response to
them?
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 7
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page