DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 83666--------------------------------------------------
Barnet Council, Parked with one or more wheels on or over a
footpath, St Peters Court
DIR By: sasienisam
Date: August 1, 2025, 4:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
I live in an apartment block on a cul-de-sac. On one side of the
road is a proper pavement that residents use to walk to their
homes. On the opposite side is a small grass verge with an
indentation from years of car parking. There’s a sign on the
wall behind it that reads “Private Residents Parking Only.”
To avoid blocking access up the cul-de-sac, residents (myself
included) have parked on this grass verge for years. I’ve lived
here for four years, and someone has parked there every day
during that time. I’ve also checked Google Earth satellite
imagery, and it shows cars parked in that same spot going back
as far as 2006.
There is no reason anyone would want or need to walk on this
grass verge — it leads nowhere, is not connected to any
pedestrian route, and is clearly not used as a footway.
Recently, I received a PCN for parking on this verge. I
appealed, but the council rejected it. I’ll attach:
Photos of where I parked, a photo of the opposite side of the
road showing the actual pedestrian footway, and the council’s
appeal response.
I’m looking for advice on whether I have grounds to challenge
this further, especially considering:
The area is clearly marked as private, it’s not used by
pedestrians, there’s a long-standing history of unchallenged
parking there, and I had a reasonable belief that the area was
either private or subject to informal amnesty, as described in
the council’s own policy.
Thanks in advance,
Sam
Location:
HTML https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5843322,-0.2203413,20.64z/data=!5m1!1e1?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDcyOS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
Street view:
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/k3RaxSHNMY1pugJH8
(note
there is a car parked there even in the street view)
Second Street View:
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/79WMr5uAqwBo7bZTA
(
this one you can change the date and see that there is always a
car parked there)
PCN and view of parking spot and pavement:
HTML https://imgur.com/a/mW74c5a
#Post#: 83670--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barnet Council, Parked with one or more wheels on or over a
footpath, St Peters Court
DIR By: sasienisam
Date: August 1, 2025, 4:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Here is the proof that the council sent by the way:
HTML https://imgur.com/a/qytomuB
#Post#: 83673--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barnet Council, Parked with one or more wheels on or over a
footpath, St Peters Court
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: August 1, 2025, 5:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
We had another case here. The problem is that verge looks to be
just inside the on-street jurisdiction.
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/barnet-parked-partially-on-grass-verge-62g-st-peter-s-court-nw4/
#Post#: 83689--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barnet Council, Parked with one or more wheels on or over a
footpath, St Peters Court
DIR By: sasienisam
Date: August 1, 2025, 5:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the fast response. I have had a look at the other
thread and i guess if they are being pedantic, then it appears
it probably is a public grass verge ( though this was very
unclear)
Would there be a potential argument that an informal amnesty
applies if i can demonstrate that people have parked there
without issue consistently for the past 20 years? Whilst it is a
grass verge, so i can understand now why it would be a
contravention, from an enforcement perspective, it clearly
doesn't impact any footpath, it would be reasonable to assume it
is private land considering that there is a sign right there
that indicates as such, and someone has parked there every day
for 20 years without issue. I am not sure if this would help my
case at all, but i had literally spoken to a parking warden the
previous week who told me that he was told not to give tickets
on the area since it was private land.
#Post#: 83698--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barnet Council, Parked with one or more wheels on or over a
footpath, St Peters Court
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: August 1, 2025, 7:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> and someone has parked there every day for 20 years without
issue. .
--- End Quote ---
The term to describe what you have written above is "legitimate
expectation", and has won appeals in the past at London
Tribunals, but the onus is on yourself to demonstrate to the
adjudicator thay you have parked there for <n> years, and other
residents for much longer than that. Of course if you win, fine,
but this argument only works once, because after the case, you
no longer have this expectation of no enforcement.
--- Quote ---
> I am not sure if this would help my case at all, but i had
literally spoken to a parking warden the previous week who told
me that he was told not to give tickets on the area since it was
private land
--- End Quote ---
This is the second argument for no enforcement, and needs
investigation because whoever owns the land, (the freeholder),
may have received complaints and could have complained to the
council about "obstructive parking" Complaints are most likely
from owners of large commercial vehicles making deliveries.
#Post#: 83700--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barnet Council, Parked with one or more wheels on or over a
footpath, St Peters Court
DIR By: Chaseman
Date: August 1, 2025, 7:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think you could legitimately claim to have been misled by the
sign on the wall right by the grass verge on which you were
"done". "Private - Residents Parking Only" clearly applies to St
Peters Court as a whole, but the fact that it is right by the
place you parked does rather give the implication that it is OK
to park there. Together with legitimate expectation argument, I
think you must have a better than 50% chance if you take it to
appeal.
#Post#: 83720--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barnet Council, Parked with one or more wheels on or over a
footpath, St Peters Court
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: August 1, 2025, 10:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So there is detail here that wasn't apparent in the other case
in particular the private sign as you were in a different part
of the road.
I also see now there is or was an unofficial resident parking
only tow away area sign at the start of the cul de sac.
There is also a zone ends sign (but that just signifies no
restrictions of that CPZ beyond).
A case can be made this looks like a private road. Certainly
Barnet should issue warnings before enforcing.
But you have to be aware of who maintains the road/verges up to
the point on the map I posted before, and there is an on-street
disabled bay past where you parked.
So it could be worth going on but don't park on the verges and
tell the neighbours.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/x8MLY8Gt/Screenshot-2025-08-01-at-15-50-14.png
HTML https://i.ibb.co/hxySj4zz/Screenshot-2025-08-01-at-15-50-31.png
HTML https://i.ibb.co/GN9cRCW/Screenshot-2025-08-01-at-15-52-44.png
HTML https://i.ibb.co/MyF4s2Nd/Screenshot-2025-08-01-at-15-50-58.png
#Post#: 84179--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barnet Council, Parked with one or more wheels on or over a
footpath, St Peters Court
DIR By: sasienisam
Date: August 5, 2025, 5:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for this. So if i wanted to continue, what would be
the best way to proceed?
#Post#: 84183--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barnet Council, Parked with one or more wheels on or over a
footpath, St Peters Court
DIR By: sasienisam
Date: August 5, 2025, 5:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Also. Would they not continue to argue the point that they made
on the second side of the PCN " if the public have unhindered
access, as at this location, the vehicle would be parked in
contravention of the footway ban regardless of the ownership of
the land"?
So even if I could make the case that the land appears to be
private, they will claim that this doesnt effect the
contravention?
Thanks
#Post#: 84216--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barnet Council, Parked with one or more wheels on or over a
footpath, St Peters Court
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: August 5, 2025, 7:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Public access is a factor in some such situations. I don't think
it's a big deal here.
Do you want to have a go at this at NTO stage.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page