DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 102622--------------------------------------------------
Can costs be awarded at a London Tribunal if the council has
acted frivolously, vexatiously or wholly unreasonably?
DIR By: TheParkingmeister
Date: December 16, 2025, 4:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
My employer (a company/registered keeper) has been issued yet
another PCN from Bexley Council for a contravention code 55 - A
commercial vehicle parked in a restricted street in
contravention of the Overnight Waiting Ban. I have had 2
previous PCNs that I appealed, accepted. And had a previous PCN
that was paid, refunded. This time they have rejected my initial
challenge and now my formal representations, so it will go to
the London Tribunal.
This is merely a summary of their behaviours, but the full list
of issues and failures by the Council is extensive.
The Council's conduct has been wholly unreasonable in defending
the penalty charge notice (PCN), primarily because they have:
Ignored Their Own Admissions: In previous correspondence
regarding this specific area, the Council's own internal
department formally admitted in writing that local repeater
signs were required and missing, confirming the scheme is
defective. Despite this, the Council continues to enforce the
restriction and rejects appeals without addressing or refuting
their own evidence of non-compliance.
Defended Illegal Signage: The Council is relying on perimeter
signs for their borough-wide zone, but evidence shows a critical
zone-entry sign was physically altered using an adhesive sticker
to change the restricted hours. This manual, non-compliant
alteration violates national design rules (TSRGD), yet the
Council continues to defend the validity of enforcement based on
this flawed sign. Other zone signs are missing. Oh, and this
zone is 60.5kmē in area, contrary to the directions in TSM 2019.
In a FOI requestearlier in the year they were only able to
provide one location and one picture of a perimeter sign to
enforce this massive area. A complaint earlier in the year they
told me they are unable to provide the locations of all the
borough perimeter signs for the prohibition.
Abused Statutory Process: In their formal rejection, the Council
abandoned the legal test (compliant signage for the public) and
justified the charge by claiming the registered keeper had been
privately advised of the restriction (they actually only told
me, and i have done my best to inform our 800+ drivers. They are
attempting to enforce based on an individual's private knowledge
rather than fulfilling their statutory duty to ensure compliant
public signage for a motorist of average prudence.
I am currently waiting for a response to a more thorough FOI
request I submitted which they were meant to respond to in full
last Monday (8th December). I plan to use the information in my
London Tribunal. They were also supposed to respond to my formal
complaint last Wednesday (despite actually submitting it in
September) regarding the very clear issues and failure, but I've
heard nothing, but told it has been logged as a stage 1
complaint which they aim to respond to in 15 days.
Essentially, the local signage is non existent, the perimeter
signage is about 5 miles away, and so far I have only seen
evidence of one of these signs existing despite their claim that
they are on every road in to Bexley. I have dashcam footage from
multiple vehicles showing perimeter signs not being present on
several routes into Bexley. This one sign Bexley relies on, is
on Thames Road, and has had a sticker placed over the time the
restriction applies, altering it, as it is the wrong font and
size and removes the hyphen. So, it is non compliant also.
So, I want to know if I can request the adjudicator awards costs
to us for the Councils unreasonable behaviour. They are just
wasting my time, their own time, not just the traffic penalty
enforcement team, but complaints team and whoever deals with FOI
requests, and the London Tribunals time.
I have put the evidence infront of Bexley 3 times now, just for
this PCN, which clearly supports the cancellation of the PCN,
yet they reject it because they have previously informed me of
the restriction in place, as if I'm suppose to baby sit 800
drivers, and it absolves the council of their responsibility to
have sufficient and compliant signage for a prohabition they
wish to enforce. It's ridiculous.
#Post#: 102635--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can costs be awarded at a London Tribunal if the council has
acted frivolously, vexatiously or wholly unreasonably?
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: December 16, 2025, 5:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In general terms, costs can be awarded for or against either
party, whether they win or lose actually.
#Post#: 102650--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can costs be awarded at a London Tribunal if the council has
acted frivolously, vexatiously or wholly unreasonably?
DIR By: TheParkingmeister
Date: December 16, 2025, 6:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Understandable. Say if I was going to request it, would I put it
in writing, or ask during the hearing? And do I need to
calculate an amount or is there set costs that they can award?
#Post#: 102729--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can costs be awarded at a London Tribunal if the council has
acted frivolously, vexatiously or wholly unreasonably?
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: December 16, 2025, 4:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/costs
#Post#: 102754--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can costs be awarded at a London Tribunal if the council has
acted frivolously, vexatiously or wholly unreasonably?
DIR By: TheParkingmeister
Date: December 16, 2025, 5:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: stamfordman link ---
>
>
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/costs
>
--- End Quote ---
"If you wish to apply for costs and expenses, you must make a
written application as soon as possible after the adjudicator's
decision, setting out precisely what expenses you have incurred
and why you have incurred them.
Your application for costs will then be referred to the
adjudicator for a decision."
Okay, that answers part of the question. I would submit the
request after the decision, presumably by post or email.
Perhaps this is not the best route to solve this issue. I was
hoping this could deter the council from continuing this crap,
as the London Tribunal decisions against them so far for this
exact issue have not been the kick up the arse they need. I have
put in a complaint to the Department for Transport this evening
and I may write to my MP too. I suspect there will be thousands
of companies and people that have been essentially scammed by
them. Unfortunately, the council haven't provided any of the
information I requested under FOIA for me to find out the scale
of the issue here. So, annoyingly, that's going to have to be a
complaint to the ICO too.
#Post#: 102812--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can costs be awarded at a London Tribunal if the council has
acted frivolously, vexatiously or wholly unreasonably?
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: December 17, 2025, 4:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: TheParkingmeister link ---
>
> I was hoping this could deter the council from continuing this
crap
>
--- End Quote ---
This whole section of the forum stands as evidence of just how
little will deter most councils from continuing this crap ;D
#Post#: 102814--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can costs be awarded at a London Tribunal if the council has
acted frivolously, vexatiously or wholly unreasonably?
DIR By: mrmustard
Date: December 17, 2025, 4:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The thing that most councils hate is bad publicity so if you
have a local paper send them the story or try national
newspapers.
#Post#: 102828--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can costs be awarded at a London Tribunal if the council has
acted frivolously, vexatiously or wholly unreasonably?
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: December 17, 2025, 5:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: TheParkingmeister link ---
>
> Understandable. Say if I was going to request it, would I put
it in writing, or ask during the hearing? And do I need to
calculate an amount or is there set costs that they can award?
>
--- End Quote ---
If and when the appeal is won, you may wish to raise it,
depending on what the adjudicator has said in the hearing. In my
experience, some adjudicators would simply say to make the
application within 14 days. I tend not to ask as I prefer to
wait for the decision which will indicate how the adjudicator
might view an application. I wrote a costs application for
member Glitch last year and he was successful - but had to work
for it in the hearing.
My modus operandi is to cite statements from the decision and
concentrate upon them in order to convince the adjudicator (who
almost always will be the same) to draw a distinction between
wholly unreasonable conduct and wholly incompetent conduct.
There is a Key Case decision which I lost v Southwark this year
which cites the relevant authority.
#Post#: 102928--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can costs be awarded at a London Tribunal if the council has
acted frivolously, vexatiously or wholly unreasonably?
DIR By: TheParkingmeister
Date: December 17, 2025, 2:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DWMB2 link ---
>
> [quote author=TheParkingmeister
link=topic=9172.msg102754#msg102754 date=1765928998]
> I was hoping this could deter the council from continuing this
crap
>
--- End Quote ---
This whole section of the forum stands as evidence of just how
little will deter most councils from continuing this crap ;D
[/quote]
Lol I know, but we can still hope right?...Right? ???
#Post#: 102929--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can costs be awarded at a London Tribunal if the council has
acted frivolously, vexatiously or wholly unreasonably?
DIR By: TheParkingmeister
Date: December 17, 2025, 2:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: mrmustard link ---
>
> The thing that most councils hate is bad publicity so if you
have a local paper send them the story or try national
newspapers.
>
--- End Quote ---
orrr to ITV, for "Tonight - Parking Problems - Part 2: Unjust
Enrichment"
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page