Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Elmfield Avenue School time car access restrictions
Having lived in Haringey for practically all my life, I was surprised to get a penalty notice for driving into Elmfield Avenue at 3:15 on a Tuesday. The contravention was "failing to comply with a restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone"
Firstly checking on Google maps I couldn't see any signage to warn drivers not to enter at certain times? I then went onto the Haringey /Parking webpage where you can view the offence. I could see clearly the signage saying no entry between 2:30 and 3:45.
I have driven into Elmfield Avenue to get to Middle Lane for years, so was not aware or on the look out for restrictions, hence the penalty notice.
What I would like to know, when were these notices put up and the restriction enforced? AND what happens to the W3 bus route in these times?
I don't think I have a case to appeal as the signs are clear, but has anyone else received penalty notices for this and appealed successfully?
Very disgruntled Haringey Resident
Betty
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Betty Brewster on
-
I got the reply to my appeal! a big fat NO! It's exactly as you said Paul,
"the obligation to check and comply with restrictions remains with the driver"
"I am satisfied that the signage is sufficient to indicate the restriction in place"
"there are also advance warning signs as you approach each school street"
Not sure about that?
I agree with you Paul, but haven't got the energy to battle with Haringey yet again. So will be paying the fine and being very careful when driving in a school area, in the morning and end of school times!
-
Permalink Reply by Brian Ahearne on
-
Can you paste the full content of your appeal and the response, please?
-
-
Unfortunately I don't have a copy of my appeal. I thought I had saved it but I must have deleted after copying into their online form!
However I have attached the response, hope it helps Haringeys%20Response1.pdf
-
-
Thanks. The reply is at least useful. They state that the onus is entirely on the motorist - however, that isn't correct. The Council has a duties regarding fair signage. Personally if they reject my appeal and urge me to go to London Tribunals, I will be be appealing to them.
Thanks for your help.
-
-
You may also want to submit feedback re the scheme:
-
-
You and Brian with appeals in hand may want to go back and recheck those signs - I've just driven past the Tottenham Lane end of Elmfield Avenue and the face of both signs showed as completely black.
I wasn't able to stop and see if they've simply been turned round, or whether the previous legend has been removed just leaving the backing plate in situ.
-
-
Are you going to appeal to London Tribunals? It doesn't cost you anything. Feel free to draw from my submission below if you'd like to.
-
-
I'm just preparing my appeal submission and am going through the law and the Traffic Management Order related to this restriction. I shall post my draft for others to view and use as a basis for their own appeal, if that's helpful.
Going through the Traffic Management Order, I see that it is an "Experimental" order - which may give you some hope of a successful appeal, as the Council is relying on feedback. My own feedback will be "great idea, unfairly, unsuccessfully and dangerously executed".
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Have you been able to establish if the signs are compliant with legal requirements?
-
-
Draw your attention to the decision of Timothy Thorne, Parking Adjudicator in the July 1998 PARKING APPEALS SERVICE case:
PARKING APPEAL 1970289930
PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE WE71540428
AND
MR AMERJIT JOHAL
-v-
LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN
PARKING APPEAL 1980047552
PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE CD75573239
Key elements of this judgment include: “by virtue of the unusual nature of the location or because of exceptional features within the location it is necessary for the Council to provide extra signs or to establish some other special arrangement in order for the restrictions to be fair.”
Regarding the Elmfield Avenue restrictions, the experimental nature of the TMO makes is “unusual” and it has “exceptional features”, thus requiring extra signs and other special arrangements to make the restrictions fair.
Further in the judgment:
"In my view the statutory scheme obliges the Council to erect and maintain signs and
road markings which accord with the concept of fairness to the motorist and the need
in unusual locations to ensure that the motorist is fully informed of the relevant traffic
restrictions. The signs must operate in such a way as to provide reasonable
information for the motorist concerning what is required in order to park lawfully. It
seems to me that, although the Council have provided the normal signs and bay
markings associated with a residents bay, the unusual nature of the location
necessitates additional signs or arrangements to be put into place so that the Council
can discharge its duty to provide adequate information to the motorist under
Regulation 18(1) of the 1996 Regulations."
There's more law to rely on from the judgment and elsewhere.I'll put together a submission and share.
There are other practical matters and a big concern on the procedural fairness of the consultation process for the restrictions. I'll update later.
-
-
From ND a few weeks ago (copied from J Klein).
"The legality of the PCN depends on whether the sign and its positioning are in accordance with the Traffic Signs Manual. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/.... If a sign isn't in the manual the council has to apply for permission to use a non-standard sign.
The legality of the zone depends on whether the Council went through the proper procedures in implementing it. For example, I recall that they have to have a consultation and write to everyone who's objected. If you do your homework you may be able to catch them out".
-
-
Thanks. Already been through the Traffic Signs Manual and the signs contravene it.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
