Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Parking appeals
In the past four or five years, I have twice appealed against parking tickets. The first time, the restrictions in Burgoyne Road were temporary and I thought they were not properly marked. I asked for an explanation as to how such temporary restrictions should be displayed. No explanation was forthcoming but, as Haringey didn't deal with the appeals process within the time allowed, the fine automatically lapsed.
The second case was quite recent. I parked without paying for a few minutes near the old N8 Royal Mail delivery office in Tottenham Lane to collect a parcel. It was early on a Saturday morning and the street was deserted. There was no queue in the delivery office and I was there only as long as it took the clerk to decide that he couldn't find the parcel(!). When I came out, there was still no one about and no ticket on my car and I went home. Some days later I received a ticket through the post implying that I had driven off before the "Civil Enforcement Officer" could issue a ticket and fix it on my car.
I appealed against this saying I was loading and asked why the CEO had not approached me and where he/she had been hiding. Haringey sent copies of photos the CEO had taken, rejected my appeal but did not respond to my points. I therefore appealed to the new (ish) Parking and Traffic Appeals Service for London on the grounds that Haringey had not properly dealt with my appeal and that the CEO had not been prevented by any action of mine from fixing a notice or giving it to me personally. I was content for the case to be dealt with by post.
The result of this appeal has now arrived. Haringey offered no evidence, ie no response at all, not even a copy of the Penalty Charge Notice. The Independent Adjudicator therefore had no choice but to allow the appeal on the grounds that the contravention did not occur. This means that he did not take account of anything I had said in evidence either.
Haringey's action (or lack of it) could be seen in several different ways. For example, they could simply have decided that offering evidence would take too much time and effort for an uncertain result. What might be called the "let's be careful with public money approach". They could have actually agreed with me that there could have been something dodgy about the way this CEO acted which they either didn't wish to defend or would rather not spend time investigating. They could simply have been too busy in the weeks before Christmas to deal with the work.
I suppose that this is end of the matter but if not, I shall update this thread later.
In both cases, I was left with an unsatisfied feeling that my local council are not interested in whether I understand their activities.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Philip on
-
Sounds like a good result for you, possibly due to Haringey lack of resources! In order to claim loading, you have to be a delivery company making a delivery or collection; claiming to do same from a private vehicle, whether or not you were legitimately loading is a loophole which has been closed.
-
Permalink Reply by Justin Guest on
-
What is the story with the Parking and Traffic Appeals service Dick? Do you go to them after an initial appeal to the local authority? Or, are they now a first port of call with appeals?
I once got a ticket (years ago when I lived in Hackney). Apparently my car was parked somewhere in Hackney I never heard of during the day- I was at work at the time. I can only assume the CEO got my details and saved them for later, as he had some of them wrong on the parking ticket. I appealed and never even heard back- ever...
-
Permalink Reply by Dick Harris on
-
The local authority is obliged to tell you that you have a right of appeal to the PATAS against their decision (to reject the first appeal). I would guess that this is because the first decision is by an administrative process rather than a quasi judicial one. See: http://www.patas.gov.uk/
The legal basis is The Road Traffic Act 1991 but beyond that is probably the Human Rights Convention under which: Administrative decisions made by public bodies which are not courts or tribunals must be compliant with Article 6(1) unless there is a right of appeal to a court or tribunal that does comply
with its requirements.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
I suggest having a look at Mr Mustard's blog and the free guide he has written which you can read onscreen or download as a PDF. It's primarily for the London Borough of Barnet, but there's sound advice in it about the stages of appeals, including to PATAS.
I am confident that one of the dodges Haringey will use to try filling the budget gap will be by treating PCNs as de facto taxation. As well as raising the parking charges I assume they'll be expecting the Parking Service to increase the number of fines (Let's call them what they are, rather than use "Penalty Charge Notice" as a softer euphemism.)
So it's sensible to get ready early to do battle if and when a Council Parking Warden or member of their Parking Service does not do her/his job properly and fails to follow the rules.
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
But since Dick admits and accepts that he parked in contravention, shouldn't he, as a respectable citizen, have paid the fine without appealing ?
Did his appeal not waste time and public money ?
-
-
Did I say that?
I have promptly paid several PCNs I considered fair (and even one or two that weren't but didn't have the time to dispute) but, in this case, I thought stopping to load was permitted and, despite what Philip Foxe says above, Haringey did not in their reply trouble to explain that it isn't. Moreover if the CEO had been visible rather than hiding somewhere, I could have asked that very question.
If we regard appeals as wasting public money we throw away one of the safeguards that protects the citizen from the state. I would say also that pushing back against oppressive or lax public administration is just as much a duty upon citizens (and rather more difficult) than meekly paying fines.
-
-
Exactly.
Using the complaints and appeals mechanisms is an important way to bring to notice and keep in check any individuals who use or tolerate sloppy practice, cutting corners, and outright rule-breaking. It may help to keep the growth of such a culture in check.
It does not undermine those staff who are trying to run a decent, fair, transparent system. If they are thoughtful and sensible they will welcome public scrutiny and challenge.
If the Government or local councils want to raise more revenue, let them do it honestly and openly. Not by turning traffic wardens into tax collectors.
-
-
It's a question of conscience Alan.
People castigate Amazon et al for using legal loopholes to minimise their tax burden. Nobody seems to be saying that the Treasury should eliminate these loopholes.
It would be interesting to know what offence was quoted on the Penalty Charge demand.
-
-
John, many people and campaigning organisations are saying that large corporations should pay a fairer share of taxation.
But in any case PCNs are not taxes. They are intended as sanctions to achieve compliance with the traffic rules.
Historically, English courts have developed doctrines of Equity to introduce fairness and a degree of discretion into otherwise rigid technical rules. And local councils applying their powers to give parking and traffic PCNs should also use fairness, reasonableness and a degree of flexibility.
But consider as well what happens in a Magistrate's Court. Justices have a large and detailed folder of sentencing guidelines. But they must also weigh factors in mitigation when considering the penalty.
I agree with you about following your conscience as a citizen. But local councils are not above the law. Shouldn't their staff also have a conscience - for example when it seems there is a reasonable doubt; or what seem to be genuine mitigating factors?
In her budget document - "The Corporate Plan" - Claire Kober announced: "a series of 'Deals' for our staff, partners and residents".
Isn't a part of any "deal" , or compact between an elected council and its citizens that obligations are mutual?
-
-
Thank you Alan for your thoughtful remarks here and elsewhere. I have had a look at Mr Mustard's guide. It is not really my cup of tea (and might be a little out of date) but I can understand why some people might get exasperated by parking fines. However, I wouldn't like to see people driven to gaming the system simply to avoid paying. Of course, if councils habitually failed to defend themselves in the interests of maximising their revenue, that too could be considered a form of gaming the system. It would be interesting to see a policy paper on this subject adopted by our council. Do you know whether one exists?
-
-
Dick, I don't know of any Haringey Policy paper on Parking. But that may be due to my having climbed out of the cave into sunlight. There have been Annual Reports - the last one I could find was published in December 2013 and covered the year from April 2012 to March 2013. It didn't really discuss the sort of policy issues raised on HoL. Just the usual Haringey spin about everything getting better.
P.S. I posted a longer reply which vanished when I tried to repost in the right sequence.
-
-
Every now and again Joe people make honest mistakes. I am Victorian in my attitude to making sure I have parked in the right place, I guess like you- not least because I see it as a waste of money to not be so. However, I have had tickets in my life, in fact I remember at least one years ago in Sheffield, where I made an genuine error because the parking regulations/times were not at all easy to make out (the notice was on the opposite side of the road and 50m from where I was parked).
That said, I would suggest that there is also an element of the council being somewhat joined up here and I would ask why there is not a free 20 spot or two outside this or other Delivery Offices. It is pretty obvious folks will need to access these Offices...
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
