Below are the independent adjudicators comments following an appeal to PATAS for the heinous crime of being inside a CPZ zone on a single yellow line in Hoop Lane (many of whose motorists go to appeal)
Although I am prepared to accept on the basis of the Council's site photograph that the vehicle was parked on a single yellow line there is no evidence of the presence of the required timeplate or CPZ signage. The Council might have been better advised to provide a plan of the Zone and evidence of the presence of signage at its entry points rather than devoting large parts of its case summary to a general exposition of the law relating to restricted streets. I am not satisfied the Council has proved the restriction relied on was clearly and correctly indicated and it follows that the Appeal must be allowed.
For those that don't know, and Mr Mustard had to check as English is a tricky language, an exposition is:
a systematic interpretation or explanation (usually written) of a specific topic
Whatever it is or isn't the independent adjudicator wasn't impressed. He would, it seems, have preferred some facts and so he cancelled the parking ticket as the case wasn't proved.
One thing is true is that fings ain't what they used to be in parking since NSL took over.
Weren't NSL meant to be experts at this parking enforcement malarkey? their actions don't suggest that. As One Barnet contracts go this ain't a good un.