Barnet Council - seeing what isn't there

 

The above photograph was taken by a 'traffic warden' (now called Civil Enforcement Officers) when giving out a PCN. Miraculously, he could see a bay that is no longer clearly there.

 

Mr Mustard took his own photograph a few days later which gives a better overview.

It is the legal duty of the council to maintain signs and lines. Traffic wardens prioritise giving out dubious PCNs over reporting signs and lines which need to be maintained.

Mr Mustard made a challenge.

In order to issue a PCN a motorist must have been alerted to the presence of a restriction by, in this case, adequate bay markings.

In this case they are eroded way beyond the point of substantial compliance as the CEO's own photograph makes plain.

The CEO should never have issued a PCN, their first duty is to check the state of signs and lines and report any that require attention.

Please cancel the PCN.

Needless to say, despite the obviously sub-standard lines the informal challenge was rejected (Mr Mustard will take this as far as the tribunal where he expects an independent adjudicator will take one look and cancel the PCN).

Clear lines, not !

The legal test is substantial compliance, viz:

In the very first tribunal hearing which Mr Mustard attended an experienced adjudicator, a lawyer, said that could be equated to 'If it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck.'

The dregs of the original bay lines are far from substantially compliant. No reasonable (& impartial) person could conclude otherwise. The council only do so because they want £130. They are going to have to fight Mr Mustard very hard for it.

Mr Mustard looked back through some of his previous tribunal case hearings (785 of them since 2017) and found the below line which was more clear than this one is and was still found to be wanting.

Note the perfect yellow line in the background

This is what the adjudicator had to say.

The end, for now.