A cautious hurrah for Hammersmith & Fulham

Mr Mustard has a tribunal case relating to Imperial Road in Fulham. It is an easy restriction to miss as it just doesn't look like a road you shouldn't drive down.

Researching his case he looked at recent winning cases at the tribunal. One supported his over-signing argument and another a delay in responding to representations argument. Wednesday will tell us if either argument worked.

As a complete aside he found this in decision 2250382511:

The traffic order contains the following exemption so the Bolt / Uber deal is entirely sensible. Mr Mustard made an error, the traffic order exemption does not apply to Imperial Road but to the following streets in Schedule 2

Mr Mustard has just realised that gives him another ground of Appeal at the tribunal as the signs, below, don't tell you that you can enter for Boarding &/or Alighting or for Loading/Unloading.

The reason why the council have made the arrangement with Bolt & Uber must be because they were issuing, say, 100 PCNs a day and they were all being challenged and had to be cancelled which wasted a fee for each PCN paid to London Councils (about 50p a time) and whatever they had to pay the contractor for issuing each PCN and then cancelling it. A simple matter of administrative convenience and finance.

Mr Mustard is now wondering how far the council have made this administrative arrangement know to mini-cab companies within Hammersmith & Fulham and further afield in London generally. Mr Mustard will ask the question of the council.

In the meantime, if you have a mini-cab company in London or have to deliver within the borough (John Lewis must be there quite often and Harrods and other major department stores) you could start emailing your vehicle movements to the council using the email address of enquiries@lbhfparking.com thus destroying the belief in the mind of the council, necessary for the issuance of a PCN, that you have committed a contravention.

The end, for now. 

Imperial Road, Fulham

 

Mr Mustard used to drive across London quite a lot but no longer does. He has in the past used Imperial Road to get to Wandsworth Bridge but suggests you don't try it now as the council camera will get you and send you a lovely PCN in the post for £130, it will sting a bit.

Mr Mustard doesn't want to get embroiled in brutal LTN (low traffic neighbourhood) arguments (he is a cyclist as well as a motorist) but does want to say well done to Hammersmith & Fulham council as unlike other boroughs who have left residents unable to take the most direct route to their homes, H&F have allowed for residents and their visitors to enter through points which are prohibited to long distance traffic, see the clear map above.

If you have to visit your granny, or grandad, or any other resident relative, you can get a visitor permit that allows you to take the direct route without risk of a penalty. For that the council are to be commended and other councils should take note.

The explanation on the council website is here. So that's the praise part of the blog written.

Now the less postive part. Two contacts of Mr Mustard did go through one of the checkpoints. Mr Mustard made representations in both cases that signage was inadequate, in November and December 2020 respectively. For a parking PCN the council are legally obliged to serve a response to formal representations (those made in response to a Notice to Owner) within 56 days, there is no such time limit in the legislation for moving traffic contraventions but adjudicators normally find against the council once 90 days have passed by. The 90 day periods duly passed by for both PCNs and Mr Mustard smiled to himself. Then finally H&F stirred themselves and cancelled both PCNs without mentioning they had taken an age to put pen to paper (finger to keyboard in reality).

The letter doesn't actually say why they decided to cancel and is 'without prejudice' to their position, what position, of being incompetent? 'Without prejudice' means the letter cannot be produced in Court but PCNs don't go to Court so what is the point of including such nonsense?

Mr Mustard showed the letter to his Solicitor to see what he made of it and his opinion was:

'One and a half pages of hot air.  Why not just say we have decided to cancel it.'

Not very often you get a free legal opinion.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

White City ( Hammersmith & Fulham council ridiculousness )

So you have your car stolen when staying with family and naturally you report it stolen to the police as soon as you come out of the house and find it missing (can you find something which is missing?). The car gets smashed up and dumped in a White City council car park. Here is a photo of it (the black rectangle is where the numberplate was to be found, sitting there casually).

Now consider that the airbags were deployed, the front numberplate is on the bonnet, the front bumper is resting on the ground and clearly a serious accident has occurred.

What should a traffic warden do? Check the stolen cars database or issue a PCN? Traffic warden number 1 decided to issue a PCN (no there aren't ticket targets but you can see why the public think there are).

So did number 2, just 4 days later

and number 3 on the very next day

then we go a whole fortnight before traffic warden number 4 arrives (either the car park isn't patrolled very often or there are some traffic wardens with gumption)

 not traffic warden number 5 though some 3 days later.

The following month the police somehow come across the car (an ANPR equipped police car perhaps?) and give it to the insurance company who now own it, having paid out on the claim. The police take the five PCN and say they will sort them out. Somewhere the system breaks down as all 5 PCN are live with £195 owing on each one (150% of PCN value) on the H&F council website except for one which has been sent to bailiffs so is £202 which with bailiff's fees is now £512, which is how my client heard about it, the new owners of their former residence having been knocked up out of bed at 6am (the earliest time that a bailiff can call). The bailiff gets a phone number from the new occupier for the wife of my client but will not listen to reason about the car being stolen and not being her responsibility (she wisely refuses to give the bailiff a new address). A copy of the warrant (which is invalid in any event as it has the wrong address on it) is refused by the bailiff until she pays it (naughty bailiff, there is an absolute right to know by what authority you demand payment). Luckily the bailiff can't clamp Mr Mustard's client's car as he no longer has one.

Mr Mustard will be logging complaints with the council about their own actions as well as the bailiff's but he likes to share with you some of the stupidity he has to deal with.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Update: 15 May 15

Out of the blue H&F have just cancelled these 5 PCN (as they jolly well should have done)