Barnet Council - 5 minutes late, that will be £130

 

It is clear that whilst a technical contravention has occurred this is clearly a case in which discretion should have been applied and the PCN cancelled. This type of miserable, petty minded, mean, common sense free, money grubbing PCN just gets councils a bad name. It certainly doesn't bring the council closer to its residents. The resident did his best to comply and should not have been treated in this way. It is churlish in the extreme.

Motorists who are represented win a greater percentage of their tribunal Appeals. To get good free help start a thread here.

The end.

No time to pay with Barking & Dagenham Council

 

Having just written about Barnet Council not allowing time to pay Mr Mustard had this case come to his attention.

This is the part time no right turn into LIDL which has made cheap food rather expensive for so many people.

You will note that the argument that you can't see properly to drive equates to a poke in the eye for oneself. Not seeing signs six times is also not a good look.

The council didn't have to fight all six PCNs, they could have let 4 or 5 go by the wayside and still got the message across that one should not turn right at this juncture.

The hands of the adjudicator are tied, the contraventions either occurred or they didn't. The nudge is as helpful a step as the adjudicator can take within their own powers. Whether the council will listen or not is to be seen but Mr Mustard doubts they will take much notice. If however the motorist has a blue badge their car should not be removed by the bailiff so they may struggle to recover these penalties.

Every LIDL doesn't help.

The end.

A cruel world in Barnet

 

Don't blame the Adjudicator, their job is to apply the law. If this had been a parking PCN the adjudicator could have recommended that Barnet Council exercise discretion and cancel or not pursue the PCN. That power is not available to an adjudicator for moving traffic PCNs.

The exercise of discretion over their PCNs is the sole province of Barnet Council. Councillors are kept out of, or don't try and get involved in, the day to day process and this case sadly and perfectly demonstrates why they should be more involved. Don't leave the day to day decisions to 'officers' (staff or contractors) who may be blinded by the revenue raising imperative.

Perhaps Barnet Council are trying to get their £4,000 back from when they failed another autustic person.

Mr Mustard is sure that Barnet Council (and others) hate the regular kicking they get from Mr Mustard. When they stop being utterly mean and miserable he will have nothing bad to write about (and there have been a few occasions when he has written about kindness). Will that day ever arrive?

The end.

Barnet Council - no time to pay

 

Never assume that a council will be helpful or reasonable. There is nothing within the legislation which imposes a duty on councils to consider accepting instalments and in this case they could have done so without a huge administrative burden. Had they accepted the offer, which appeared to need time to pay until the end of January, and the motorist not paid as promised, the council could have moved straight to a charge certificate at 150% of the penalty value, so £195.

Adjudicators are not allowed by law to exercise discretion, only the council can. The adjudicator, if such a challenge had been mounted, might have found that signage was inadequate at this location which happens about 50% of the time and then the motorist wouldn't have had to pay anything so they missed a trick there.

By fighting the PCN at the tribunal the motorist has got themselves time to pay but only at the full penalty value of £130 not the £65 they offered. Somewhat usurious.

The end

Barnet Council - pursuing a trifling matter

 

A pragmatic decision by the adjudicator which Mr Mustard will save to bring out in the future if he meets another case with similar facts. Councils try to punish motorists for really minor errors, this one with a penalty of £80. The adjudicator has stopped their cunning plan by bringing into play the long established doctrine of 'de mininmis non curat lex'. Courts don't use Latin so much these days but it roughly means that the law is not concerned with trifling matters.

Barnet Council should have exercised their discretion, at least the first time, but money talks. This time the motorist paid nothing and the council wasted c. £30 in tribunal fees.

The end.

Newham Council - tow truck happy

Mr Mustard has his eye on Newham Council and so the following decision came to his attention.

 

In many boroughs councils also photograph the seats and footwells so that any claim that a voucher for payment, a blue badge or as in this case a carer's permit were on display can be considered in the light of possible supporting evidence.

There is no traffic management purpose to towing a vehicle from a bay in a street which seems to have plenty of space.

It does, of course, raise lots of lovely money.

Worse is to come!

The end.

Redbridge Council chance their arm

 

Khartoum Road

Another random decision which Mr Mustard came across.

 

One cannot look in two directions at once and there isn't much time whilst moving to look for other signs and given that the right hand one was, in effect, covered why would you expect the left hand one to be any different? The left hand sign is much harder to make out when turning right. The full sign is as follows and you need a few seconds to take it all in.

What councils often fail to mention is that there is a duty imposed on them by legislation which is to erect and maintain adequate signage.

This PCN should never have been issued never mind defended at the tribunal.

As it hppens Mr Mustard has just started an Appeal to the tribunal for a parking PCN in Khartoum Rd in which the sole sign was defaced. There is clearly a problem in this corner of Ilford; the solution is not to penalise the innocent but to catch the guilty.

The end.

Loading - the 'peculiar proposition' of Barnet Council

 

Delivery riders, in the gig economy, don't make massive sums of money and a £130 PCN might wipe them out for the day.

It would have been better if the rider had parked on the adjacent single yellow but he didn't (he will in future) and as it happens he didn't, in law, do anything wrong.

The scooter of the traffic warden, as it happens, was parked much more badly as it completely stopped access to the disabled bay and it was parked more than 50cm from the edge of the carriageway, a contravention from which it is not exempt. It also acts as a bad example to the public.

Mr Mustard started the fight of three rounds. First, the informal challenge as soon as the PCN had been issued.

Mr Mustard knew the PCN could be beaten but has to overcome the belief in the mind of the rider, and the worry about the 50% discount, that a council must be telling the truth and believe that he will win in the end. This rider knew Mr Mustard of old so went with the advice received.

 

Mr Mustard knew that the council stance was weak. What is unloading if not the delivery of food from a restaurant to a home for money? The fact that the traffic warden ('CEO') didn't see unloading doesn't mean it didn't happen and besides, he only observed from 1:38 p.m. to 1:38 p.m. so 'not at all'; the CEO arrived on his scooter, issued a PCN in 40 seconds or so and left. At that time the rider was inside the adjoining flats effecting the delivery.

 

The Notice to Owner arrived and the second challenge was made. Councils often rely to these saying they have already considered it which is true but you are legally obliged to make the second challenge (if you don't want to pay up) and the facts are still the same so don't think you need something new for the council to consider, they have to reconsider the same arguments.

As predictable as the sun rising in the morning Barnet Council rejected the argument for a second time (Given the regular drubbing which councils get at the hands of Mr Mustard at London Tribunals he wonders why they bother to fight him? as the tribunal fee is £30 or so which is a dead loss to the council as he wins 4 out of 5 cases so the maximum council income is £130 and the outgoings are £150)

So kind, you did nothing wrong but you can give the council £65 if you are a mug.

Mr Mustard duly started the appeal to an independent adjudicator at London Tribunals. For the third time the same argument was advanced.

Barnet Council decided to produce the evidence pack of 100+ pages. When he went through it Mr Mustard found that the Notice to owner was dated 9 December but not posted until 10 December. That is a breach of law and so he added that as a preliminary point to the tribunal file. Thus he had two strong arguments.

The hearing day arrived and it was quick conference call and the adjudicator cancelled the PCN. 

The adjudicator was critical of the council and in saying they had advanced a 'peculiar proposition' was was giving the council a legally phrased slap in the face. Mr Mustard has read the Jane Packer case, and the previous masterclass on loading from 1999 (Norell v City of Westminster). Both are to be found on the key cases section of the tribunal and the council should keep themselves up to date on key decisions and follow them and not try to collect money under false pretences.

Please forward this blog to any food delivery riders (or drivers) that you know but also suggest they stay out of disabled bays, bus stops, goods vehicle only loading bays etc.

 

The end.

Nothing to see at Redbridge Council

 

The role of an adjudicator is to apply the law and if therefore, as in this case, the permit is not adequately displayed. In this case the resident was issued with three PCNs in quick succession because his permit was slightly hidden by the black dots around the edge of the windscreen.

The evidence to the tribunal from Redbridge Council included this:

The same car had been parked in the same road for a year and the traffic warden often chatted to the resident and was well aware which car was his and should therefore have exercised discretion and not issued a PCN or three. In the alternative, why doesn't the traffic warden ('CEO') use his radio to contact the office and ask which vehicle the permit is for. That would be equitable given that permit zones are there to protect the residents, not to punish them. 

Mr Mustard isn't entirely convinced that traffic wardens are kept in the dark. If you live there do ask a warden to look up your car and see what they say.

If there hadn't been other grounds except for being a permit holder the adjudicator might have made a recommendation to cancel as he was clearly unimpressed with Redbridge Council wanting (initially) three PCNs to be paid for as they rejected both the informal challenges and the formal representations. The evidence pack arrived at the last minute and the cheapskate council by using second class post rather than first class opened the door to what was, in the end, an easy win. They also didn't prove the past this point zone entry signs so Mr Mustard was too observant for them. Councils win so many Appeals against unrepresented motorists because the public doesn't have a history of fighting back and know what is likely to work. Mr Mustard hopes to write some guides this year to particular aspects of parking law and practice.

The end.

If you can't take it, don't dish it out.

 

Mr Mustard doesn't know exactly where in the above road the offending car was parked but the picture above is ok to illustrate how you can be in contravention of a council traffic order or parking law even on private land.

You can see blue signs on the wall on the right which are probably about private parking enforcement. Whilst parked there you can also be ticketed by Newham Council for being on the footway because this is an area to which the public have access i.e. they can easily walk across it. Also, the double yellow lines apply as far as the building line i.e. the wall. A PCN could also have been issued for that. In 2025 the distinction between private and public areas is very blurred.

 

The end.

 

No mercy given by Barnet Council

Barnet Council aren't ususual in being beastly to the public but the below decision is a useful illustration, in Mr Musatrd's opinion, of how councils refuse to cancel because they want the money. What other explanation can there be for refusing to cancel?

 

If you know Mr Amir Khan please say 'blue badge' to him in case his child qualifies.

The legislation which enabled councils to issue PCNs was written on the basis that councils would fairly exercise discretion. Thanks, in part to the increased use of outside contractors and the pressures on council budgets (no matter how much they deny that imperative) that is seen to happen less often. 

One quick and simple solution might be to allow adjudicators to exercise discretion themselves rather than have them ask the council in question to be kind and for which there is no comeback if the council say no.

The end.

 

Newham Council meets PCN poundland

 

Another situation which Mr Mustard hasn't seen before despite fighting over 2,000 PCNs.

A random decision which Mr Mustard looked at on the tribunal decision register.

 

As always this decision, which is entirely reasonable as councils like to control everything, the system sets what you need to pay, is not a precedent but can be claimed as supporting your argument if the same happens to you.

The end.

Newham Council - out of order

 

https://www.deviantart.com/benares78/art/Big-Bang-Theory-Out-Of-Order-323747067

This is the follow up blog to this one.

Picking up where the previous blog left off the Notice to Owner arrived (once the lease company had transferred liability) and Mr Mustard made a short formal representation.

That met with a long rejection.

If there was sympathy the PCN would have been cancelled.

Just because a 'traffic warden' doesn't see boarding doesn't mean it isn't happening and, if you go back to the first blog, he was told why the car was there.

A driver is adhering to the restriction if he is engaged in assisted boarding of an elderly person with reduced mobility.

An observation period of 2 minutes may not be sufficient depending on how fast the old person moves, if there are stairs and if he is at the back of the building.

Mr Mustard ploughed on and started an Appeal to an independent adjudicator at London Tribunals.

All it said was 'assisted boarding was ongoing' as the informal challenge and the formal representations which had already been made are automatically carried forward.

Newham Council started to prepare their standard evidence for the tribunal. They prepared the evidence list 'A' and the Case summary at 'B'. Here are the relevant parts of the case summary:

Suddenly after that the provision of evidence came to a juddering halt and a DNC (do not contest) form was filed, which said:

This is the first time that such an omission had ever been identified by an enforcement authority. All the other PCNs which had doubtless been issued in Hilda Road could not be supported as the document which authorises yellow lines to be painted simply didn't exist. Everyone who received a PCN for doing so and paid up at 50% had burnt their money (and Mr Mustard surmises that Newham didn't suddenly send out refunds). Mr Mustard always straps in for the ride if he has a half decent argument and gets some surprising wins along the way.

The end.

Haringey has 194 PCN issuing traffic cameras

This blog came about because there was a location at which solo motorcycles were the only motor vehicles allowed. Mr Mustard was curious as to how many such locations existed in Haringey and the answer turned out to be that it was the only one. Mr Mustard thought he might as well find out how many locations existed at which a PCN could be issued so he asked.

Here they are:

So that is 194 ways in which you could go wrong and to try and help you reduce the number of PCNs you receive Mr Mustard gives you some hints:

 

Yellow box junctions. Stop at the entry and check there is room to exit without a wheel being on top of the box (a bumper overhand should not lead to a PCN even though legally no part of you car should be over the box). Stop even before turning right as if you enter with the exit road completely blocked you will be likely to receive a PCN.

No entry: how could you miss these signs?

Opposite those signs are there part time ones to make this cul-de-sac safer for kids at school opening and closing times:

The 'flying motorbike' sign didn't use to be very well known but given the number of PCNs which have been issued for breaching this sign, which means no motor vehicles should pass it, Mr Mustard hopes that it is becoming better known.

 

When schools are closed some signs may be folded away. This is to let traffic through outside term term but it doesn't reinforce the message that tomorrow the sign may be operative. You really do need to drive along looking for changes.

 

The camera in this case also catches people who drive out of this side road. No-one should be doing that as it is one way all the way and well signed with blue arrows.

You have to be fairly dozy to go left at Bounds Green tube station which is very well signed (you have already driven over a go straight on arrow on the ground in the left hand lane). Whilst these lights are green pedestrians are crossing on a green signal for them in the side road.

This is another location at which you have to be pretty inept to miss all 3 signs.

These weight limit signs are very badly placed (and recent). They should be positioned at the mouth (near enough) of the junction. Once you have started turning your 40ft articulated lorry into this side road you will have a hell of a battle to reverse out. If you are delivering a skip to a local household you have a defence that you are exempt from the limit, as your need is for access. Such a PCN will be and usually is rapidly cancelled by Haringey Council is your paperwork is adequate proof.

If there are no times or days the restriction is all times on all days. If planters are in the road that is the time to stop and think, you shouldn't pass a planter without checking what is what.

Heavy goods vehicles such as skip lorries and delivery vans can't turn around in the narrow road so are allowed through. The apostrophe is an aberration. The supplementary plate is non-standard and doesn't appear to have been authorised by the Secretary of State.

Please stay out of trouble or stop driving if it is all too much for you.

The end.