Barnet Council - your number's up

 

Older readers will get the reference to 'come in number x'

This was an odd case although Mr Mustard has now seen a second instance of it in a different borough.

For starters the PCN was for the wrong contravention, it was for code 01 but should have been for code 02 as loading was also banned.

The motorist, Mr D, sent Mr Mustard a copy of the PCN placed on his car windscreen which ended with the numbers 6618. That could not be found on the council computer and so Mr Mustard just kept an eye out to see what would happen next.

A month later Mr D received a Notice to Owner bearing a number ending 6607 for the same set of facts (date, vehicle, location etc).

What you need to know now is that PCNs are issued in sequential series by individual traffic wardens and that the last digit of a PCN is a check digit so the PCNs in this case were 660-7 and 661-8 and thus they had been consecutively issued at the same time.

What had therefore happened was that the traffic warden had decided something was wrong with 660-7 and issued a fresh PCN 661-8 intended to cancel 660-7 but accidentally cancelled 661-8 (or the computer took over and did it).

It was therefore an easy win as 661-8 was never served and Mr Mustard had proof that 660-7 was served.

Mr Mustard made out three arguments in his formal representations to the council.

1    Finchley Road as a description of the location is too vague (the keeper and driver may be different).

2    Loading is banned so the alleged contravention is incorrect.

3    The PCN was not served.

The Notice of Rejection didn't tackle points 1 and 2 and said that the PCN was either placed on the windscreen or given to the driver. It also waffled on about CPZ entry signage which was irrelevant as there was a local sign.

Thus it was an easy decision to start an Appeal at London Tribunals at which time a fourth Ground of Appeal was added which was the Notice of Rejection dated 14 August offered a 50% discount for 14 days from service and 2 days earlier it had already been removed. A council must be as good as their word.

There was no need for a hearing. Faced with an opponent with 4 straight arrows in his quiver the council cancelled the PCN.

The end. 

A mystery move by Barnet Council?

 

A lady, let's call her Miss K as the road in question was Kingsmead, EN5 (Mr Mustard used to live near it but had never heard of it) contacted Mr Mustard as below:

Thank you for agreeing to have a look at my PCN. I have attached photos of the notice from the Council’s online website.

There are 2 questions I would like your advice on:

1. Can I contest the PCN?

I had parked in a cul-de-sac; a quiet road, which had no road markings or parking restriction signs and (I had hoped) not blocked a driveway.

2. Can I contest the moving of my vehicle without any information left or sent to me about the whereabouts of it?

What was terrifying about the whole episode was that I thought my car had been stolen as all the other cars parked in the vicinity had not been touched. My house keys were in the car with the service book which had my home address (a silly thing to do, I know), which was extremely upsetting. My initial reaction was to call the police, but found some builders on a site nearby who subsequently told me a car was moved around midday. I then called the car pound number listed on the council website who tracked it to a nearby road. Although undamaged, it was partially placed on the curb, which in itself could be a parking offence according to the council!

Your time and advice on this matter is much appreciated .

Kind regards, 

Mr Mustard wonders if someone else moved the vehicle as this was in November when NSL were hearing to the exit door and removals were rarely done in Barnet at that time and less so relocations although the fact of the PCN being on the windscreen makes a council move more likely.

Mr Mustard duly made the 'informal challenge' the one in immediate response to the PCN on the windscreen. He kept it simple:

The alleged contravention requires part of the car to be adjacent to a place where the footway and carriageway are level and that is clearly not the case here.

He helpfully provided an annotated image:

It took only 3 days for Barnet Council to cancel the PCN. It was a PCN which a traffic warden should never have issued.

Residents get quite precious about 'their' driveway entrances and parking this tight to one, especially in a narrow road makes it more difficult and dangerous to reverse your car our (although one should reverse in but that's another story). At the very least you would be well advised to only park next to the full height kerb i.e. to where the back of the wheel was and Mr Mustard tries to leave 2m of room. Residents phone up the council if they are annoyed and ask for enforcement which means the nearest traffic warden will be sent round and for an easy life they just issue a PCN.

The end. 

Address problems

 

DVLA, Swansea: Lovely place to work, it must lift your spirits as you arrive there each day?

You must make sure that the address for your vehicle as recorded by the DVLA is full and accurate. get your V5 registration document out now and give it a once over. The address on your driving licence must also be changed at the time you move.

Wrong addresses cause havoc. Whilst councils should make enquiries if they get post back some of them, Barnet included, just make a note and then plough on as if nothing has happened.

That wasn't the problem in the case that Mr Mustard is about to highlight, that was a case of a number of properties having the same number, different supplementary letters, ABC etc, and also a house name which started with that letter and that is why Mr Mustard suspects that everything went astray, the motorist knowing nothing about a PCN until the bailiff clamped the car and were paid in full.

Mr Mustard then usually makes a Subject Access Request, goes meticulously through the processing and finds the errors. Once he points them out councils usually back off. In this instance they agreed to refund back in November but haven't managed to do so yet. This is probably a side effect of the change of PCN processor from NSL to APCOA which, masterly understatement follows, has not gone 100% smoothly.

Mr Mustard watched the cctv. The PCN was issued at a problematic yellow box junction situated at the exit of the B&Q access road in Crickleood Lane and with an exit only junction to the other side. People often 'barge out' from the side road even though they should give way. That then causes a stop in the box. In this case the stopping was after such an event.

There is absolutely no traffic management purpose to the PCN. Access to B&Q was barely affected, any incursion into the box was trivial, the box is painted beyond the exit, the car could have moved forward if the driver has chosen to do so & therefore the stop was not due to a stationary vehicle (a legal requirement) and the box needs a repaint as it will be much less clear at ground level where the end of it is.

If the DVLA address had been 100% perfect Mr Mustard would have saved hours of work and got the PCN cancelled at the beginning.

Luckily the parking manager agreed to not pursue the PCN which should never have been issued in the first place.

Almost the end.

PCNs in London double in a decade !

Here are the stats taken from Annual reports issued by London Councils, the mouthpiece for councils in London and the body which has various statutory functions.

Bare numbers are hard to follow so here are some charts to make it digestible.

First, a chart of the overall numbers, please keep your eye on the scales on the left as they are all different:

The dotted line is Excel's idea of the trend. Anyone can see they are on a steady upward trajectory apart from the year to March 2021 which is when covid hit.

Next, parking PCNs

Again down in covid when lots of us stayed home

London is getting more built up and that means more people and more cars which will explain some of the increase. The main driver is, in Mr Mustard's opinion, simply the number of traffic wardens on the street or, for TfL, if they added extra cameras on Red Routes, which they have.

Next is bus lanes of which there have been a few new ones over the period:

Finally the main reason for the increase, moving traffic PCNs for stopping in box junctions, not turning in the direction shown by blue arrows, doing U-turns where banned and 'school streets' and 'Low traffic neighbourhoods' which clearly aren't low traffic, they don't stop the unwanted traffic, they just punish it, deliberate and innocent error alike. Mr Mustard suspects that the number of these will drop as Londoners get to know where they all are and change their routes and/or travel times to avoid PCNs.

PCNs are meant to be a deterrent.

Clearly they aren't otherwise there wouldn't be nearly 10 million PCNs a year issued in London. Mr Mustard's clients, or potential clients, have done their best 99% of the time.

Just to get a ball park idea of the money involved let's assume that every PCN is for £160 and that they all get paid at the 50% value.

9,457,848 times £160 at 50% =  £756,627,840

That is money which the government would otherwise have to give councils towards their costs or that they would have to raise through council tax.

Of course, the whole sum isn't profit, there is a massive industry and hundreds or thousands of council staff behind this. 

When he has time away from his day job and the 50 hours a week spent fighting PCNs, he will look at the major costs of Barnet Council to collect their 278,209 PCNs issued in a year.

What is abundantly clear is that PCNs don't work. The stick has failed. We need a different solution.

The end, for now. 

 

 

Newham Council are cheats - #51

 

This sign is unreasonably long.

The motorist managed to interpret it correctly and parked legally.

In the first place that is the wrong contravention as the car was within a bay so the correct alleged contravention would be for parking in a suspended bay.

The council get asked a simple question by the adjudicator and they go silent because they simply cannot prove their case and rather than being honest and admitting what happened they try to ride it out. The ambiguity was settled in favour of the person adversely affected by it, that is normal.

Ionut should never have been issued with a PCN, his car should never have been towed, the council should never have rejected the representations nor should they have opposed the tribunal Appeal.

Cheats, as proven by door bell footage.

Cyber attack problems - Kensington & Chelsea

 

The cyber attack on Kensington & Chelsea Council has been widely reported. The above is an extract from the Frequently Asked Questions section on the council website.  There have been real knock on effects, even though parking software is usually an externally provided service, as the below letter shows which relates to an on street PCN issued on 13 August and challenged on 26 August which was day 14 so preserved the 50% discount:

Some small observations.

Why was there a 'significant backlog' prior to 24 November 2025 ?

The identification of the 6 month limit is correct but the guidance of the Secretary of State contains this:

Mr Mustard suspects that a Ground of Appeal of delay if raised at London Tribunals will tend towards the council being given a fair bit of leeway. If Mr Mustard were instructed as representative he would be looking for a comprehensive explanation and timeline as to what steps have been taken and suggesting that the passage of time prejudices the motorist and that should take priority over the council's technical problems.

Mr Mustard's suggestion to help the council get back up to date is simply to cancel historic PCNs, clean the slate and start again, bang on time with everything. One suspects that the thirst for revenue won't allow for this solution to be applied.

The council has taken a reasonable approach though and Mr Mustard will be sending in both sides of the blue badge. It is a common error for people who live in the suburbs to think that the badge applies everywhere when in fact they are of limited application in central London. If you don't go there often it is easy to forget.

How kind of the council to still be willing to accept the motorist's money. However, as the challenge to the PCN was made within the 14 day limit they are obliged to honour the discount offer stated on the PCN.

The end.