Showing posts with label catch 22. Show all posts
Showing posts with label catch 22. Show all posts

30 January 2016

Barnet's Boxing Day bonus

Confusion abounds as to when Boxing Day falls especially when it comes to parking. Legally it was 28th December 2015 which left 26 December as a normal Saturday although many motorists thought that it was already Boxing Day (the Boxing Day sales having started) and got caught out.

Mr Mustard thinks that someone at NSL, who manage the parking enforcement operation for Barnet Council, may have over-indulged on mince pies and festive spirit as they clearly didn't know what day it was because the PayByPhone system refused payments on 26 December. NSL then sent traffic wardens out to carry out their dastardly duties and they duly ticketed the cars of people who had tried to pay and been unable to. Mr Mustard knows of a challenge which has been made on the basis that it was impossible to make payment and the challenge has been rejected. Mr Mustard thinks if that lands on an adjudicator's desk they will not be amused.

The numbers are not huge. Mr Mustard found them in the response to a Freedom of Information request on the whatdotheyknow website.


It is not relevant what it says on the council's website. A motorist has the right to be informed by signs near to where he/she has parked.

The sum at stake isn't huge but it is clearly wrong of the council to profit from its own error (or that of its contractor). Mr Mustard was told that the council did stop ticketing that day as they, quite rightly, received howls of protest by telephone; one thing the British public will not stand for is unfairness.

Codes 11 and 73 are for being parked without payment, #11 on the road and #73 in a car park. Any PCN issued in a shared use bay is also suspect.

It is disappointing that the council are not honest enough to correct their error and automatically cancel these PCN and refund any that have been paid without awaiting a challenge which may never arrive.

Mr Mustard will give council parking management an opportunity to do the decent thing and if they fail he will make a formal challenge to the statutory Accounts of the council after the year end. That will cost anything up to £10,000 in extra audit fees and so as only £2,160 (36 PCN at £60) is at stake the council may find it pragmatic, whether they agree or not that they should be honest (they have a general duty at law to be fair), to issue refunds as they will oitherwise find that dishonesty does not pay.

If you have one of these PCN or any other PCN issued on 26 December 2015 you can enlist Mr Mustard's help by emailing a copy of your PCN to mrmustard@zoho.com

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

23 August 2015

Who is Mr Mustard? - Haringey Council want proof

Update as requested by a reader (23 June 2022)
 
Sent 23 August 2015
 

The request was accepted and complied with by post. It wasn't very interesting!

21 August 2015

No contravention & no car now either

my client's car
OK here we go with a most improbable story.

18 June - evening - the car breaks down. It is left at the side of the road, on a single yellow, with a note under the windscreen wiper.
19 June - the council concerned issue a PCN and fairly instantly remove the car to the pound.
25 June - Mr Mustard's client cannot afford to pay to release his car (£65 for the PCN, £200 for the removal & £40 a night for storage) but goes to the pound where they give him the PCN but not a letter explaining his rights. The representation grounds on the PCN are not the ones for the removal of a vehicle. Also, the PCN says that if you pay you lose your rights to contest the PCN. The perfect storm.
1 July - the council write saying that unless the PCN and the fees are paid there is no right to make representations. They sandwich together several parts of the relevant regulations, which are here in their original format:

There is much toing and froing of non-statutory communication but then, on

22 October - a Notice to Owner is issued.

12 November 14 - representations are duly made "the contravention did not occur due to the breakdown of the car"

27 November - the council scrap the car. Yes, really they do.

24 December - the council reject the representations. One of their reasons is that the Owner has not produced proof of the vehicle being repaired after it was broken down. Funny that as it was in the council pound all the time!

January - Appeal to PATAS

5 March 15 - PATAS allow an Appeal as the council do not submit any evidence.


So; Mr Mustard's question is simple.

Was the council correct? Do you have to pay if your vehicle is removed before you can make representations or can you, as Mr Mustard thinks, leave your vehicle in the pound at £40 a night whilst you make your representations and then Appeal to PATAS if rejected?

It does seem rather odd that this client has been found, 9 months after he was deprived of his car, to not have committed a contravention but his car has been scrapped and the council concerned are telling him to get on his bike, they were within their rights to scrap his car (even whilst they were considering his representations!).

Does anyone have anything that will help Mr Mustard's client?

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

The council concerned haven't even heard the start of this, never mind the last of it.

Update 22 August: Just after midnight a PATAS case thudded into Mr Mustard's inbox in which a different council takes a right legal thumping for having failed to inform a motorist of his right to make representations immediately upon the removal of the vehicle.