Mind the gap

 

Residents get very precious about 'their' dropped kerb even if they don't have a car, aren't expecting any visitors or planning to go out. They call the council, Barnet in this case, and say they want enforcement and a Civil Enforcement Officer ('traffic warden') duly trots, cycles or scoots round. Inevitably they issue a PCN to appease the resident even if no contravention has occurred.

So it was on 31 March 2026 in Kingsmead, a location Mr Mustard had never heard of even though it is near High Barnet tube and Mr Mustard has lived in New or High Barnet since 1993.

This is what the traffic warden found:

That looks bad but there should always be a photo taken at 90 degrees to the drop so we can be sure as to the position.

The car must be clear of a line drawn across the road from the weed you can see, that is where the taper kerb, which slopes down to meet the carriageway, ends and only if you pass that point are you in contravention.

It would be courteous to leave a larger gap but that isn't a contravention plus the road is wide and quiet, being a cul-de-sac so not dangerous to join. The CEO should not have issued a PCN to this car. If they didn't meekly issue PCNs every time, residents might phone less often.

Miss T made her own informal challenge. It was rejected. She had read Mr Mustard's earlier blog on the subject. Mr Mustard reviewed the rejection, which included this:

Mr Mustard didn't like it. It isn't any (as in all) footway that can be enforced, only in 3 circumstances: vehicle access, for pedestrians to cross the road or access to a cycle lane.

The writer was hallucinating, there is no tactile paving (aka dimpled paving) in the council's photos nor would there be as this is access to a private drive not a place where the blind are advised to cross the carriageway.

Sympathy, my foot.

Mr Mustard occasionally bothers a parking manager with his viewpoint on low standards of work and this was one such case. He pointed out the lack of a contravention and that the back office were just churning out made up rejections.  Three days later Miss T received another letter:

Amazing how, with a dollop of added mustard, the situation can change so quickly.

If you are being badly treated, in addition to following the process and challenging everything at the correct time, start making complaints.

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. 

More dropped a clanger than dropped kerb - Barnet Council

It was inconsiderate to park, allegedly for a short time, on this corner but as it wasn't a contravention Mr Mustard fought the PCN. He doubtless also gave the driver some words of advice.

Barnet Council rejected both the informal challenge and the formal representations which wasn't very bright of them but doubtless the revenue imperative was running the show.

This led to Mr Mustard starting an Appeal to London Tribunals which means c. £30 in wasted fees by the council, who have to fund the independent tribunal mostly based upon their share of usage.

Mr Mustard decided to have a bit of fun and waxed lyrical in his Grounds of Appeal.

The council then proceeded to waste at least 2 hours of their agent's time (NSL) in getting them to produce the Evidence Pack for the tribunal. There was more nonsense within it:

'The CEO has a legal obligation to issue PCNs to any vehicle seen parked in contravention.'

Mr Mustard will let Captain Hastings of Poirot fame speak for him: 'What rot'.

(CEO = Civil enforcement officer a.k.a. Traffic Warden.)

The independent adjudicator was even-handed and thorough in her assessment of the evidence of both sides but there was only ever going to be one outcome, a cancelled PCN and so it turned out.

This is a classic example where Barnet Council claimed that black is white (there aren't even any shades of grey here). It was an abuse of power which should be punished but there is no mechanism to bring that about. If a council had to give £130 back for every unlawful PCN there would be more care taken.

Please don't pay PCNs which are patently wrong, you only encourage them.

The end

Barnet Council - simply getting the law wrong

 

A car was parked here, outside the section of dropped kerb which serves the front door and bins, carefully leaving clear the right hand section which could be used to park a small vehicle. A PCN was issued by a Barnet Council traffic warden. The motorist challenged it as he knew he wasn't blocking a private drive, a cycle lane or a place where pedestrians cross the road. The absence of a cycle lane or parking place is patently obvious. Mr Mustard will leave the question of pedestrians crossing the carrigeway for the moment.

The response to the challenge is below:

The legislation does not cover 'any' dropped footway, only those for one of three statutory purposes, viz:

So, would a pedestrian cross at this locale? The norm is that one would expect to see a similar dropped kerb in the footway on the other side of the road, often with tactile paving. Here is the view from further away from the property in question:

Who would be crossing the road here? The traffic warden got it wrong and this has been compounded by the back office getting it wrong.

This should not be happening.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Dropping a clanger - in Brent and Barnet

 

The red lines are the section which can be enforced if any part of your vehicle is alongside.

'Dropped kerb' is the colloquial term for a place where the path (or verge) has been lowered to meet the carriageway. There are three types of dropped kerb which can be enforced under the provisions of Section 86 of the Traffic Management Act 2004

The second option (b) is usually found at junctions so pedestrians don't have to step up and down (you might think it applies to a speed table but Mr Mustard seems to recall an adjudication decision which found it didn't as the primary purpose of that was to slow traffic).

So that is clear as clear can be, yes?

Apparently, despite 17 years in which to learn the law, Brent Council and Barnet Council don't understand it, to the detriment of the motorist and to the advantage of council coffers.

A lovely picture of this short dropped kerb in Hilltop Avenue, Brent. From this we can glean that the dropped kerb is to a bin store and there isn't a matching dropped kerb on the other side of the carriageway.

A traffic warden can only issue a PCN when he has a belief that a contravention has occurred, clearly he/she cannot properly hold that belief in this case. The motorist knew the law and quoted it to Brent Council at the informal and formal stages and Mr Mustard quoted it at the Appeal to an independent adjudicator stage.

Brent's responses were worthy of Yes Minister and would be funny if money was not at risk and also quoted an out of date law.

So three times Brent Council got it wrong, and so simple. How many times have they done this? The Adjudication took just a few minutes on the telephone, with the adjudicator cancelling the PCN and saying this:

Oh dear, being reminded that the role of the local authority is to apply the law and only just escaping an order for costs as the bar is set very high.

Barnet Council weren't quite as bad, but not far short.

They issued a dropped kerb PCN at this location in Derby Avenue N12:

Looking at the three scenarios in which a PCN can be issued:

For pedestrians to cross the road - clearly not in the middle of a parking bay and no dropped kerb opposite.

Cyclists - no cycle lane there.

Private drive - no and never was so very off why the drop is there in the first place.

It was bonkers of the traffic warden to issue a PCN at that location in the first place.

The informal challenge referred to a tribunal decision which set out the law:

I attach tribunal decision 2120539093 which sets out the 3 categories of dropped kerb which the council is entitled to enforce.

The dropped kerb in question is not within those categories so the council does not have the legal right to issue the PCN.

That challenge was rejected:

The council didn't carefully consider anything.

The council quote the wrong Act although the wording of it didn't change much and then in the next paragraph quote the correct Act although rather unhelpfully not that it was section 86.

The law doesn't cover 'any' dropped kerb as if it did there would be no need to set out three categories of dropped kerb which can legally be enforced.

It is true that tribunal decisions aren't precedents but they are 'legally persuasive' and Adjudicators are experienced lawyers who consider these cases all day and tend to get the law correct 99.9% of the time.

The parking didn't contravene any regulations.

Curiously the identical representations were made at the second opportunity, in response to the Notice to Owner, and they were accepted. The Notice of acceptance contained a standard line which is nonsense:

'Please note that this does not set a precedent for any PCN issued under similar circumstances'. By 'similar' Mr Mustard reads, 'in the same place' as otherwise it makes no sense, which it doesn't anyway. Of course it sets a precedent, the PCN was wrong and every other one issued at that location in Derby Avenue, outside #16, is a nullity due to having no legal foundation.

So, on two dropped kerb cases on which Mr Mustard has been the advisor in the last month, two separate councils, with different contractors, got it plain wrong both on the ground and in the comfort and safety of their offices. Mr Mustard finds it hard to believe that he has been in some statistical freak show and found the only two occasions when Brent & Barnet councils have right royally lashed up.

Don't let it happen to you.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard