Barking Council - wide of the mark

 

Barking & Dagenham Council got the law absolutely wrong in this case. 

They had already rejected a good challenge by the motorist at the PCN stage.

Mr Mustard stepped in at the Notice to Owner stage. He used the council's online system which asks standard irrelevant questions. Whoever sent the rejection did not know what they were doing. Loading/unloading and boarding/alighting are completely different concepts.

The kerb marks would probably have been found to be inadequate as they are not bright and there should be one every 3 metres or so, so that there is always one adjacent to the vehicle. 

Mr Mustard started an Appeal to the independent adjudicators at London Tribunals. Just before the case was due to be heard Barking threw in the towel and cancelled the PCN.

Mr Mustard is concerned that most motorists would believe what a council writes no matter how wrong.

Sadly there is no remedy within legislation which obliged a council which contravenes the Regulations to pay a penalty. There should be in order to improve the quality of processing of representations.

The end. 

Barnet - the renegade council

The above image is from the Highway Code which couldn't be clearer, you can stop to load/unload on double yellows (provided it isn't explicitly prohibited by lateral kerb marks) and you can drop off and pick up passengers.

The below is from the council's own Traffic Management Order i.e. the council enacted it:

So given both of the above why are Barnet Council rejecting representations based upon a complete lack of knowledge of both the Highway Code and their own rules? Could it be the money?

Anybody who pays up in response to the council's incorrect interpretation of the law has been conned out of £55.

If you have such a letter send a copy of the challenge you made and the council's response to Mr Mustard (mrmustard@zoho.com) as he is going to fire an email into the inbox of the parking manager and ask him to get the law applied properly. Mr Mustard can't be sure but the rejection letter was probably written by an employee of NSL Ltd who really ought to know the law by now.

Within 24 hours of Mr Mustard emailing the parking manager, the PCN is being cancelled, an apology sent and retraining is planned.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Oh dear me Richard (Cornelius)

Blind man's bluff

Let's go back in time.

On 8 November 2012 Mr Mustard was in the audience at the One Barnet Question Time organised by the Barnet Alliance for Public Services

---

Sent: 09 November 2012 18:04

To: Cornelius, Cllr Richard Conservative

Subject: NSL now working (my ref #1401)

Dear Cllr Cornelius

Last night you said "NSL is generating savings now" (based on my manuscript notes but it will be on film)

You know how I like to armchair audit this sort of thing.

Please send me the figures which justify your claim. Please make sure this includes how much overtime has been paid to get them up to the expected level of PCN and the number of CEO (traffic wardens) now assigned to the contract as opposed to the number at contract start (number of posts not people in post) which I do believe has increased.

By the way, based upon what happens at PATAS (the independent adjudicator ) the contract still isn't going very well.

On Tuesday 6th November the hearings went as follows, and every single parking ticket was cancelled:

1. Allowed by Order of Adjudicator (this usually means no evidence filed by Barnet council)

2. TMO wrong.

3. No copy PCN filed.

4. Council failed to deal properly with correspondence.

5. By Order.

6. By Order.

7. Inadequate evidence from council.

8. By Order.

9. By Order

NSL are still not covering you in glory. Imagine this sort of mess in month 7 on DRS and NCSCO. Don't say later that I didn't warn you.

Thank you

Best regards

Mr Mustard

---

From: Cornelius, Cllr Richard Conservative

Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 4:34 PM

To: Mr Mustard

Subject: RE: NSL now working (my ref #1401)

I did say it whether its on film or not. I will get the info to back up .

regards

Richard

---

28 November 12

Dear Mr Cornelius

It is over 2 weeks since your email as below. Do you have the info now please.

Yours sincerely

Mr Mustard

---

23 January 2013

Dear Mr Cornelius

Oh dear it seems that the simplest factual question takes 10 weeks to not be answered.

On what date will I have an answer please?

Yours sincerely

Mr Mustard

At this point Mr Mustard concluded that Richard didn't have any evidence to support his statement and waited for proof to come out of its own accord.

---

Mr Mustard has now obtained the minutes of meetings between NSL and the council thin client parking team for 2012/13. Here are some of the entries from the 23 November 12 meeting;

* Council raised concerns regarding RR Donnelley, as several issues arose concerning scanning, banking of cheques made out to Barnet and unallocated process.

* Council raised concerns regarding PATAS performance - NSL to provide full commentary and action plan on how performance will improve - NSL to ensure quality of appeal packs moving forward are of a high standard, NSL to arrange more training and visit to PATAS.

* Civil Enforcement Officer notes in relation to cases of where PCN handed to driver needs to be more robust as several cases lost at PATAS.

* Council advised NSL now had contract for 6 months, expect a turnaround in relation to how contract is performing.

---

So what do we see from this. On 8 November Richard Cornelius, the Leader of the council said the contract is making savings which was his way of saying this One Barnet contract is working but the same month it is clear that the contract has never performed as it should have done. Problems have not gone away either. There are more blog posts to follow.

Mr Mustard has been concerned for some time that councillors generally don't get into the nitty gritty of council functions and then vote in seconds on long, complex and important committee reports. This is a classic example of a lack of in-depth understanding.

Either Corny was bluffing, or ignorant or worse, that he was making a carefully worded statement (he only spoke about savings, not about performance and left the audience to equate the two) which could be construed as a lie (I don't think Corny is a liar but he certainly didn't tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about how well the contract was performing).

One Barnet isn't working.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard