Parked by the garage

 

Well done that mechanic, parking your client's car half on the pavement and half off and next to double yellow lines which apply up to the building line thus giving the traffic warden the choice of two easy tickets both of which would be hard to beat.

Of course the garage didn't tell their customer, Mr L, about the PCN, he found out when the Notice to Owner arrived three months later. Luckily the traffic warden chose a third contravention entirely:

For that contravention to take place all of the car needs to be a long way from the kerb, often known as double parked, and on the carriageway. That wasn't the case here. Mr L had been unlucky and lucky all at once.

Mr Mustard wrote the formal representation:

Tower Hamlets didn't dally, they cancelled the PCN fairly quickly. They probably noticed the veiled threat by the use of the words 'wholly unreasonable' and 'vexatious' that the writer was thinking ahead to the tribunal and the costs rules (rarely awarded but this would have been a deserving case.)

After a blog last week about council error, Mr Mustard wrote that councils go wrong 0.1% of the time. A different expert suggested that the real rate is more like 3 - 4% and he may well be correct, Mr Mustard feasts on errors more often than he first thought and he won a tribunal case on the day this blog was advance written as the wrong traffic order was in evidence and as the adjudicator pointed out the traffic warden didn't take a photo of the sign (an error which Mr Mustard had missed but he still had three good arguments and won on the first one).

The end. 

Tower Hamlets play fair

Mr Mustard's friend had a blue badge passenger in the car. He knew that was OK in Barnet and Enfield* to park in a residents bay and therefore assumed it would be ok in Tower Hamlets. It wasn't. Mr Mustard thought about the matter and sent in the following informal challenge. (* do put Mr Mustard right if he is wrong about this).

Tower Hamlets were quite quick and replied after 2 weeks.

The content of the letter, which was sent attached to an email, was somewhat contradicted by the covering email.

If there was a scoring system for this PCN Tower Hamlets would get a 9 out of 10, so well done them for cancelling for a first error which should not get repeated. This is how it should be.

This does highlight though the problem for a blue badge driver who really needs to research where he/she can stop for free before he/she makes a journey across London. It wouldn't need much, a blue badge logo on all bays where blue badges could be used would be a simple addition and bring clarity to all. Tower Hamlets sadly didn't answer the simple question posed by Mr Mustard, once they have cancelled a PCN they don't want to spend more time on it.

The end.

The challenge that never was in Tower Hamlets

Mr Mustard helps a skip hire company who inevitably incur PCNs whilst collecting or delivering a skip other than on a main road as they have to breach the weight limit but are exempt provided they take the shortest route. They don't get many jobs in Tower Hamlets but did have one in Tredegar Square and accessed it via Tredegar Road which sounds OK but possibly wasn't. Anyway, the PCN which arrived was deficient. Here is an extract:

 

 

The PCN was deficient for not stating the weight which was allegedly exceeded. This is usually enough at the tribunal for a win. The PCN must state the contravention which is believed to have been exceeded and we don't know if the weight was 5T, 7.5T etc.
Sometimes the sign will be within the images provided but not in this case.

The PCN was dated 1 March 2024.

Representations were made against it online on 11 March 2024. Following his usual practice Mr Mustard embedded a copy of the authority letter within the representations so that he doesn't forget to prove his right to act.

On 10 April Tower Hamlets Council sent a nonsense letter:

 

 

Mr Mustard duly arranged for a representation to be sent in by the company on 18 April which included a waste transfer note.

 

All was then quiet until 30 May when the council accepted the waste transfer note as genuine (it was) and cancelled the PCN.

 

Mr Mustard suspects that the failure to consider the representations the first time around would have counted against the council at the tribunal and the failure to state a weight almost certainly would have, there being a number of decisions in favour of motorists on this point. Do use this ground if you receive a similar PCN.

The cctv isn't all that near the sign in question either so the time of the alleged contravention might also have been wrong so that is a fight for another day or may help you if you receive a PCN relating to Tredegar Road.

The end.

 

Ding ding, hold on tightly in Tower Hamlets

 

You can't just start running a bus service in London, you need a permit from TfL. That includes approval of the route. That is predictable.

 

What you can't predict is that a London borough included on the route will decide you aren't running a local bus service when you clearly are and will try to stuff you for £130 a day each way.

Here is part of the timetable for the bus in question, a bit early for Mr Mustard

 

 

Here is part of the route at East India DLR

The reason that Mr Mustard is writing about this is as he randomly opened the following London Tribunals adjudication decision just because he liked the name:

Don't you just love it when a lawyer rips into someone (apart from yourself):

The Enforcement Authority's submissions at to why the vehicle was not a local bus were not of great assistance.

Centaur have 100 vehicles and clearly know what they are about.

Despite the comprehensive drubbing Tower Halmets let subsequent hearings go ahead when it would have been diplomatic and sensible to withdraw. There may yet be more.

The end, for now.

PCNs - exercise of discretion - #30 Tower Hamlets

 

Tower Hamlets Council - Policy - Cancellation of PCNs by MisterMustard on Scribd

Mr Mustard forgot to mention Tower Hamlets when he wrote this series of blogs, he was waiting for their new policy to be produced and provided. In the meantime here is the existing policy which the council produced as soon as it was requested.

Discretion doesn't appear until page 5 but at least there is some and they are the reasons that you hear the most.

Mr Mustard doesn't agree with no. 5, that isn't mitigation. If there are no lines when you park and double yellow lines appear under your car whilst you are parked you have not committed a contravention. The council should know what lines they have painted when. Furthermore the daily traffic warden briefing should tell wardens of where lines are being painted that day so they can tread lightly in that area.

Policy no. 6 appears to be less generous to blue badge holders than to other permit holders which may be a breach of the Equality Act.

Policy no. 10 for multiple moving traffic contraventions is a reasonable approach.

The end (for now).

Tower Hamlets - no paying out policy

On 22 March, Miss A's car was towed to the pound. She paid the £65 PCN charge and a £200 removal fee to recover her car. Mr Mustard took up the cudgels on her behalf and a hearing at the independent tribunal ensued on 24 June. Mr Mustard/Miss A lost on the PCN but won on the tow away so £200 was directed by the adjudicator to be returned 'without delay'.

As of 20 June the refund had not been made (a bit rich when you can only recover your car by paying instantly) so Mr Mustard decided to ask for the procedures which are in place to ensure that the council do follow the decisions of adjudicators, which they are legally bound to do.

Here they aren't:

That can't be right surely. The council will have plenty of policies and procedures to make sure you pay on time, as well as a 50% supplement if you miss the 28 day payment deadline, but none at all to make sure they issue refunds quickly. 

The council have a general duty at law to be procedurally fair; clearly they aren't.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Tower Hamlets - 7/10

Tower Hamlets would have got 9/10 if the website said that the council was going through the payment records and refunding everyone of its own volition but they must be applauded for publicising this on their website. Hopefully there are also some publicity signs at the locations concerned (if not I expect a local resident will read this blog and erect some; a copy of this blog post would be the quickest to print out and tie to a lamp post). This will only affect a small number of PCN hence the official willingness to refund. If it was 100,000 PCN that were wrongly issued one would anticipate rather more resistance.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard