Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Has anyone been issued a Penalty Charge Notice while parked in a street that contains different types of parking restrictions?


My car was parked near the border of 2 zones, with different times of operation, at 9.40 am. The interactive CPZ map clearly shows I was parked in the Dog Kennel Hill zone(restrictions are in force 11-1) not in the West Peckham CPZ restrictions 9-11).


An informal appeal was submitted to Southwark Parking Services and I received what looks like a standard letter (not cancelling the PCN).


Not much time left to make a decision if it?s worth appealing once the Notice to owner arrives (risking another standard letter as a reply and having to pay the full ?130 penalty) or if we can have any hope that someone is going to actually look at the information we send.


Any advice from previous experience, highly appreciated!

What was the time on sign on the bay you parked in?


If you were in a bay in the West Peckham zone according to the traffic order and the sign had the times for the West Peckham zone then legally the penalty is correct. The online map might have been misleading but even if it was incorrect it has no legal standing.


Also I?ve not seen on here any question over the CPZ boundaries and if there was one I?m pretty sure it would have come up on here and been sorted by the Council and no PCNs issued until it was.


It?s some time ago now but when I dealt with PCN appeals if the sign and traffic order were correct the penalty would have stood and a Notice to Owner been issued.


Unless you are sure you were not parked in the West Peckham zone pay now. If you were wait for the Notice to Owner and make a formal representation (this will go to the registered keeper at DVLA so if this is not you let them know as if they pay on receipt there is no right to appeal).

Write to the PM. The 2015 manifesto had a commitment to tackle disproportionate fines. Or write to David Cameron, he can afford to pay your fine and didn't meet this commitment, or many others. It's not a facetious comment, these are the exact words: We will continue to support local shops and residents in tackling aggressive parking enforcement and excessive parking charges.

> My car was parked near the border of 2

> zones, with different times of operation,

> at 9.40 am. The interactive CPZ map clearly

> shows I was parked in the Dog Kennel Hill

> zone(restrictions are in force 11-1)

> not in the West Peckham CPZ restrictions 9-11).


After grappling with the Southwark website and map, I agree with you on the times of restriction for each of the zones, just as in the attached CSVs from the map page.


AFAICS from the attached map there's only one street that straddles them, that's Avondale Rise; in particular, just the small segment west of Copleston Road that ends at Ivanhoe Road and crosses the railway line, which seems to be the dividing line between the two CPZs. The half adjoining Copleston Road, up to the middle of the railway bridge, is in Peckham W, and the end bit is in Goose Green CPZ.


I've been to have a look. In that segment of Avondale, apart from double yellows and bus stops, there are three small residents' parking bays. They're all in the half nearer to Copleston and so apparently in the Peckham W zone. Each has a sign saying Residents Parking Only 0900-1100, which tallies with what we agree are the times applying in Peckham W. After that I went back to the website and added the Peckham W and DKH zones in turn, just to check that I had the right ones. Which, I'm afraid, seems all to be consistent with your having parked in the Peckham W zone. But I'll be happy to be told I've got it wrong.

If it is this difficult to tell, you might be able to mount a defence that the signs were confusing. A rule of thumb is that people cannot be expected to follow the rules if they do not know what they are.


If you want to do this, I should ask for their photos, take lots of your own. Check that you really are right, or at least that a reasonable person would find the situation confusing, and then appeal.

Coincidentally, it was at 5.10 this morning that I woke up with the thought that Jack maybe, possibly most probably, had indeed parked in the DKH zone segment. Even then I've no idea whether the PCN was justified or not, in the absence of facts like the location and the exact wording of the PCN.


To win an appeal you're going to have to present cogent evidence that Southwark got the facts and/or the law wrong. If you're in a position to do that you can probably persuade us too, and possibly vice versa.


[Edit: Goose Green->DKH]

Thanks for all the comments and advise, highly appreaciated.

Ianr, well spotted, Avondale Rise. Many thanks for taking the time to have a look at the area: "I've been to have a look. In that segment of Avondale, apart from double yellows and bus stops, there are three small residents' parking bays. They're all in the half nearer to Copleston and so apparently in the Peckham W zone. Each has a sign saying Residents Parking Only 0900-1100, which tallies with what we agree are the times applying in Peckham W. After that I went back to the website and added the Peckham W and DKH zones in turn, just to check that I had the right ones. Which, I'm afraid, seems all to be consistent with your having parked in the Peckham W zone. But I'll be happy to be told I've got it wrong."

Our car was parked between the double Yellow lines and the bus stop (single yellow line there, no parking bay with clear restriction times), according to the cpz map on the DKH cpz side of the railway (even if there are no signs dividing the 2 cpz areas as Southwark council claims)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...