PCN for parking with one or more wheels on or over a footpath (code 622)

Neil_B

Gordon861 wrote: »

I still not sure the code is actually wrong. You actually have two offences there.

1. (24) Not parked correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
2. (62) Parked with one or more wheels on any part of an urban road other than a carriageway (footway parking).

The (62) offence is considered more serious than the (24) so they have done you for that one.

The reason they have used it is because that fact that you are outside the bay on the pavement side, therefore you are actually parked on the footway. For parking purposes the inside of the bay is not considered part of the footway so if you'd been inside on the pavement side but not the road side it would have been a (24) offence.

An Adjudicator might interpret it like that but I think the chances are better than 50/50 personally. It boils down to when it is appropriate to use each code.

It is certainly worth seeing what Havering have to say for themselves and they may of course trip themselves up along the way.

---

IMO simply say ---

No contravention occurred. My vehicle was parked at a location where pavement parking is permitted. I enclose a pic of the sign at the location.


Don't go comparing to the alternative contravention at the mo. That will confuse the issue and open doors for them to argue.
-

HolisticHarmony

Neil_B wrote: »

IMO simply say ---

No contravention occurred. My vehicle was parked at a location where pavement parking is permitted. I enclose a pic of the sign at the location.

Don't go comparing to the alternative contravention at the mo. That will confuse the issue and open doors for them to argue.
-

That's a great help, thanks, Neil B. In your opinion, should I include the other circumstances (of dog ill/dying, etc)? Do you think that will strengthen my case? I'm just concerned that if I don't include that now - and they reject my appeal - won't it be too late to add it at the second stage?

HolisticHarmony

Gordon861 wrote: »

I still not sure the code is actually wrong. You actually have two offences there.

1. (24) Not parked correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
2. (62) Parked with one or more wheels on any part of an urban road other than a carriageway (footway parking).

The (62) offence is considered more serious than the (24) so they have done you for that one.

The reason they have used it is because that fact that you are outside the bay on the pavement side, therefore you are actually parked on the footway. For parking purposes the inside of the bay is not considered part of the footway so if you'd been inside on the pavement side but not the road side it would have been a (24) offence.

I've read this again and am a bit confused Gordon861.

The bay isn't marked on the road side (only on the pavement) so it's not possible to be "inside on the pavement side but not the road side". Do you mean if the car isn’t on the kerb/the bay at all and is only in the road? Otherwise I can’t see when a (24) offence would be given for these type of bays.

Gordon861

Because your car goes outside the bay they could choose a (24) offence due to not parking in the marked area and that would only be a £60 fine, but due to the fact that outside the bay means you are also on the pavement they have gone for a (62) offence as that's the bigger infringement.

But as Neil says you probably don't want to mention the outside the bay infringement, instead you want to go with the 'halfway road/pavement parking is permitted so I don't see what i did wrong defence'.

The 'in marked bays only' bit might not help, but the fact that the bays are only half marked(ie not on the road as well) means you claim that there were no bays and you therefore never saw the lines indicating how far onto the pavement you were allowed to go. and just thougt the markings were there to indicate which lengths of pavement you were allowed to park in.

Neil_B

Gordon861 wrote: »

The 'in marked bays only' bit might not help, but the fact that the bays are only half marked(ie not on the road as well) means you claim that there were no bays and you therefore never saw the lines indicating how far onto the pavement you were allowed to go. and just thougt the markings were there to indicate which lengths of pavement you were allowed to park in.

It does sound odd.

I can't recall what these are supposed to look like. Anyone?

--but again, whilst I see what Gordon is getting at, I wouldn't go confusing it with trying to over explain yourself.
Better to see what they say in reply maybe? -- then work from that.
-

Gordon861

Yes, I would just go with 'the sign says park with two wheels on the pavement and I did so' and see what they say.

I always thought these pavement parking bays were supposed to have marks in the roadway as well.

Another thing I have noticed from looking at the booklet I have is that they are required to 'measure the distance of the contravention' as well as take a photo of it, so that might also be something missing from the ticket. Something like 'you were parked 20cm onto the pavement'.