Parking in a suspended bay - Blue Badge Holder

dragon42tt

Seeking Advice on PCN for "Parked in a Suspended Bay" - Blue Badge Holder on behalf of my sister in law. 

Hi everyone,

My sister in law received a PCN from Transport for London for allegedly parking “wholly or partly in a suspended bay” on 16 October 2024. She's a Blue Badge holder, and the bay she parked in usually permits disabled badge holders for up to three hours. The regular sign for this bay reads: "Red Route, No stopping Mon-Sat 7am-7pm, Except loading max 20 mins, disabled max 3 hours."

Key Details:

Contravention Location: O/S 440 - 450 Holloway Road, N7

Contravention Time: 16 October 2024 at 12:57 pm

PCN Amount: £160, reduced to £80 if paid within 14 days.

My Concern:

The PCN and TfL's online portal show three photos of my car parked in the bay but none of these photos include the details of the suspension sign that’s supposed to justify this contravention. Usually, when Tfl or local council suspends a bay, they include an image of the suspension sign with the PCN evidence, showing the dates and details of the restriction. In this case, there’s no image of the suspension notice to confirm:

1. The specific dates/times of the suspension.

2. Whether the sign was clearly displayed and visible to drivers.

3. Whether any exemptions were mentioned for Blue Badge holders.

My Grounds for Appeal:

1. Lack of Evidence of the Suspension Sign: Without a photo of the suspension sign, it’s unclear if the suspension was properly displayed or if the details were visible to drivers. This missing evidence makes it hard to confirm that the restriction was enforceable at that time.

2. Blue Badge Rights: As a Blue Badge holder, she's usually allowed to park in this bay for up to three hours (she usualy does when going shopping in Iceland). Since she couldn’t see any suspension sign in the evidence, it’s unclear if the suspension applied to disabled drivers or if alternative arrangements were made.

3. Potential for Misleading Signage: The usual sign on this bay allows certain activities (loading and disabled parking) during certain hours, so a suspension sign would need to be prominently displayed and clear to avoid confusion.

Questions: 

Has anyone successfully challenged a PCN for suspended bay parking on similar grounds?

If TfL didn’t provide evidence of the suspension sign, is this typically strong grounds for appeal? (They usualy take photos of the suspension sign after it's erected) 

Any tips on framing my argument effectively as a Blue Badge holder?

Thanks in advance for any advice or similar experiences you can share. 

KeithP

dragon42tt said:

My Concern:

The PCN and TfL's online portal show three photos of my car parked in the bay but none of these photos include the details of the suspension sign that’s supposed to justify this contravention. Usually, when Tfl or local council suspends a bay, they include an image of the suspension sign with the PCN evidence, showing the dates and details of the restriction. In this case, there’s no image of the suspension notice to confirm:

1. The specific dates/times of the suspension.

2. Whether the sign was clearly displayed and visible to drivers.

3. Whether any exemptions were mentioned for Blue Badge holders.

It looks like the car was in the layby outside the Iceland store in Holloway Road.
You have shown us a picture from TfL showing the car parked in that bay.
That picture does show the sign authorising disabled parking in that bay has been cover by a black bag
- as can be seen in this cropped image...

Surely it is very clear from the TfL images you have shown us that parking there was suspended at that time.

In your last picture you show us what the sign looks like when it is not covered.
I don't understand the relevance of that, the evidence is - it was covered at the time of the alleged parking event.

MattMattMattUK

I agree with Keith, the suspension sign is visible and the normal sign is covered in the picture supplied by TFL and your last image is irrelevant. I cannot see how you have a valid argument at all, it appear TFL have a slam dunk.

Coupon-mad

 It see what the experts on FTLA say (forum of people who used to post in pepipoo).

dragon42tt

I attached a Google Maps image of the regular sign at this location to show the typical restrictions, which might be helpful for context. Regarding the suspension sign, while it’s technically visible in the PCN photos, it would be hard to spot when pulling up next to the Range Rover to reverse into the bay, especially from a lower vehicle. The van parked right next to the suspension sign also obstructs its visibility.

Additionally, the suspension sign is facing the wrong direction, which makes it harder to see. In my opinion, it’s poorly placed, another sign could have been added to the lamp post at the other end of the bay for better visibility.

She parks here several times a week. In this instance, she didn’t step out of the car; she parked, and her husband went into Iceland supermarket.

Without a clear photo of the suspension sign, I don’t think anyone should be expected to pay the PCN without contesting it first. For example, I once received a PCN from Islington Council for parking in a suspended bay. However, I had parked my car the night before when there was no suspension sign. It had been suspended for filming however the sign was not up when I parked. My neighbour actually saw the film crew grab the sign from under a car and put it up in the morning, as someone had ripped it down the day before.

The only way I could prove this was the case was when I noticed that all the other suspension signs in the area were secured with black cable ties, but the one near my car was tied with a white one, which the film crew used to reattach it. This, along with my neighbour’s account, convinced the council that I wasn’t at fault. 

The point here is that things aren’t always as clear-cut as they seem in photos. There could be other factors at play. In this case, I don’t think it’s reasonable to pay the fine without more evidence showing when the sign was erected or at least the specific dates and times on the suspension sign. Just as drivers can make mistakes, so can TfL or councils. For instance, the suspension might have ended the day before, but the signs weren’t removed.

So, let’s not rush to conclusions, as shown in my example, things aren’t always as straightforward as they look in the photos.

dragon42tt

Coupon-mad said:

 It see what the experts on FTLA say (forum of people who used to post in pepipoo).

Thank you, will post it on there today. 

dragon42tt

MattMattMattUK said:

I agree with Keith, the suspension sign is visible and the normal sign is covered in the picture supplied by TFL and your last image is irrelevant. I cannot see how you have a valid argument at all, it appear TFL have a slam dunk.

So you're saying she should just take their word for it and not request to see the details of the suspension sign? just pay!

If it were me I wouldn't pay a penny before I see all the evidence. Seems to me that alot of people have tunnel vision about this type of stuff, never thinking outside the box.