Parking protest suffers setback ... or has NPAS walked into an elephant trap

The story below comes following a statement by the Sunderland City Council press office.
However, what they have done is compound the mistake that NPAS made.
The reason why I had not posted the decision was due to the fact that the NPAS adjudicator, Andrew Keenan, had made a number of errors in his Judgment.
I had appealed 26 not 28 PCNs.
The judgment stated on the front page in each case ... 'appeal dismissed.'
The adjudicator made a statement to the effect that stated that 'all the lines and signs in Sunderland are correct.'
However, in the reasons for the judgment he allows two appeals because ... wait for it ... the signs were not correct!

So the Council couldn't wait to trumpet their apparent 'victory' and compounded the NPAS mistake by handing a factually incorrect statement to the press. A request for a correctly worded decision has been made to NPAS who will be forced to issue another apology highlighting their incompetence has been made and a review of the adjudicator's decision has been requested as he has made mistakes in fact and in law.
The complaint to the Local Govenment Ombudsman will follow.

NPAS will be desperate to avoid another hearing because there is new evidence which will prove acutely embarassing to them and Sunderland City Council. However, it is currently being assessed and may be a few days before it can be released.

Meanwhile, the BBC Documentary highlighting NCPs 'practices' will be shown again on Monday night ... BBC 1 at 7.30pm.

I think that the Cabinet Meeting on Wednesday at Sunderland City Council will be a difficult one for Council Leader and his colleagues who have shown a total lack of competence to date regarding getting a grasp of the Parking problem. Will they keep NCP or sack them?

All but two of 28 ticket appeals are rejected
Sunderland Echo
Thursday, November 16, 2006
By Ross Robertson

Protester Neil Herron's bid to expose what he claimed were flawed city council parking regulations has failed, after he won just two of his 28 ticket appeals.

Mr Herron deliberately parked in restricted areas to collect tickets as evidence to highlight his campaign.

He went head-to-head with Sunderland Council over the fines at a hearing held by the National Parking Adjudication Service (NPAS).

But NPAS adjudicator Andrew Keenan rejected all but two of the appeals.

Mr Herron claimed that traffic orders in the city were conflicting and unlawful, while signs and lines were riddled with errors and misleading to motorists.

But Sunderland Council said the NPAS decision meant the parking regime in the city was not flawed.

A spokesman for the council, which was represented in the adjudication by top barrister Stephen Sauvain, said: "The decision means that the overall integrity of the scheme has been upheld.
"The vast majority of motorists use the city's parking facilities responsibly, observing the lines and signs which aim to ensure efficient and safe use of the city's roads and car parks.
"We hope that in the light of this adjudication everyone will continue to do so."

Mr Herron said he intends to appeal against the adjudicator's ruling, claiming legal and administrative errors were made in the decision-making process .
"This is simply round one in the appeals process and it is necessary to request a review," he said.
"If the Sunderland public think that there are no problems with the signs and lines in the city, then they must be scratching their heads as to why the council has paid back more than £60,000 to motorists illegally fined."

Mr Herron also claims that parking tickets are still being issued in Frederick Street, where he was successful in appealing against two of his tickets because it was found that there was no valid traffic order in operation.

Under traffic regulations, parking bays must measure no more than 6.6m and the traffic order for Frederick Street covers a 94m stretch of the road.

But when drafting the order parking chiefs forgot to include a disabled bay and motorcycle bay on that stretch of road.

Leaving those details off the written regulations meant it was unlawful to issue tickets in that area.