Parking refunds due in Edinburgh ...

On closer inspection we are starting to find that many council officers speak with forked tongue.

Yet again, instead of simply apologising for the error they attempt to twist words to say what they want them to mean rather than what they actually say.
If Mr. Leithead is wrong then why go to the expense of correcting something which they claim is already correct?

Is it any wonder that the public is not prepared to accept this any more?


Parking fines in Edinburgh have been illegal for more than a decade, claims former police chief
Apr 19 2010 Rory Reynolds

ALL parking fines issued to drivers in Edinburgh over the past 12 years are illegal, according to a former top traffic cop.

Chris Leithead, the former head of London Metropolitan Police's traffic branch, claims the city council have been fining drivers under "non-existent legislation".

The former superintendent said the local authority had made a fatal error in the wording of the fines and has urged drivers to appeal the penalties or demand a refund.
Edinburgh City Council admit they are to introduce a new Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) but insist there was no issue in the first place.

Leithead, who is now an adviser to councils on decriminalised parking, said: "I believe Edinburgh's main TRO is not lawful.
"It refers to an initial charge for parking places with pay-and-display machines or meters - a term that shouldn't be there.
"When they decriminalised parking, the council were required to amend their TROs to remove the term because it came from a section of the Road Traffic Regulation Act redundant under the new scheme.
"But Edinburgh are still using 'initial charge' in the main TRO, which covers most of the city.
"A local authority can only do what they are empowered to do by law and Edinburgh are making charges under non-existent legislation."

Leithead, 69, said drivers who try to reclaim their fines have a very good case.
He added: "Motorists who have been fined while using a paid parking place have the strongest case.
"That's what the initial charge refers to. But others, such as those who got a ticket for being on yellow lines, could argue they have a case because the whole TRO is unenforceable due to the law."

Edinburgh City Council have issued 920,000 penalty charge notices in the last four years and collected around £7million in fines last year.
Chief executive Tom Aitchison rejected Leithead's claims. He said: "There's no provision in the legislation which necessitates the council to give the period when payment is required a certain name. Therefore, any term can be used."



But he said the council's new TRO changes the wording that Leithead says make the orders illegal. He added: "It removes the words 'initial charge'."

Know any Blue Badge supermarket victims?

If so, The Motorists Legal Challenge Fund lawyers would love to hear from you.

Supermarket parking limits 'breach' disability laws
BBC News
Supermarkets have started to limit the amount of time customers can park
The UK's big supermarkets are breaking disability laws by having strict time limits in about two-thirds of their car parks, charities have told the BBC.

Private firms run some of the parking areas for Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury's and Morrisons and customers face penalty charges for overstaying.
But under the Disability Discrimination Act, businesses need to make extra allowances for disabled people.
The supermarkets say they will review their policies on disabled parking.
Supermarkets are increasingly using private parking firms and automatic number plate recognition systems to limit customer parking, often to two hours.

'Acknowledge problem'
The restrictions are to discourage drivers from abusing the free parking spaces.
BBC Breakfast contacted 200 large supermarkets from the four main chains.
Of the 124 that imposed parking time limits, about two-thirds said they did not give disabled people any extra time to shop, which is a breach of the law.

Britain's motorists are being stealth taxed by another dubious practice
Neil Herron
Motorist campaigner

Neil Coyle, from the charity Disability Alliance, said: "Supermarkets need to acknowledge there is a problem, and secondly, very quickly they need to ensure their car parking procedures conform with the law.
"You or I can stamp our feet and say how outrageous it is but at the end of the day there is a law that protects disabled people from this happening."

He said the supermarkets needed to end the "unfair charges" or "they can wait until someone takes a legal case and potentially face a considerable compensation case".

Motorist campaigner Neil Herron said supermarkets should get rid of the "draconian" and "legally questionable" private enforcement process and handle car parking in house.
"If someone is abusing the system, clamp them, charge them a £2.50 clamp release fee, handled by their own staff.
"Britain's motorists are being stealth taxed by another dubious practice," he said.

The BBC's Keith Doyle said all four supermarket chains have said they will review their policies on disabled parking.
"If you do need extra time, the advice is to go to customer services in the supermarkets - they have all told us they will make allowances, they will review their policies - so give customer services your registration number and hopefully you won't get a ticket," he said.

NCP Services' Tim Cowen has had a busy week defending the indefensible

I must be careful however, 'cos last time I wrote about a parking matter involving Mr. Cowen and NCP Services he told me I had spelled 'indefensible' wrong so let's have a look at this week's excuses ... and we shall see who is going through a bad spell ...

The first one is ... Parking Ticket for Funeral Vicar reported by the BBC. Hearse outside a church. Photo of vicar on Blue Badge. Mourners telling the Civil Enforcement Officer it was the vicar's car and a funeral was taking place. Spokesman Tim Cowan said: "The CEO who issued the ticket is adamant that at no time did anyone explain the car was owned by a vicar conducting a funeral. "
Would like to know on a believability scale of 1 -10 as to whose word you would accept. The vicar and churchgoers or the NCP Services employee. To check out how Mr. Cowen responded when faced with similar accusations that his employees were less than honest click here

Second one is what you would call 'Bang to Rights Guv.'
Veteran parking campaigner, and fellow TalkSPORT guest Barrie Segal exposed illegal activity by a NCP Services Civil Enforcement Officer in the City of Westminster. The story was reported in the News of the World last Sunday and shows a CEO faking evidence. Great work by Barrie and the NOTW.
NCP Services spokesman Tim Cowen insisted wardens were not on commission, saying: “There is no incentive to us to issue these unenforceable tickets.”

It must be pointed out that the tickets are only 'unenforceable' when the motorist knows the law and catches the CEO out as in this case. If it is shown that this is common practice then there must be a Police investigation. All the money from fines issued at this location must be refunded immediately.

Illegal parking bays in Wigan

As the panic grows amongst councils it now appears that the 'rule of law' is now starting to have an affect. 'Industry' warnings from the British Parking Association and investigations by the District Auditor across a number of local authorities now has councils owning up to having unlawful restrictions and, in some areas suspending enforcement.

When you read the report below ask yourself why, if 'new parking regulations and restrictions will soon be put in place, which will mean civil enforcement officers can legally issue fixed penalty notices' then it is clear that the 'old' parking regulations were not legal and therefore could not be enforced.
Unlawfully derived income = unjust enrichment. Refunds must be made.

Parking warning
Wigan Today
29 September 2008

Motorists hoping to escape a parking ticket due to technicalities in a parking spot in Pemberton are being warned to park responsibly.

Due to some parking restrictions not fitting the legal requirements, such as the wrong markings for parking bays, Wigan council has been forced to stop issuing tickets in Fleet Street, in the paved area to the rear of the shops and post office. But a small number of motorists have written to the council complaining they have been issued with parking tickets in an area where civil enforcement officers cannot legally issue notices until new enforceable parking regulations are put in place.

In total, 11 tickets have been rescinded this year. But Wigan council warned that new parking regulations and restrictions will soon be put in place, which will mean civil enforcement officers can legally issue fixed penalty notices if motorists flout the parking laws.

A council spokesman said: "Although Vinci Parking have slightly jumped the gun following some work at Fleet Street, enforceable parking regulations are imminent and motorists should not run the risk of the amnesty still being in place."

Hackney Council writes off £millions

However, the are still intent on spending thousands on lawyers to pursue market traders in a campaign of harassment.

Read this and then compare it with the Hackney Gazette report below ...

In Thames Magistrates Court yesterday market trader and 'Metric Martyr' Colin Hunt (left) faced the most bizarre of criminal charges. (What must be borne in mind, and must be placed in context, is that Colin Hunt, one of the original five Metric Martyrs, is the brother of Janet Devers, the 63 year old Hackney trader who currently faces charges by Hackney Council of selling goods by the pound ... the first such prosecution for 6 years).

The charges ... obstruction of the public highway by having his mango boxes 12" over the white line ... his pitch boundary.

What staggered the court was the fact that the council's evidence clearly showed people walking past the boxes. However, Colin produced damning evidence ... perhaps finally revealing the true agenda behind the Metric Martyr's prosecution ... two separate written statements from former Market Inspectors claiming that their bosses had been conducting a deliberate campaign against the market trader, currently on sticks at work recovering from a hip operation.

The Magistrates immediately adjourned the case and the witnesses have been requested to appear in court to give evidence.

Perhaps now, finally the truth will out.

COUNCIL WRITES OFF MILLIONS

Hackney Gazette
mailto:hg.editorial@archant.co.uk
07 August 2008

A Gazette investigation has uncovered millions of pounds of taxpayer's money written off by Hackney Council. Almost £40million of debt went uncollected in the last financial year, an audit of the town hall books revealed.

Opposition councillors and campaigners slammed the council for its inefficiency and unfairness.

Parking fines accounted for more than half the £38million of debts Town Hall officials wrote off in the last financial year. An audit of the town hall books found council's parking officials failed to collect more than £21million in parking fines. Mark Wallace, campaign director at public spending watchdog, Taxpayers Alliance, said it seemed that the council was using the parking fines to make money off people who would pay the first time of asking but let those who didn't get away with it.

He said: "I think this has become a total farce. It makes a mockery of the law."

Most of the cash was lost through parking tickets expiring and errors when issuing the tickets.The council also pays Central Parking System (CPS) almost £3million per year to give out parking tickets. No provision is made in its contract with CPS to be fined for mistakes made when issuing tickets and the company receives thousands of pounds in bonuses for meeting its targets.

Council tax was the next sizeable chunk written off with more than £6.7million in debt not collected, nearly double the amount written off in the previous year. The council said that this was due to the debts being irretrievable as they were more than six years old, the amount owed was so small it would be uneconomical to collect or the person had died.

A similar explanation was given for the £6.5million outstanding in rent arrears on council properties. The failure to collect council tax and rent arrears, Mr Wallace added, sent a message that people didn't have to pay it.

But while the council were writing off millions of pounds they were also spending significant amounts as well. The Gazette ploughed through the council's finances after they were made public at the end of last month. More than £42million was spent on agency staff by the council in 2007/08, £11million more than neighbours Tower Hamlets. On top of this, nearly £3million more was paid to consultants.

Mr Wallace also slammed the council splashing out £545,000 to produce and distribute its newsheet Hackney Today. "It is utterly outrageous that the money paid by hard working taxpayers is being squandered on council propaganda that hardly anyone reads." If they want to publicise themselves, they should do a good job.

Glasgow fiddles and spins over £4m parking ticket write off

In what must rank as this year's most disgraceful piece of dishonesty, and one which would make Pinocchio blush, Glasgow City Council completely misrepresents the reason why £4m worth of parking tickets have been written off.

However, the truth is out there and any evasion will only lead to further investigation and exposure.

But ... if Glasgow's claims regarding DVLA are correct then this will cast doubt on the validity of EVERY Penalty Charge Notice.

Letter to the council follows the article.



Council writes off £4m of parking tickets
GRAEME SMITH
Glasgow Herald
July 29 2008

Scotland's largest local authority has admitted that around £4m due on 60,000 parking unpaid fines will almost certainly never be recovered.
The total is also growing by around £500,000 a year as more illegal parkers dodge the penalties.
The admission from Glasgow City Council comes after thousands of penalty charge notices issued in Scotland's four main cities between 1998 and 2006 were left with a legal question mark over them. The notices were flawed because they did not bear both the date of issue and the date of the offence, as is legally required.

The format of the notices has since been changed, but the mistake led to Edinburgh City Council in effect writing off around £6.5m in unpaid fines by telling sheriff officers not to pursue 70,000 unpaid tickets. It also cancelled a further 4327 and did not pass them to sheriff officers.

In Aberdeen £2.5m worth of fines imposed between 2003 and 2006 were wiped.
Glasgow City Council originally said in February 2006 that its outstanding ticket total was 71,315, worth £5.6m, but later that year it revised its figure and said there were just 11,000 outstanding, worth £580,000.

Now, in an answer to a request under the Freedom of Information Act, the council has said the 60,000 difference was because "many of the previous cases going back several years have now been identified as unrecoverable and inactive".

The request was made by a regular contributor to the Pepipoo website, established to help motorists defend themselves against parking and speeding fines.

It means that between £3.1m and £4.7m in parking fines has effectively been written off. A spokesman for the local authority has since confirmed that it did not expect to collect the money for these tickets unless the offenders volunteered it.

The spokesman said it was wrong to assume that this was a blanket write-off of single-date penalty charge notices and said it was predominantly because of inaccurate details which are held by the DVLA.

But one of the campaigners against illegal parking charges said: "This is quite clearly because of the illegal single-date tickets, no matter what the councils say."

The council spokesman said: "This is not the case. We take advice from our recovery agents on every outstanding ticket to determine which ones we consider recoverable. The most common reasons are incorrect or out-of-date information registered with the DVLA and a failure to trace the individual.
"To put the figure in context, the 60,000 issued between 1999 and 2006 that are considered unrecoverable amount to little more than 5% of the notices issued.
"Although it is possible that many of those penalty charge notices (PCN) considered unrecoverable are also single-date tickets, we would not write them off for that reason and any unpaid single-date PCN not considered unrecoverable for another reason would still be on our system."

He said the statutory document was sent out to the registered keeper of the car involved in the parking offence, as provided by DVLA, and if that was not paid then a charge certificate was issued. If that was not paid it was passed to sheriff officers.

A spokesman for the DVLA said: "A recent survey highlighted that 94.5% of all vehicle keepers on DVLA's database can be contacted using DVLA's records. Also, 83.8% of all records contained no errors. Errors could be due to a number of factors, for example failure to notify DVLA of a change in vehicle colour or address."

George Black
Chief Executive
Chief Executive Department
Glasgow City Council
City Chambers
George Square
Glasgow
G2 1DU

Dear Mr. Black

In the edition of the Glasgow Herald dated 29th July 2008 a Glasgow City Council spokesman, in relation to the story regarding the writing off of £4m worth of Penalty Charge Notices, said:

"any unpaid single-date PCN not considered unrecoverable for another reason would still be on our system."

I would appreciate clarification of this statement, and confirmation of the following:

(1) Does 'on the system' mean they are on the system being pursued or on the system because they have been written off?
Are ANY single date Penalty Charge Notices are being pursued? If so, please clarify the legal basis for doing so as Justice Jackson stated that single date PCNs are a nullity from which no financial liability arises.

(2) What is the total value of income derived by Glasgow City Council from single date PCNs AFTER the High Court decision Barnet v The Parking Adjudicator [2006] EWHC 2357 (Admin).

(3) Please provide copies of all communications (written, telephone, e-mail) regarding issues arising from the above Barnet v The Parking Adjudicator [2006] EWHC 2357 (Admin) decision and on what date were the Glagow City Council PCNs changed to include two dates?

I look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely,

Neil Herron

Drivers to have parking fines reimbursed

Yorkshire Post
By Alexandra Wood
HUNDREDS of motorists in Hull will get back money paid out in fines after Humberside Police admitted to wrongly issuing parking tickets over a two-year period.

The force should have stopped collecting the fines in July 2006 when Hull Council took over parking enforcement.Yesterday officers apologised and said 711 people who had been fined would have the money reimbursed.


Assistant Chief Constable Alan Leaver apologised on behalf of the force, admitting it was not the "greatest moment" in the force's history.Hull Council highways manager Graham Hall said they had been one of many local authorities to take over parking enforcement under the Decriminalised Parking Enforcement scheme.



In a statement Humberside Police said: "As a result of a procedural error approximately 711 parking tickets were issued inappropriately in Hull between July 2006 and June 2008 by police officers, community support officers and special constables.


"Due to changes in the law in 2006 only civil enforcement officers working for Hull City Council are subsequently able to issue such tickets.


"The tickets issued by Humberside Police were for parking offences actually committed but the fines collected will now be reimbursed."


Police said the error only related to Hull and that their officers were able to issue tickets throughout the rest of the force area.

A neat way to avoid a parking ticket ...

But for those of you who haven't got the legs for it there's always ParkingAppeals.co.uk