Rachel Johnson ... a victory for common sense against council snoopers

'Periscope' parking fines quashed
BBC Report
Rachel Johnson argued that there were no warning signs to tell drivers they were being filmed
Motorists issued with parking fines after being caught out by so-called "spy cars" may now have grounds to appeal after a legal ruling.

Rachel Johnson, 32, challenged three £60 fines issued by Wirral Council using evidence gathered by Smart Cars fitted with periscope cameras.
A tribunal upheld her claim that the Penalty Charge Notices were invalid because there were no warning signs.

About 30 councils across England and Wales are believed to use the cameras.
'Privacy invaded'
Ms Johnson appealed to the local authority after receiving three tickets in the space of a week.
On each occasion, she had parked briefly on double yellow lines outside the off-licence she runs in New Brighton.
"I felt like my privacy had been invaded," she told the BBC.
"We were just going about our business, trying to run a business, and I knew we were allowed to park here."

The fines were overturned by the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, which rules on appeals against parking penalties issued by councils in England and Wales.

For just general enforcement local authorities shouldn't be using CCTV
Neil Herron, parking fine campaigner

It ruled the charges were invalid because there were no signs in the area saying motorists could be photographed.
The tribunal also said the area was unsuitable for the use of cameras.
A Wirral Borough Council spokesperson said they were reviewing the recommendations issued by the tribunal.
"Anyone who has received a parking ticket and feels that they have a valid reason to appeal is able to do so through the appeals process detailed.
"Each case is reviewed on its own merits."

The Local Government Association (LGA) said councils which used the periscope cameras for parking fines would also be studying the implications of the tribunal ruling.

Parking fine campaigner Neil Herron said the use of the periscope cameras was no substitute for experienced parking attendants.
"CCTV enforcement should only be where parking attendants can't go - where it's too dangerous or too restrictive.
"For just general enforcement local authorities shouldn't be using CCTV.
"A CCTV camera doesn't record whether loading or unloading is taking place, whether a blue badge has been displayed, whether there was any exemptions in the traffic order."

CCTV Refunds for motorists

RULING THAT MAY QUASH THOUSANDS OF CAR FINES WAIVED:
Rachel Johnson's fines were declared invaled by the adjudicator
Daily Express

Tuesday August 4,2009
By Andy Russell

THOUSANDS of parking fines could be scrapped after a test case victory over tickets issued by roving spy camera cars.
Businesswoman Rachel John­son was jubilant after she exposed a loophole and had three £60 fines quashed in a landmark ruling.

Rachel, 34, who runs an off licence in New Brighton, Merseyside, said: “We got three tickets in a week. It was outrageous. It is absolutely disgusting that the council uses such sneaky tactics to issue fines.
“There should be clear signs notifying motorists cameras are in operation. They are operating like prowlers, lying in wait.
“These spy camera cars are an alarming invasion of ­privacy and smack of a way to raise money.”

Outraged married mother of three Rachel took her case against Wirral Borough Council to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and won.
The adjudicator decided the ­penalties were invalid as there were no warnings of ­cameras in ­operation.
A letter notifying her of the decision said local authorities should use the new ­generation of Smart cars with periscope-mounted cameras only ­“sparingly”, in areas where ­wardens cannot be used.

Parking justice campaigner Neil Herron, founder of parking appeals.co.uk, is calling for all councils to refund penalties imposed with similar spy ­camera evidence.
He said: “This is yet another victory for motorists against the Big Brother tactics that are used to penalise drivers for simply parking their car in a public place. Councils are ­playing fast and loose with the legal requirements. All councils that have issued fines unlawfully with these spy camera cars now have a duty to refund the cash, regardless of whether the motorists concerned appeal.”

He added: “I hope they do the decent thing and make the refunds quickly. Otherwise anyone who has paid a fine under these circumstances should write to the Traffic Penalty ­Tribunal seeking redress.”

Tory councillor Sue Taylor, who backed Rachel’s fight, said: “This landmark ruling could open the floodgates to thousands of other drivers.
“Councils need to introduce a system of erecting temporary signs in places where they are operating.
“That will discourage motorists from parking illegally and that should be their aim rather than simply cashing in on ­collecting fines.”
Wirral council said it was reviewing the way its spy car was used to issue parking fines.

Big Bother for Big Brother ...

Will they ever learn?
Come on guys ... it isn't difficult to get it right. Just do the decent thing and put the signs up and use CCTV as a deterrent. If you are going to use Smartcars have an open access council website and tell motorists where the Smartcars are going to be so then there will be no excuse for motorists. Get them outside schools catching motorists parking on the school keep clear signs where safety is important. Combine that with a road safety programme for the children alerting them to the dangers of their parents parking on zig-zags. The voice of a six year old telling a parent off far outweighs any 'sneaky' enforcement which only creates resentment and anger.
However, the landscape will change somewhat when we step into the realms of moving traffic enforcement which has now been taken out of the hands of the Police. Do the legal draftsmen and the Department for Transport really know what they are doing? More to be revealed soon. Meanwhile, this is in tomorrow's Telegraph.

Motorists must have warning of parking spy cameras
Thousands of motorists could have their parking tickets quashed after an appeal tribunal cancelled a fine issued by Wirral Borough Council, ruling that councils using spy cameras must put up warning signs.
By David Millward,
Transport Editor
03 Aug 2009

The decision by the Traffic Penalty Tribunal will have implications for 32 councils who have been given permission to use cameras by the Department for Transport.
Rachel Johnson, 34, challenged three parking tickets which were issued on the basis of evidence gathered by Smart Cars fitted with enforcement cameras by the council, which is based in Merseyside.

Related Articles
Council to repay motoring fines as signs were too small
Councils to use cameras to catch drivers
Parking tickets up fivefold in six years
CCTV parking fine councils fail to get permission to use new system
CCTV evidence can lead to parking fine

Her claim that the tickets - known as penalty charge notices - were invalid was upheld by the adjudicator, who agreed that notices should be posted warning drivers that cameras were in operation.
Miss Johnson described the cameras as "sneaky" and said the behaviour of the council was outrageous.
''These spy camera cars are an alarming invasion of privacy and smack of a way to raise money,'' she added.

According to the tribunal, such cameras should be used "sparingly" and only in areas where civil enforcement officers - as traffic wardens are now known.
Widely used in London, camera parking enforcement is spreading to the provinces and it is already in use in Medway, Nottingham, Bournemouth, South Tyneside, and Basildon.

In what it describes as "operational guidance", the Department for Transport has advised councils to warn motorists when they are being used.
"Motorists may regard enforcement by cameras as over-zealous and authorities should use them sparingly. The Secretary of State recommends that authorities put up signs to tell drivers that they are using cameras to detect contraventions," the guidance adds.

The ruling is a victory for campaigners such as Neil Herron, of ParkingAppeals.co.uk , who have said the guidance should be legally binding.
He welcomed the ruling, saying: "It is another victory for the motorist and a reminder to all local authorities that the legislation is there for a purpose and they can't break the law to enforce the law."

Notes
Anyone with a CCTV PCN e-mail enquiries@parkingappeals.co.uk for more information.