The gathering of the clans ...

In the hills and the valleys and the towns and the cities and on every piece of potholed tarmac that Britain's motorists traverse at £8 per gallon and with a £50,000,000,000 tax take per annum to the Treasury there comes a moment where 'tipping point' is reached.

On top of the potholes, the 'speed awareness courses' for doing 34mph in a 30mph zone, and the lack of investment in the country's decaying road infrastructure, Britain's motorists are often pursued to the ends of the earth for the most minor of parking contraventions (minute late back to a meter, an inch over a white line) by councils now empowered to raise the fines, issue the fines, collect the money and keep the money (and appeals adjudicated upon by 'independent' adjudicators paid at the rate of 60p from every ticket issued) ... we now see one of those public officials, who are paid handsomely from the public purse, in a position of trust with pension rewards the private sector would die for (if they could retire early enough to extract the benefit) ... given an absolute discharge for forging documents to extract a £60 fine from a pensioner.

Now just hold that thought for a minute.

A £60 fine for parking in a pay and display bay that wasn't marked correctly BUT an absolute discharge for the person FORGING the documents to make a financial gain for his employers, Exeter City Council.

Read the press cutting below .... "The defendant has admitted he doctored the plan and blames others in the council for being involved."

A word of warning to all those council officers out there who thought that they were above the law. To those council officers who thought that they could act with impunity. To those council officers who thought that their colleagues or 'the system' would protect them.

Check the Local Authority (Indemnities for Officers and Members) Order 2004 ... and then check out how much you personally have to lose should the council decide that, because of your actions, you cannot be protected. Don't assume that you are protected.

The MPs serving time at Her Majesty's Pleasure did not expect such a turn of events but thanks to the dogged determination of Heather Brooke who exposed the MPs expenses scandal the public saw that justice could be dispensed and the guilty dispatched.

In some council areas Civil Parking Enforcement is lawless, unregulated and out of control and has been for a number of years and it is the new MPs expenses scandal, the pensions and endowments mis-selling, the disgraceful bank charges scandal ... but now the moment is upon us where every motorist who has suffered a personal injustice but has been daunted by the enormity of taking on the system can join behind a man who has been prepared to stand up to be counted.

The Peter Harry case, a pensioner pursued relentlessly for a £60 fine with council officials prepared to forge documents for financial gain has unsettled the common man. If the Judges and the etsablishment will not protect and defend our rights and freedoms how will justice ever be seen to be done?

Thanks and praise needs to go to all those parking offiocers and many parking managers who are quietly and openly supprting what we do knowing that there are rotten apples in every profession. Until those rotten apples are removed then parking enforcement generally will continue to feel the public's wrath.

The disparate groups across the country are coming together. The clans are gathering. If you are a council officer who thinks that you are above the law ... we are now at 'tipping point.' The British Motoring Public will not tolerate this any more.

In the coming days the landscape will change .... and the 'common man' will ensure that justice will be seen to be done in the most public of fashions.


This is Exeter

Monday, February 28, 2011,

Ex-council man walks free over map charge

A FORMER parking officer in the city has walked free from court after he admitted falsifying a map relating to a parking ticket.

Judge Graham Cottle gave Geoffrey Urwin an absolute discharge and questioned why the case had ever been brought to Exeter Crown Court.

Urwin, 43, of Oxford Road, St James, had falsified a document used in a motorist's appeal against a parking ticket. The court heard he had since lost his job.

The defendant was going to deny the charge but changed his plea after Judge Cottle said he thought an absolute discharge was appropriate.

Urwin admitted that, without reasonable excuse or justification, he willfully misconducted himself, by falsifying a map used in a parking penalty notice proceeding.

The charge said it happened between June 1 and June 30 last year, when the defendant was a parking support team leader with the council.

He was accused of doctoring a map, which was presented to a traffic penalty tribunal after a motorist appealed against a parking ticket issued to him in Exeter.

Prosecutor Andrew Macfarlane said that the motorist was someone who had a "campaign with others".

Mr Macfarlane said: "He deliberately parked in a parking bay where he believed markings were not entirely accurate and declined to put money in the meter."

He said that the parking attendant recorded it as the wrong space in Southernhay, while trying to show the position of the parking bay.

"The defendant decided to doctor it and place it in the correct designation with where the car was, falsifying that document," said the prosecutor.

"The policy of the council is, if that error is found, rather than falsifying the document, the parking charge is abandoned.

"The defendant has admitted he doctored the plan and blames others in the council for being involved."

Judge Cottle said: "Does the crown court exist to deal with this?"

The prosecutor replied that a Crown Prosecution Service lawyer had made an "exhaustive analysis" of the case. Judge Cottle said: "He'll get an absolute discharge if convicted….That is what the county council should be about, not this kind of court."

The judge, who was due to sentence a rapist and also a man who had killed a pedestrian through careless driving later in the day, said he was dealing with cases of "immense seriousness" and should not have to deal with one of this kind. He added no criticism was intended of the prosecutor.

Mr Macfarlane replied that common law meant the case had to be dealt with at crown court.

Defence counsel Nicholas Bradley said Urwin had no criminal record and had lost his job since this incident.

"He was asked to leave and he did," said Mr Bradley.

Judge Cottle said about the offence: "He probably accepts he did something he shouldn't."

After the guilty plea and sentencing, Judge Cottle said the offence would not rank as a criminal conviction.

Urwin told the Echo after the hearing: "I'm extremely relieved. That's it."

Is this a traffic sign?

According to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal ... the mantra they chant is 'as long as no reasonable motorist could be misled' ... and 'the meaning of the restriction is clear' ...

However, Manuel, let me explain ....

and sorry to be pedantic but the law is so ... and many people pore over matters to ensure that there is no confusion, but when confusion reigns ... lawyers earn their money ... and Judges clarify the law (and they do not wear wigs Karl Pilkington as disguises so that they don't get recognised ... although Judge Cottle in the Peter Harry case may well buy a blonde one after deciding that forgery by a council officer was a 'trivial matter.' That may make 32 million motorists a tad angry).

Meanwhile, back to traffic signing law which, is as boring as watching yellow paint dry ... traffic signs (as prescribed by TSRGD 2002 referenced at Sction 64 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984) must be of the colour, shape and size of the 'pictures and dimensions' in the books that clever people spent lots of time making ... otherwise they are not traffic signs!!! If they are not 'traffic signs' they are not legal, something that the Traffic Penalty Tribunal adjudicators seem to find difficulty in grasping (although PATAS adjudicators seem to understand what the law requires them to do).

So, in the world of the 'independent' Manchester based TPT (who receive 60p from every ticket issued), if the meaning of the sign is clear ... then that is good enough ....

Don't laugh ...

Would a ticket be valid at this location?

Or this one?

or ... and if you've had a little drink or two and starting to slur ...

... or feel as though the living dead are being paid from the public purse ...

... so, Mr. Parking Adjudicator ... the meaning of the sign below is quite clear but it ain't a traffic sign as required by Section 64 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 or prescribed by the strict and pedantic diagrams of TSRGD 2002 so check out the words of Justices

Rix, Ouseley and Bennett



Would any reasonable motorist be misled? Of course not but it ain't legal ... and nor is the fine!

Prepare for the maelstrom ... Council officer forged parking documents

I expect that Britain's motorists will be incensed at the decision of Judge Graham Cottle but expect a very bright media spotlight to be shone on the sordid affairs of parking officers in the South West.

As a reminder of what the CPS say ...

CPS Guidance: Misconduct in Public Office

Like perverting the course of justice, misconduct in public office covers a wide range of conduct. It should always be remembered that it is a very serious, indictable only offence carrying a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. A charge of misconduct in public office should be reserved for cases of serious misconduct or deliberate failure to perform a duty which is likely to injure the public interest.

... and then read the words of Judge Cottle.

Then remember that Peter Harry is a VICTIM of wilful misconduct and the criminal actions of someone paid from the public purse. This massive injustice will incense Britain's motorists.

Official forged parking documents
Published on Fri Feb 25
20:10:09 2011
Press Association

A motorist has spoken of his disbelief after an Exeter City Council official escaped with a slap on the wrist after admitting forging documents in a parking dispute.

Geoffrey Urwin, 43, who worked at Exeter City Council as a parking support team leader, doctored a map that was presented to a traffic penalty tribunal after motorist Peter Harry appealed against a ticket he had been given.

Urwin, of Oxford Road, St James, Exeter, pleaded guilty to a charge of wilful misconduct at Exeter Crown Court on Friday and was given an absolute discharge by Judge Graham Cottle, the Recorder of Exeter.

Exeter Crown Court heard the charge related to an incident in June 2009, when Mr Harry, 67, who is part of a group campaigning against illegal issuing of parking tickets, discovered that some of the parking restrictions in Exeter city centre were incorrectly marked and decided to test them.

He found that the parking bays on Southernhay East were marked with a double white transverse line - meaning motorists who did not buy a ticket could not be penalised for parking there. When the retired cheese wholesaler, from Dawlish, Devon, received a penalty notice for not purchasing a ticket, he appealed against the fine.

The court heard that Mr Harry found that the ticket he had been issued with stated that he was parked in Southernhay West, when in fact he had left his car in the adjacent Southernhay East. He also discovered that a map the council had submitted to the tribunal had been doctored and the word 'East' removed - making it look like he was parked in 'Southernhay', the court heard.

After Mr Harry complained to the police, it was discovered that Urwin had realised that the pensioner was right and so the defendant altered parking plans to put the city council in the clear, the court heard.

Before Urwin entered his plea, Judge Cottle spoke of his disbelief that the case had ever reached the crown court in the first place. "The CPS lawyer spent hours on this case? I wonder whether that was money well spent," the judge said.

Speaking outside court, Mr Harry spoke of his disbelief at the comments of the judge. "I cannot understand justice sometimes," he said. "I am absolutely astounded. I am just struck for words. How the judge can give an absolute discharge for a criminal offence, which he never heard anything about, is beyond me."

A spokesman for Exeter City Council said: "Geoff Urwin no longer works for the city council. We have no further comment to make."

Copyright (c) Press Association Ltd. 2011, All Rights Reserved

The death of parking enforcement in Devon? Is it time ...

How much more evidence is needed?

Perhaps the Court Case at Exeter Crown Court next Thursday will be the 'tipping point.'

As many council Parking Managers read this blog it is perhaps time that you reflected on your own indifference and intransigence if you too have been guilty of enforcing restrictions that you knew were unlawful. The mantra often chanted by the 'industry of 'it's only a parking ticket' will perhaps, in light of the MP's expenses scandal, be viewed in a different fashion. 'It was 'only a packet of biscuits' or 'only a few mortgage payments' for a mortgage that had been paid off didn't wash and those guilty of defrauding the public purse are now spending time at Her Majesty's Pleasure.

Now let's look at a Parking Manager who KNEW that there were no lawful parking restrictions, who KNEW that the Traffic Order was invalid AND YET STILL ALLOWED MOTORISTS TO BE DEPRIVED OF THEIR CASH TO ENHANCE THE COUNCIL'S COFFERS AND THE PARKING MANAGER'S STATUS.

Where is the difference. The public is entitled to expect honesty and integrity from those paid from the public purse.

There is a great deal of evidence in many council areas going back many years. There are many motorists and businesses who have suffered greatly. I doubt that many will have sympathy for any crocodile tears shed by those currently looking over their shoulder.

The press are looking for the new 'abuse of public trust' scandal. Perchance it might be greedy councils and their officers who thought that the motorist was easy prey.

Well done to those brave enough to stand up to be counted. Well done to those council officers who were not prepared to be tarred with the same brush as those with their arrogant contempt for the law.

Meanwhile, more news from the pointy bit at the other end of England!

This is Exeter
Wednesday, February 16, 2011,
Signs removed in parking dispute

SIGNS which warned of parking restrictions in Crediton's Market Square have been removed following claims that fines were collected illegally.

Campaigners claim Devon County Council did not have proper authorisation from central Government to enforce parking. County councillor Percy Prowse thinks fines of nearly £6,000 have been paid by motorists who parked in the restricted bays and did not buy a ticket.

The county council said at the beginning of this month it was not currently enforcing parking in the restricted bays, and last Monday some signs were removed.

Tell me this isn't fraud

I met with a certain council officer a couple of years ago and he admitted that the council BCC were aware that there were a great deal of signs and lines across the county which were non-compliant. He was concerned because the consultants who had been brought in were just tasked with identifing those which needed renewing due to maintenance issues and not compliance issues. He admitted that he had spent his weekends checking compliance.

His, and the other reports will be available. I would suggest that someone starts asking the questions. Would also suggest that the council officer I met checks his position and his conscience. A little reminder.

2 Fraud by false representation
(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation—
(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
(2) A representation is false if—
(a) it is untrue or misleading, and
(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.
(3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a
representation as to the state of mind of—
(a) the person making the representation, or
(b) any other person.
(4) A representation may be express or implied.
(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or
anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to
receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

3 Fraud by failing to disclose information
A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) dishonestly fails to disclose to another person information which he is under a
legal duty to disclose, and
(b) intends, by failing to disclose the information—
(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

As the Police begin investigations into criminality across the country and cases start to be prepared for the High Court I assume it is only a matter of time before action is demanded in Marlow. Taking money to which you are not entitled is NOT a civil matter.

Council still ticketing drivers despite signs admission
Thursday 21st January 2010
By James Nadal »

PARKING fines are still being dealt out on a Marlow street – despite a council's admission that signs were wrong.

A secret filming sting by UKIP in November prompted Buckinghamshire County Council to review parking bays in Institute Road.
Although BCC acknowledged the errors motorists are still being given tickets.

Figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the Free Press show there were 36 fines dished out in the first four weeks after the admission was made.

Wycombe District Council, which is responsible for enforcement, said it is “still waiting for conclusive guidance” from BCC about which bays are correctly marked.

But there was confusion after BCC said it was up to WDC, which it had not heard from.

Spokesman Richard Wells said: “As far as we're concerned all the bays are enforceable but it's Wycombe's responsibility to enforce the tickets, it's nothing to do with the county. The ball is in their court.”

An audit has taken place and new signs and lines have been ordered.
UKIP says thousands of motorists are entitled to refunds because various roads across the town have incorrectly marked bays.

£Millions of parking fines unpaid ...

Look at the figures for Leeds and then look at the piece we did with BBC. Government Officers alleging theft and extortion. As more and more evidence is gathered across the country it is only a matter of time before more and more is exposed. My repeated attempts to get a Leeds City Counil parking ticket to adjudication have failed. The Council have cancelled EVERY PCN issued. However, they have not done so for other motorists issued in the same locations.

400,000 parking fines as councils owed millions
Yorkshire Post
11 January 2010
By Jack Blanchard

Traffic warden hot-spots where motorists are more likely to be hit with a parking ticket than anywhere else in the region, are revealed by the Yorkshire Post today.
Figures released under the Freedom of Information act show more than 400,000 parking tickets were given out by council traffic wardens in Yorkshire last year – about one for every five motorists in the region.The fines brought in more than £10m in revenue for Yorkshire's local authorities during the 2008/09 financial year. But it has emerged millions more are still owed to councils in unpaid fines dating back a year or more – including more than £5.4m owed to Leeds City Council alone.

Our investigation reveals Yorkshire's worst street for parking tickets is Clarendon Road in the Woodhouse area of Leeds, where traffic wardens handed out more than 3,000 tickets last year. Close behind was Cookridge Road, also in Leeds, with Sheffield's Ecclesall Road in third place.The car park where motorists are most likely to receive a ticket is the Castle car park by Clifford's Tower in York, where more than 1,800 fines were issued during 2008/09.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Leeds City Council issued by far the most parking tickets in the region. About a third of all parking tickets handed out in Yorkshire are issued in Leeds.The council's team of 84 traffic wardens handed out nearly 350 tickets a day throughout last year, bringing in £3.3m in revenue for the authority. A spokesman said: "Leeds is the largest city in the region and we would expect to issue the most parking tickets, collect the most money and have the most unpaid fines – despite our collection rate being higher than the national average."Parking tickets are only ever issued where motorists have parked outside of restrictions which are quite clearly marked and visible."

Leeds's total of more than 127,000 parking tickets was more than double that of Sheffield, the next-largest city. However, Sheffield oversaw by far the largest year-on-year increase in parking fines last year – 30 per cent more tickets were issued than during the previous year.Sheffield has also introduced the biggest rise in traffic warden numbers. The city council now employs 54 enforcement officers, up from 36 four years ago. Our study also shows rural councils employ very few traffic wardens and hand out very few tickets. This is partly because many smaller authorities have opted not to decriminalise on-street parking offences, leaving ticketing in the hands of police. Councils such as Selby therefore only enforce parking in its own car parks. Selby employs just three part-time parking inspectors and issued 241 tickets last year.

This is the BBC piece on Leeds City Council's parking enforcement regime. You be the judge of its legality. The most powerful quote was not used in the excert above so it is listed below and forms part of the file handed to the Police. The names of the Government officials have been obscured but the Police are aware of their identity.

"... attempted fraud or extortion..." not my words but the words of one Goverment official to another. Hard to believe? The document we managed to get our hands on (along with many others just as damning, is shown below).

A timely reminder of why we are at the High Court ...

It has been a long journey. The investigation began in 2005 and it took over a hundred cancelled tickets before the council 'dared' go to adjudication.

This is what NCP were up to in Sunderland and what was revealed in an award winning BBC Inside Out Documentary. However, the Parking Attendants' behaviour grabbed the headlines. The council officers' behaviour is yet to be revealed.

To get 'decriminalised' powers in 2003 certain Sunderland City Council officers 'misled' the Secretary of State. Decriminalised Parking Enforcement (DPE) allows councils to keep the money issued from parking fines, rather than the money going into a central pot. That is why revenue from parking has hit £1.9 billion per annum.

The number of fines in Sunderland went from 3000 before DPE in 2003 to 30,000 after. More will be revealed in the coming weeks and we will start to publish (in the public interest) all the documents released by the Government Office for the North East and the Department for Transport which will show how many people knew what was going on yet not one Governemnt official was prepared to intervene to prevent motorists being fined illegally.

The following Youtube clips will help to set the scene ...

Council officers create false documents

Wonder how many other council officers have done something similar?
The District Auditor's Report can be read here

Council guilty of bogus report
SEA DEFENCES ... Maribe Drive in June 2004
14 December 2004

SCARBOROUGH Council wrote a bogus report and broke the law over contracts for its sea defence scheme, a shocking new report reveals today.
The Audit Commission has said the council failed to put contracts out to tender, which is against the law, and ignored concerns of its legal staff and external lawyers. The Commission's report says the Government could now decide to withdraw part of its funding for the scheme.

This could mean taxpayers having to foot a £3.1 million bill for preliminary work on the Marine Drive project by the council's consultants, plus fees. The council gave the work to its favoured consultants High Point Rendel – and an officer compiled a bogus report to justify the awarding of the contract. High Point Rendel has now doubled its charges from £1.2 million to £2.4 million. Senior Scarborough Council members today said they are planning an internal investigation.

Scarborough Council has said people "should not assume" that tax payers will have to foot the bill.Its group leaders are likely to recommend a full investigation be carried out during a meeting of the cabinet later this month.

The auditor's report states: "In relation to several coastal protection schemes there is a compelling case for bringing to the attention of the public what I consider to be significant shortcomings in the way the council managed the projects and failed to fully protect the interests of local and national taxpayers. "In my view the adequacy of the appointment process, the specification and the terms agreed with High Point Rendel were not sufficiently robust."

A bogus 'best value evaluation' exercise was prepared by an officer to justify the award of work to High Point Rendel. Procurement regulations were not complied with and in my opinion the appointment was unfair and unlawful. "The terms and conditions of the Government grant have not been met and there is a risk of the council now having to finance the advice and supervision costs. "The failure to enter into a lawful and fair contractual relationship with High Point Rendel has exposed the council to the unnecessary risk of financial loss and poor value for money."

Other schemes awarded to the company and which have been found to have broken procedure are Holbeck to Scalby Mills strategy, Robin Hood's Bay and the Haggerlythe, and Staithes Harbour.

EXPOSED ... Ealing Council knew its junctions were illegal and still banked £1m

How many times did the cock crow?

How many denials have been issued?

More than 30 pieces of silver involved here ...

This will serve as a message to all councils, council officials and councillors out there.

This is not a game. Parking and moving traffic enforcement is not a revenue raiser and you cannot 'disregard' the law when it doesn't suit or when it impacts on the council's cashflow and budget. You cannot take money from the public to which you are not entitled.

It is one thing to be incompetent and get the law wrong. It is a very, very different situation to continue to take money in the full knowledge that such actions are unlawful.

The piece below is the result of the fantastic and determined work by Parking Appeals' Yellow Box expert Jim Douglas.

Taylor apologises over Southall box junction enforcement scandal
26th November 2008
By Alex Hayes

A COUNCILLOR has apologised after it was revealed officials knew six box junctions were unlawful five months before they were removed.

Councillor Phil Taylor gave the “unreserved apology” after it was revealed a council official was told by email in June by the Department for Transport (DfT) the six box junctions were too big.
However, thousands of tickets were handed to drivers until the DfT spoke to the council again at the beginning of November, and enforcement stopped.

The amount taken in fines on four of the boxes in South Road and High Street, Southall over that time could amount to nearly £1m.

Councillor Bassam Mahfouz, the Labour transport spokesman, said: “There is damning evidence to show the council has failed to act after it knew the truth.

“In June they said they did not need permission from the DfT for these junctions, but then went and asked anyway.
“They were trying to deflect blame from themselves and push it onto the DfT. I gave Cllr Taylor the chance in private and in a Full Council meeting to suspend these junctions until the DfT ruling was in, but he declined both times.
“Now it turns out someone at the council knew the entire time. Cllr Taylor has accused me of being inflammatory, but the really inflammatory thing her is people were forced to pay when the council knew they were not legal.”

The row over the junctions blew up after a series of victories for drivers at appeal hearings at the parking adjudicator which started at the end of 2007.

However, at an appeal hearing on October 29, where a bus company was handed £700 in costs, a lawyer from the council was still claiming they had not heard back from the DfT.

Cllr Taylor, who is in charge of parking services, said he had not been shown the June email until today (yesterday).
He said: “We will be refunding everyone ticketed at the affected yellow box junctions since June 20.
“At the beginning of November we immediately suspended the junctions following advice from the Department for Transport.
“I believed that this was the first time the Council had been given this advice or the decision to stop enforcing them would have taken in June.
“I am furious that this email was never brought to my attention and I have ordered an immediate investigation on how this could have happened.”

Parking campaigner Neil Herron called for resignations, and for every penny taken from drivers since the bays started to be enforced to be paid back.

He said: “If this had happened at any private institution heads would roll.
“I think there should be resignations on the table after this.
“The question now should not be who do we repay, but how fast can we repay everyone who has ever been caught on these junctions.
“These people are public servants yet their attitude has been to deny everything and refuse to listen to advice.
“It's not what the public expects.”

Over the last two years more than £3m has been taken from drivers on the six wrongly-marked junctions, with £1.2m being taken since April this year.

Had a parking ticket in Leeds in the last three years?

... then you must watch this.

BBC Look North broke this story exclusively tonight. We had supplied them with papers released under the Freedom of Information Act ... which contained damning revelations about issuing parking tickets illegally, Government Officers even referring to 'fraud or extortion.'

The implications for anyone receiving a ticket and being pursued by a council which does not have legal authority to do so could lead to further criminal complaints and it was considered that the content of the documents was so serious that, in the public interest, a formal complaint had to be made to West Yorkshire Police at 11.30am on Tuesday 22nd April 2008 by Neil Herron.

The BBC Look North programme can be seen here

Anyone who has had a Leeds City Council parking ticket (Penalty Charge Notice) in the last three years please e-mail us at enquiries@parkingappeals.co.uk and we will keep you up to date with developments.

Don't worry if you cannot remember exactly when or where you got it, the important thing is to get in touch as soon as possible.

We intend to pursue matters to ensure that everyone who has been fined unlawfully gets a refund and if there is any more evidence to pass to the Police then we will do so.