Herron v The Parking Adjudicator ... Order of the Court of Appeal

A watershed moment for Britain's motorists. I am sure that many residents and ratepayers of Sunderland will want to know how much this case has cost to date.

CPZ High Court case ... view from the Gallery

The report below has been forwarded from an interested observer in the public gallery...

"What is intriguing about the whole affair and of course the JR is the route taken by the 'official' side and the dumbing down of the legal requirements.

To have a QC, the Treasury Solicitor and Sunderland Barristers sing from the same hymn sheet that CPZ's must be allowed to have zig-zag lines and crossings in, it is 'common sense' when large areas of restriction apply actually flies in the face of the advice and guidance recently issued by the Secretary of State for Transport.

The Secretary of State made it clear that CPZ;'s were only intended to cover up to 12 streets to avoid drivers being confused and forgetting what the restriction is.

Additionally, a CPZ is only there to reduce the number of signs that are put up in tandem with a single yellow line as all other bays etc effectively stand on their own signing.

So here we had the Crown arguing against their own government guidance and in addition saying that whilst the law is precise in relation to signing, you don't need 'lawful' signs to inform a driver what restriction applies.

The 'official side' were trying to tell the High Court that it isn't signs that give effect to a Traffic Regulation Order yet the legislation makes if very clear it is.

In all the hubbub and guffawing by the Crown they forgot one main thing.

The case against Sunderland revolves around an Adjudicator that erred in law in that the signing was 'extensively' flawed throughout the area and in areas where the Secretary of State had agreed the format of non-prescribed signs, the highway authority ignored that written agreement once it was signed - thereby voiding the special authorisation.

In all of this and as pointed out by Neil's QC, Mr Jones, the 'official side' had agreed the content of Neil's expert witnesses Mr Bentley's report, Mr Sauvaign had agreed Mr Bentley was right but did not agree with the outcome.

Sunderland had agreed the content and findings and had implemented many of the modifications recommended to make certain non-prescribed areas lawful.

In all of this, the official side had dropped the ball and were running with a baton that had effectively nothing to do with the case.

Having the High Court accept Mr Bentley's report and findings unopposed if not universally agreed, it is difficult to see how they could forget what they agreed, but they did.

QC for the Adjudicator became extremely angry and there was effectively a spat because the Court was reminded of the report, its content and the official sides acceptance.

It seemed to me that the official side decided to play rugby on the football pitch during the FA cup final and at the end of the day, they only then noticed that the ball they should be playing with was round!

And in conclusion, it was clear (regardless of the findings or political outcome), the Judge got it! "

Peter H

Press Coverage of CPZ High Court Case ...Daily Express

TRADER'S COURT BATTLE TO RIP APART BRITAIN'S 'UNJUST' PARKING RULES
Daily Express Wednesday May 19,2010
By David Pilditch
A CRUSADING market trader yesterday launched a High Court battle that could “blow apart” Britain’s parking laws.

PARKING: Neil Herron outside the High Court
Neil Herron, 47, is fighting a crucial test case which if he wins could throw into doubt the validity of millions of pounds worth of parking tickets. And it could see drivers applying to have fines overturned.

His lawyers argue that millions of tickets have been issued illegally in towns and cities. Local authorities were accused of unlawfully setting up a system designed to confuse drivers and generate huge incomes.

If successful it would abolish controlled parking zones – known as CPZs – around the UK.Mr Herron’s crusade to challenge the nation’s parking regulations began over a £60 parking fine issued five years ago.

He has spent £100,000 fighting the case, forced to re- mortgage his home in Sunderland and sell his £20,000 Nissan Navara car. But yesterday he insisted his “David and Goliath” battle was the only way to overturn Britain’s draconian parking legislation.

Standing on the steps of London’s Royal Courts of Justice, he said: “Many people have paid a parking ticket that they feel is unjust because of the potential cost of appealing it.“Effectively I have spent £100,000 on a £60 parking ticket but that is what it takes to make a stand on a point of principle.”

Mr Herron, who led the Metric Martyrs campaign to allow shopkeepers to continue to sell goods in pounds and ounces, is contesting 39 penalty notices issued by Sunderland City Council in a CPZ, which he claims is not being operated within the law.

The zones allow authorities to mark roads with single yellow lines without having to put up signs nearby stating when enforcement is in place. Instead, information is given only at the entrances to the zones.

Mr Herron’s barrister, Alun Jones QC, said that Department of Transport documents obtained through Freedom of Information requests supported their arguments that the special zones did not comply with the law because they are too large.

Mr Jones said confusion to motorists and generates a significant amount of income which would be taken away from local authorities if our submissions are right.“If people are not confused they won’t commit so many infringements and you won’t get so many penalties and enforcements.”

He told the hearing regulations state CPZs cease to be valid if they include other markings such as crossings and taxi ranks. Mr Justice Bean responded: “This probably applies to every CPZ in the country doesn’t it? If you’re right the CPZ is effectively abolished.”

The judge later went on to say that if he accepted issues raised, “I may be blowing the whole traffic regime to bits”.

Sunderland City Council insists the CPZ is legal. Stephen Sauvain QC, for the council, said: “There is no suggestion that any motorist was confused or capable of being confused or unsure as to the nature of the parking restrictions.”

He said there would be “severe adverse consequences” for local authorities if Mr Herron won. Mr Justice Bean reserved judgment until a later date.

More foI documents ... this one from Marilyn Waldron DfT

CPZ Documents released under FoI ...

I will make no comment and let the content of these recently acquired documents speak for themselves.
More will follow.
What must be remembered is that there are documents relating to CPZs which the Department for Transport refused to disclose to Lord Lucas under the Freedom of Information Act.

Stephen Sauvain QC, mentioned below, also represented Sunderland City Council at my first parking ticket adjudication. The appeal was against a handful of £60 parking tickets and the Council brought in the country's 'expert' to handle a simple appeal (and then for further advice) at a cost to Sunderland ratepayers now believed to run into six figures.