Abandon All Fear

What nobody else seems to be saying…

[Payback] I Won Against Parking Injustice

Posted by Lex Fear on December 3, 2006

You win some, you lose some. Back in October I blogged about how time constraints forced me to give up and pay the £45 bribe parking fine the police were demanding. I paid as the date they were asking me to appear in court I was due to be on a beach somewhere in Maui.

So you will either be pleased or outraged to know that 2 other outstanding Council Parking Fines (PCNs) were cancelled this month. I have had many hits for people googling “Parking Fine Template Letter” and “Get Off Parking Fine”. Now, let me make it clear there is no such letter and there is no such loopholes in the law. There is however, The Law and the Constitutional Bill of Rights Act 1688 which states:

“That all Grants and Promises of Fines and Forfeitures of particular persons before Conviction are illegal and void.”

This is a Constitutional Act, that means it cannot be overruled by a later by an ‘ordinary’ Act such as the Road Traffic Act 1991. Below is an edited version of the letter I wrote to Coventry City Council. The photos I included showed different angles of the road where the lines were almost entirely worn out. This is not a template letter, however, I hope you may find it useful in constructing your own defence. If you are going to defend against a parking ticket you may want to check out Pepipoo forums.

Coventry City Council Parking Services Unit
PO Box 3943
Coventry
CV1 9AF

Re: Penalty Charge Notices: 00XXXXXX / CV00XXXXXX

Dear Sir/Madam

I am writing to appeal against the Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs), on the grounds that the offence did not occur. The enclosed images are taken of the road where I was parked on these occasions, on the corner of XXXXXX Road, outside of the residents bay, outside the [Landmark] and [Landmark]. Specifically, the restriction is not signed as prescribed by the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 (the TSRGDs). References in this representation to Road Markings refer to that statutory instrument (2002/3113).

Representations:

1) The signing/road marking is non-prescribed, as road markings must conform to the enclosed diagram (Schedule 6 Road Markings). The road markings numbered 1017/1018.1 are continuous lines terminating with T-Bars. Particular attention is drawn to item 4, Permitted Variants: None. The road markings in the restricted area are not continuous, or visible and do not have the required T-Bar endings, therefore varying from the prescribed regulation.

From the photographs, there are no single or double yellow lines apart from some double yellow lines leading from the edge of the entrance to the [Landmark] to the corner before the drain. A closer inspection reveals that there are indeed some light faded patches of yellow on the road where I was parked, directly outside of [Landmark].

Since the road markings are not in conformity with the regulations then there can have been no contravention. This is clear form the court decisions of MacLeod v Hamilton (1965) S.L.T 305 and the PATAS Adjudicator decision in Cooper v Richmond (as reported on 18/07/00).

I also refer to legal authorities:
MacLeod v Hamilton 1965 S.L.T 305
If signs to indicate the effect of a “No Waiting” order have not been erected, or signs have been erected not conforming to s.64 of the RTRA 1984 and TSRGD 2002 (SI 2002/3113), no offence against the “No Waiting” order is committed.

Davies v Heatley [1971] R.T.R 145
Because by s.64 (2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 traffic signs shall be of the size, colour and type prescribed by regulation, if a sign the contravention of which is an offence contrary to s.36 is not as prescribed by the regulation, no offence is committed if the sign is contravened, even if the sign is clearly recognisable to a reasonable man as a sign of that kind.

2) Both of the PCNs issued fail to comply with Section 66(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1991 by not including a date of issue. This renders them void and unenforceable. See MacArthur v Bury (NPAS Circular 04/05) Case Number BC188 NPAS the Adjudicator decided that to comply with Section 66(3) a PCN must have a date. The date of the contravention is not the date of issue even if, in most cases, the PCN will be issued on the same day as the contravention. A real possibility of prejudice arises from potential uncertainty as to when the 28 day and 14 day periods for payment begin and end. Coventry City Councils PCNs do not have a date of issue (see enclosed).

3) Not withstanding the above, the appellant submits that Coventry City Council is attempting to extort money in an unlawful manner.

Please find enclosed an extract of the Bill of Rights Act 1689, enacted and formally entered into Statute following the Declaration of Rights 1689. I draw your attention to the section that I have highlighted:

“That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void”.

This states that a conviction is necessary before a fine can be imposed. As you will be aware, the Bill of Rights is a “constitutional statue” and may not be impliedly repealed. As stated in the ‘Metric Martyrs’ Judgment in the Divisional Court (18th February 2002) by Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Crane (I will paraphrase, but have included a copy of the judgment’s relevant sections 62 and 63):

62.”We should recognise a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: as it were ‘ordinary’ statutes and ‘constitutional statutes.’ The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights. Examples are the … Bill of Rights 1689 …

63. Ordinary statutes may be impliedly repealed. Constitutional statutes may not…”

I am not aware that the Road Traffic Act 1991 makes express reference to repealing the Bill of Rights Act 1689.

Therefore, it would appear that Coventry City Council have no lawful authority to demand money for any alleged offence until or unless it has been dealt with by a Court of Law. Consequently, the forfeit that you have demanded of me is illegal and void. As I am sure you will understand, I cannot knowingly involve myself in an illegal act and accordingly decline payment of this fine.

Yours faithfully,

A Fear
Registered Keeper XXXX XXX

ENCLOSURES
1. Diagram SCHEDULE 6 ROAD MARKINGS
2. Extract of the Bill of Rights Act 1689
3. Extract of Metric Martyrs Judgment, Sections 62 and 63. 4. Photographs taken at time of alleged offence.

I must warn you I am no lawyer and by taking any advice on this blog you are solely responsible for any consequences of actions based upon this information.

That said, I wish you every success in sticking it to ’em.

Advertisements

2 Responses to “[Payback] I Won Against Parking Injustice”

  1. Markimus said

    Nice work!!! I have successfully side stepped countless parking tickets with some interesting twists… not quite as elaborate as this. Nice work.

  2. Alex Fear said

    Thanks Markimus, however I can’t claim full credit for the research. I found Pepipoo a long time ago when I got fed up with speed cameras. They have only recently started a forum topic on parking tickets.

    I simply followed the suggestions, made sure I understood it and then went ahead with it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: