In this week (sorry for the delay, I have been rather busy) of 22 September 14 there were 1018 new Appeals logged at PATAS and Barnet are still accounting for a disproportionately high percentage of them at 6% (59) when they should only be 4% based upon them issuing 4% of London's PCN. More people fight back in Barnet than most places. Well done.
There were 56 Barnet cases decided upon of which 38 (68%) were won. It is well worth your time to argue.
One case that was lost is worth mentioning as subtle wordings makes all the difference.
Some shops sell "parking vouchers" for 30 minutes, an hour or 2 hours of parking. These can only be used in pay-to-park bays. The motorist parked in a residents bay for which they should have used a "Visitor voucher" as they are described on the council website.
That distinction would be subtle enough but what if the printed voucher is actual headed "Visitor Parking Voucher"? - with the word "Visitor" having been made smaller since the last reprint,
then the confusion would be understandable and you can see why no-one would turn the vouchers over to read the small print.
Three cases that were won by the motorist.
1. The council (NSL) refused to cancel a PCN for a cloned car as the owner (for some unknown reason) had not reported the cloning to the police. there is no need. If you drive a red Ford and the cloned vehicle is a yellow Vauxhall then the fact that the car isn't yours is evident. This motorist came from West Midlands to PATAS at Islington so was clearly serious.
2. A vehicle was driven away before the issue of a PCN. This can be lead to a postal ticket but not if the photos were at 12:14 and the PCN at 12:18. You would expect the PCN to be first and then the photos. Too odd to stand.
3. A suspension sign was not on the same post as the time plate. How would you see it otherwise?
Keep those Appeals coming. Can we get them up even higher?