City U-turn as parking tickets reworded after legal threat
The Scotsman
ALAN RODEN TRANSPORT REPORTER
THE city council has altered the wording on its parking tickets in the wake of a planned court action by campaigners who claim the tickets are not valid.
Barrie Segal, a leading campaigner who has successfully overturned parking fines in four London boroughs, claimed earlier this year fines being issued in Edinburgh were invalid because of a missing detail.
He is still hoping to mount a test case to prove this, which could open the floodgates for thousands of penalties being cancelled or refunded.
Despite insisting just two months ago that the wording on its tickets complied with legislation, city chiefs have now taken steps to alter the tickets - and block any future challenges. They claimed today the decision was made following the Evening News story two months ago highlighting Mr Segal's findings, which they fear might have given rise to "copy-cat" appeals.
The Road Traffic Act 1991 says parking tickets must carry the date the offence was committed and the date the fine was issued, even if - as tends to be the norm - they fall on the same day.
The tickets in the four London boroughs - as well as Bury and Sunderland - have been overturned because they did not carry the "date of issue".
Until recently there was no specific reference to this date on Edinburgh parking tickets, but it has now been added.
Mr Segal, who runs the appealnow.com website, said:
"I know Edinburgh have changed their parking tickets since I raised the issue, and I think it's now quite clear they were wrong in the first place."
One city resident is now determined to test the council's resolve when it comes to parking fine appeals. Suzanne Robertson, a 25-year-old advertising executive from Morningside, said she was taking her stance to "fight for the rights of motorists".
She has appealed five penalty notices to the council on the grounds that they were invalid.
So far, the city council has cancelled two of the tickets, preventing Ms Robertson - who is being helped by Mr Segal - from taking her challenge to an independent parking adjudicator.
"They didn't give a reason for successfully granting my appeal, which was a bit strange, so they must have realised they were invalid," she said.
"If they had admitted to the problem at this stage, it would have opened the floodgates."
If a test case at the Scottish Parking Appeals Service is successful, there is no definite guarantee all other outstanding tickets will be cancelled - but there have been successful follow-up appeals in London.
However, motorists who have already paid parking fines will not be able to get their money back, because they have accepted breaking the regulations.
Andrew Holmes, director of city development, said today: "We believe the date on our parking tickets was clear to motorists and it was never found to be non-compliant.
"We changed our tickets as we anticipated a rash of copy-cat cases; these failed to materialise but they could have cost taxpayers in staff time and money for legal fees."
Last updated: 04-Aug-06 11:58 BST
ALAN RODEN TRANSPORT REPORTER
THE city council has altered the wording on its parking tickets in the wake of a planned court action by campaigners who claim the tickets are not valid.
Barrie Segal, a leading campaigner who has successfully overturned parking fines in four London boroughs, claimed earlier this year fines being issued in Edinburgh were invalid because of a missing detail.
He is still hoping to mount a test case to prove this, which could open the floodgates for thousands of penalties being cancelled or refunded.
Despite insisting just two months ago that the wording on its tickets complied with legislation, city chiefs have now taken steps to alter the tickets - and block any future challenges. They claimed today the decision was made following the Evening News story two months ago highlighting Mr Segal's findings, which they fear might have given rise to "copy-cat" appeals.
The Road Traffic Act 1991 says parking tickets must carry the date the offence was committed and the date the fine was issued, even if - as tends to be the norm - they fall on the same day.
The tickets in the four London boroughs - as well as Bury and Sunderland - have been overturned because they did not carry the "date of issue".
Until recently there was no specific reference to this date on Edinburgh parking tickets, but it has now been added.
Mr Segal, who runs the appealnow.com website, said:
"I know Edinburgh have changed their parking tickets since I raised the issue, and I think it's now quite clear they were wrong in the first place."
One city resident is now determined to test the council's resolve when it comes to parking fine appeals. Suzanne Robertson, a 25-year-old advertising executive from Morningside, said she was taking her stance to "fight for the rights of motorists".
She has appealed five penalty notices to the council on the grounds that they were invalid.
So far, the city council has cancelled two of the tickets, preventing Ms Robertson - who is being helped by Mr Segal - from taking her challenge to an independent parking adjudicator.
"They didn't give a reason for successfully granting my appeal, which was a bit strange, so they must have realised they were invalid," she said.
"If they had admitted to the problem at this stage, it would have opened the floodgates."
If a test case at the Scottish Parking Appeals Service is successful, there is no definite guarantee all other outstanding tickets will be cancelled - but there have been successful follow-up appeals in London.
However, motorists who have already paid parking fines will not be able to get their money back, because they have accepted breaking the regulations.
Andrew Holmes, director of city development, said today: "We believe the date on our parking tickets was clear to motorists and it was never found to be non-compliant.
"We changed our tickets as we anticipated a rash of copy-cat cases; these failed to materialise but they could have cost taxpayers in staff time and money for legal fees."
Last updated: 04-Aug-06 11:58 BST
posted by Neil Herron at 5:48 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home