London Borough of Hackney – Parked resident/shared use without a valid permit

SITUATION

The permit situation in this case was around different Zones.

The permits within the Zones are e-permits. So no physical paper permits have to be displayed, it was recognised via vehicle number plate recognition.

The appellants permit was for Zone F, but also covers the use for other Zones.

The appellant parked in Zone D, which she was entitled to do so with the permit they had. However, within Zone D the requirement was to display a clock. The appellant did not.


The Enforcement Authority (EA) issued a PCN, because no clock was displayed. They argued that it is stated within the Terms and Conditions. A copy of that, was provided as evidence.

However, the appellant claimed they were not made aware of this at the time of applying and receiving the e-permit.


WHY WAS IT ALLOWED?

The Adjudicator agreed that a clock should have been on display since, the Zone the appellant parked in was outside their Zone.

However, the issue was whether the appellant had been made aware of that requirement (of displaying a clock).

The appellant provided evidence that they attend a Town Hall to apply for the permit and were not told to display a clock. They also provided evidence of an email from EA to back this up further.

The EA did not provide any evidence that the Terms and Conditions were sent to the appellant.

Therefore, the adjudicator accepted the appellants evidence that the Terms and Conditions of the permit had not been provided to them. There was no evidence to disprove this.

Therefore, having accepted that the appellant was not made aware of the requirement to displaying a clock by the EA, the appeal was allowed.