Havering Council’s Parking Ticket Scandal – Part 3
The third part of the ongoing parking scandal being perpetrated by Havering Council’s Parking Department is described in this article by Havering Resident, Mr. L Jones. The department is accused of continuing to issue illegal, underhand, and incorrect Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs), despite being instructed not to do so. The article describes how the council placed three different notices on top of each other on an out of order play and display machine in Elm Park Avenue, causing confusion for motorists. Mr. Jones argues that the council is breaching the Codes of Practice on Civil Parking Enforcement (CoPoCPE) and wasting taxpayers’ money with their actions. The article concludes by asking how many more motorists will be affected before the council takes action to bring their notices and signs into line.
Mr. Jones continues,
And now readers, as if Parts 1 and Part 2 weren’t bad enough, Part 3 just gets even more preposterous. This ongoing parking scandal being perpetrated by Havering Council’s Parking Department puts them at the TOP of the list of Cowboy Parking Operatives. And believe me, there are some major cowboy private parking firms out there. This parking department is the pinnacle of them all. They just keep on ‘making it up as they go along’, by continuing to issue illegal, underhand, and incorrect PCNs. What adds to the brown icing, (already spread by the whirly thing), on the cake….? Read on.
The following is part of a paragraph, reprinted from Part 1, to allow newer readers to understand the term ‘issued’ in relation to a Penalty Charge Notice, (PCN). In literal terms and deceivingly misused by the parking department, a PCN is issued correctly when it is placed, either on the vehicle, or in the hands of the motorist. It is the contents of the PCN that are wrong, as well as the reasons why they are written up in the first place, before the PCN is issued. Any illegal, underhand and incorrect PCNs should never be written up at all, let alone issued, if the reasons for doing so do not conform to the Codes of Practice on Civil Parking Enforcement, (CoPoCPE). Throughout the remainder of this article, the words, ‘issue, issues, issued and issuing’, refer to the content and reasons for the PCN being wrong, in any tense, past present or future, as well as the placing of the PCN on the vehicle.
On the 31st January 2023, the parking department stuck a 3rd notice on top of the 2nd notice, stuck on top of the 1st notice, stuck on the out of order play and display machine in Elm Park Avenue, (yes, you can see all 3 on the one machine). The first notice, having been in place since the machine was out of order, stated Parking was Free. The second one, placed on 24th January 2023 said, ‘No return within 2 hours’, yet the pole-mounted sign said, ‘No return within 3 hours’. Now, the 3rd notice says, ‘No return within 3 hours’. Confusing for motorists, yes, very easily, but not for the parking department. The first notice, stating parking was free meant exactly that to the motorist, but not to the parking attendants. Having been instructed by the parking department to do so, they were issuing illegal, underhand and incorrect PCNs to motorists, based on the sign at that location. Both the 1st notice and the sign were ambiguous and as such PCNs CANNOT be issued lawfully because they are in breach the CoPoCPE. Now, and finally, both the 3rd notice and the sign comply, so parking for longer than 3 hours, or returning within 3 hours, will result in a legally issued PCN.
The placing of the 2nd and 3rd notices on the same machine proves unequivocally, and beyond all doubt, that the parking department were, and knew they were, wrong to issue PCNs from when the 1st notice was on the machine. It then goes from the sublime to the ridiculous. Bring back the monkeys, sorry, amoebas. The 2nd notice was equally as ambiguous as the 1st notice when it said, ‘No return within 2 hours’, and the sign said, ‘No return within 3 hours’. The 2nd notice would still be there if a colleague hadn’t emailed the Councillor in charge of parking to tell them of this monumental school boy error. So what do we get for this inexcusable and abject failure? When the 3rd notice was stuck on the Pay & Display machine, all the other on-street pay & display machines, (yes, all of them are out of order too), had a plastic bag placed over them and the same notice stuck to them. The only change to the notices being the location name where each of the machines are.
I am seriously beginning to wonder if there is anyone within the parking department with two or more brain cells between them. Even if there were, they would be extremely lonely because there is so much vacant space for them to get lost in. One of the locations has no signs, but the other two locations do. You’re ahead of me again. The notices all say, ‘No return within 3 hours’, but the signs say, ‘No return within 2 hours’. At the time of writing I understand my colleague has not yet written to the Councillor informing them of these indefensible and indefinable errors. Why should the Councillor have to keep pointing out the pathetic failings of the parking department? Then again, it is the perfect opportunity for them to further see just how, with utter incompetence, this department is run, and how it thinks it can continue to operate with such unaccountable impunity. Can I ask the parking department how much money has been wasted by the abysmal actions of those employed to ‘work’ within the department? That’ll be a NO then? I guess that’s what we have no choice but to pay our Council Tax for! How many motorists, confused by the ambiguity of the signs and notices will have had, and will have, an illegal PCN issued because the parking attendant will pick and choose, UNLAWFULLY, which they want to use to issue the illegal PCN? How long will it be before further money is wasted to bring the notices on the other machines in to line with the signs? How much is our Council Tax going up this year?
I fully appreciate the need for parking attendants. They have to keep the traffic moving and are right to penalise errant motorists who really do park illegally and in many instances dangerously. They are not, however, employed to issue illegal PCNs. Again, this parking department, as do so many in other boroughs, knowingly operates with such cowardly abandon.
To take matters further, these disgraceful actions are just being compounded beyond comprehension. The parking attendants, as we all know, are also part of the brainless wonders working within the parking department. What other scam could they possibly come up with? Within 10 meters of the pay & display machine referred to above, these vacuous attendants are now issuing PCNs to vehicles parked on private property. The contravention is for having one or more wheels parked on a public footpath. When the people in the department see this PCN, £1 to a 1d, they won’t check the evidence the attendant is legally obliged to gather and use it to cancel the PCN. Instead, they will just send the Notice to Owner, (NtO), in the post, together with the photograph clearly showing the vehicle to be wholly on private property, and demand with menaces that the motorist pays up. OR ELSE!
At this location, if a vehicle was to have one more wheel on the public footpath, the front of the vehicle would have smashed into the building next to where the vehicle is actually parked. In a simpler explanation, hopefully…. The outer edge of the curb runs into, and parallel with, the outer edge of the brick line of the building. Therefore, unless the wheels are entirely outside the body line of the vehicle, don’t laugh, they are according to the numpties issuing the PCNs, it is impossible for any wheel to be on the footpath. What is the parking department going to say about this then? Cop out No. 4… “We are very sorry for this. An attendant, new to the area, mistakenly identified the space as being public land. We can’t understand though why they believed there were one or more wheels on the footpath when it is abundantly clear from the photograph, there wasn’t”. What a complete and utter load of b******t. They can blame the parking attendant for their error, but choose to entirely ignore the internal failure where the required checks would have spotted the mistake before the NtO was sent out.
Please, can someone at the top of the Administration tell these hopeless individuals to stop digging? They are already so deep that even if they were to stand on one another’s shoulders, they still couldn’t get out. Anyone with an ounce of logical common sense would have had the wherewithal to ensure that a new attendant, who didn’t know the area, would have been accompanied by someone who does. But, as we already know so well, there is NO ONE with that skill set working in the parking department, from the TOP to the BOTTOM! Perhaps, wishful thinking again, can someone from the department explain how the necessary checks that are required to be made before a NtO is sent out, are not actually picking up the fact that there are NO wheels on a public footpath? Another NO then?
Additionally, as if those in the parking department couldn’t make themselves look even more stupid than they already are, the overall and undeniably low IQ now plunges into the negative region. For those of you familiar with the round-about at the junction of Elm Park Avenue and St Nicholas Avenue, there is a Sainsbury’s Local on the corner, (previously, the Elm Park Tavern). A parking attendant, seen by several witnesses, was observed trying to issue PCNs to vehicles that were not displaying valid Disabled Badges whilst parked in the Disabled Bays at that location. It took some minutes for these witnesses to convince the idiot, (apologies to the word idiot), that the land is private and they had no right to issue PCNs. ‘Hey Mister, it’s private land. Can’t you see there’s a big notice stuck on the wall of the shop by the private parking company’. The attendant’s high and mightier than though arrogance further substantiates the contempt the parking department holds for the rule of law. Glad to say, no PCNs were issued, but WTF did they think gave them the right to believe they could? Can’t give a Cop out No.5, they’re so deep now, a loud hailer wouldn’t reach them.
Let me also make it abundantly clear, there are ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSES for any motorist, who does not have a valid Blue Disabled Badge, to park in any Disabled parking bay. Those who do are lower in IQ than the attendants who, quite rightly, will issue them with a legal PCN. Personally speaking, I would increase the penalty tenfold for that offense. The bays are there for a reason so do not try to justify your actions with the cheap and pathetic excuse, ‘I just popped into the shop for two minutes to buy a packet of mints’. If you can move that b****y fast then you are not disabled!!!
And now for something completely different, but still to do with the parking department. Not a scandal at this time, but you can be rest assured, it certainly will be, very, very, very shortly. Some of you will already be aware of the new ‘cash cow’, with more to follow soon, which has been installed at the junction of Hornchurch Road, High Street and Abbs Cross Lane. This is the new automated yellow box junction camera. Forget the verbal diarrhea the parking department is trotting out about it only being used to ensure traffic flows more freely, it is there purely to generate increased revenue. As all motorists who use this junction know, the ONLY reasons why traffic stalls at this location is because of the bus stops on the High Street and the traffic lights at the junction of Billet Lane. During peak traffic, if one or more buses stop at the first bus stop, no traffic can overtake thereby holding up everyone behind. This backs up very quickly to the junction and as a result, straight-through traffic is stalled. The only vehicles that can move freely are those proceeding from the High Road towards Romford or turning left into Abbs Cross Lane. Even that traffic can stall sometimes in peak traffic when the road blocks up further ahead. No change there then. ONLY traffic turning right into Abbs Cross Lane can legally stop in the box junction. However, they obviously have to give way to oncoming traffic before doing so. This traffic also stalls because the right turn filter light isn’t always in operation, so only two, sometimes three, cars can cross the junction, but traffic is stalled or moving freely. Still NO change there then.
Traffic heading from Hornchurch Road across the junction towards Hornchurch, can’t if the way is not clear. Fair enough, traffic is stalled, so again, NO change there then either. The lights change and the traffic turning right from Abbs Cross Lane can’t because the traffic is stalled on the other side of the box junction. Again, NO change there then. The lights change again, and now the traffic heading towards Hornchurch can’t move because the traffic is still stopped ahead. NO b****y change there, AGAIN! But now we have a brand new box junction camera that has only been installed to keep the traffic flowing more freely, so say our inglorious parking department. B******T!
Dare I ask, and an open question to ANYONE within the Council? Is there any SMARTA*** who is prepared to state, in writing via the Havering Daily and the local newspapers, (NO B******t), how this new box junction camera will keep the traffic flowing freely and better than it was before the camera was installed? That’ll be a BIG FAT NO!!! Not because they won’t, it is because they can’t!!! It is purely for generating increased revenue. NO IFS, NO BUTS, OR MAYBES… REVENUE ONLY!!!
The current administration has tried to distance itself from these new camera installs by saying that the ‘scheme’ was instigated about 5 or 6 years ago by the previous administration. So what! ‘You’, as the current administration are still allowing it to go ahead because the box junction camera was been installed after you were elected. If, and when you get the answers to the questions you have asked referencing accident data, will you publish that data in its entirety and be able to justify the new camera/s that have been and will be installed? Another big FAT NO!!! Will you stop the remaining cameras from being installed? NO, because you want the revenue just as much as the last administration did.
And, when you are, as many of us will be, the recipient of a PCN at this box junction, you must write to the Councillor in Charge of Parking and the Head of the Parking Department, (for details, see part 2), and congratulate them on the vast improvement in traffic flow since the camera was installed. Don’t be surprised if you get the following as a reply….,“HA HA, HA HA. We were only kidding about the improved flow of traffic, but thanks for the additional revenue. Yours, Laughing all the way to the Bank”.
Quite simply. If this new administration doesn’t put a stop to the disgusting, disgraceful, dishonest, disingenuous, and unconscionable actions, by a blasé parking department, then they need to be genuinely, and seriously reminded; even after all the hard work they are trying to do to recover from the mess left by the previous administration, the disingenuous and illegal issuing of PCNs will be uppermost in the minds of the voters at the next local elections. A new broom sweeps clean and it is now or never that the opportunity should be seized by the new administration to rid the Council of the festering corruption that is the Havering Council Parking Department.
Support Local Journalism
We at The Havering Daily appreciate your support of quality journalism. Your generous donation, no matter the size, allows us to continue bringing unbiased and informative news to the community. Your contribution helps us maintain our independence and allows us to continue providing high-quality journalism. Thank you for valuing the work we do and for supporting our mission
Thank you
Stay up to date with all of our latest updates and content by following us on our social media accounts!
We have created community pages where we will share our up-to-date stories happening in the area. Add the area closest to where you live.
Romford town centres are swarmed with CEo’s, revenue generating criminals, who penalising business for delivering goods to the other business, while parked in the loading/unloading bays. When you are not seeing 5 minutes in operation, they issue the tickets. Who the hell decided on the 5 minutes window? If sometimes, the load is large and could take 5 journeys to drop 50 boxes? Locking the van between the journeys is more important to secure the load. You cannot always demonstrate loading/unloading activity and you get PCN 99% of the time. My suppliers are writing to me saying it is not cost effective for them to come to the area to deliver goods anymore, resulting loosing good contracts. Who is going to cover that loss? I think someone should check the revenue increase year on year and check how many more Ceo’s they have hired, if they have an ocrease, it means they have ROI per head they hire and the agenda is only to withdraw as much cash as possible in the window of 14 hours. Also operating hours, used to be say 8-6, not they are in Romford town til 9:30pm! South street is the ghost town and they are still issuing PCN’s to my suppliers, who never blocks anyone, or parked in the wrong places, all penalties are issue at the loading bays, to a commercial vehicle! Its just absurd and a criminal activity.