Ceci n'est pas une dropped kerb

A gentleman who lives in the same street as me told me about two stretches of pavement on Preston Road approximately 20 and 30 metres away from where I received a fine for parking adjacent to a dropped kerb. I had not been able to clearly see these stretches of pavement on my expedition to find dropped kerbs disguised as a badly repaired stretch of pavement, as they had cars parked in front of them. Cars that I am  confident did not received tickets for parking adjacent to them because this sad man went up and down Preston Road on Sunday to see if any other tickets had been issued. They hadn't

The first stretch of pavement seems to my untrained eye to be a dropped kerb. Granted it doesn't drop all the way to the road but it does seem to feature a noticeable dropping of the kerb stone.

The second stretch of pavement seems to conclusively be a dropped kerb. On this stretch of pavement the kerb stones have been lowered right down to road level.

So where could a man turn for help in trying to ascertain what is or isn't a dropped kerb and help in avoiding PCNs for parking adjacent to them? Why our good old friends North Tyneside Council's website.

 I looked at the section of their website that gives help and advice to avoid getting a PCN. No mention of dropped kerbs there at all whatsoever let alone any advice on what NTC consider is or isn't a dropped kerb.

So I looked at the section of their website about dropped kerbs. This tells me that "A dropped kerb involves kerb stones being lowered and the pavement being strengthened and made into a ramp. This helps people with pushchairs or in wheelchairs to access the road from the pavement more easily. Dropped kerbs also provide vehicle access to private residences from the road."

So there you have it. NTC's own words about what does and doesn't constitute a dropped kerb. So using this method I should be easily able to identify what is a dropped kerb and what is a badly repaired stretch of pavement disguised as a dropped kerb.

Nope I'm still baffled and will be even more baffled as the concrete in the first photo begins to age. I'm looking forward to having NTC explain to me and a magistrate, the clear differences between these two stretches of badly repaired pavement less than 20 metres apart.

Po-faced council responds

As many predicted the dullard automatons at North Tyneside Council ignored my request for further communication to be made using carrier pigeon and instead sent the following response by Royal Mail. Apologies for the blurred images, just pretend that I have deliberately induced motion blur in an attempt to convey my shaking fury at the bland reply.

NTC kindly include their own photographic proof of my parking offence, but even after taking off my rose-tinted and incredibly biased glasses, I'd say the photos back up my original claim that the dropped kerb looks like a badly repaired pavement.

Dear North Tyneside Council, I will be challenging your fine in the magistrates court but I am baffled why I have to wait 28 days for a needless letter to be sent to the van owner in order to instigate a formal challenge. I would have thought that a council that was willing to issue tickets at 08:38 on a Sunday morning would be interested in a swift resolution to this matter.

And so we wait...

The postman has been and gone with no conventional reply arriving from NTC this morning. I am now off working in bonny Scotland for a couple of days working for Detroit Social Club.

I have left my lovely lady on high pigeon alert and given her strict instructions that if a bird with a message does arrive that she should feed, water and house the bird pending my return.




Number of carrier pigeons with return correspondence from North Tyneside Council = 0 

There's only one rubbish council!

The hits just keep on coming and by the time I have posted this there will have been more than 2000 unique page views since I started this blog yesterday.

Any football fans amongst you will be interested in the current page view league table that I have created using the number of page views sourced from football club messageboards


POSITION             NUMBER OF PAGE VIEWS

Barnsley FC             36
Sunderland FC         34





So as it stands Barnsley are in with their first chance of winning something since the FA Cup in 1912. Go on you Tykes! My beloved Newcastle are nowhere to be seen. Why must they continue to hurt me?

Wow

Blimey just shy of 1000 page hits in less than a day, I am stunned by how quickly this has spread. Thanks to Paul Smith over at the brilliant Bitter Wallet for highlighting my quest, glad it gave you and a few others a smile.

The council should have received the letter this morning and whilst I'd like to think that it may have brightened someone's otherwise dreary working day, I fear that my friend Ben Hall may be correct when he says they have a "special in tray" for these kinds of correspondence.

Number of raised eyebrows after checking the number of page hits = 2

Number of carrier pigeons with return correspondence from North Tyneside Council = 0

My letter challenging the parking ticket

Ross Lewis

North Shields

Your Ref PCN CHARGE NH0XXXXXX

Sirs,

I refer to the above PCN issued to me this morning.  I was the hirer of this vehicle and therefore responsible for the above PCN being issued.

I parked the vehicle at approximately 4:30am this morning using my now tried and tested technique of checking the road and its proximity for any markings and or signage that would prohibit legal parking. I was not aware that North Tyneside Council now also expects me to use my hitherto unknown psychic powers to ascertain if I am committing a parking offence.

I had parked the vehicle next to what at a glance in the dark light of 4:30am, appeared to be a badly repaired stretch of pavement. As you can tell from my address above, I am a resident of North Shields, so a badly repaired stretch of pavement is something that I encounter on a daily basis and as such, this particular stretch of pavement gave me no cause for parking concern. Having received the PCN I was shocked to read that I was guilty of “parking in a special enforcement area adjacent to a dropped kerb”. I immediately moved my van expecting to see the clear markings prohibiting parking, that my sleep deprived body and mind had failed to spot earlier. But no such markings were revealed, so I looked around to try and spot the signs that would give clear parking guidance but to my horror I could not locate any. I looked again at the stretch of road and pavement, surely in the cold light of day I would immediately see that this was a special section of pavement, with its inherent parking prohibition clear to anyone just by looking at it? But no, from the angle that I had approached when parking, even in daylight it looked like a badly repaired stretch of pavement.

Fair enough I thought. In principle I have no problem with my local council deciding to fine me for parking adjacent to a dropped kerb, that they have disguised as a badly repaired stretch of pavement as long as they apply the rule fairly. With this in mind I made a packed lunch of cheese and pickle sandwiches and a flask of weak lemon drink and set off on a quest to find other dropped kerbs that have been randomly disguised as badly repaired stretches of pavement. The first dropped kerb I came to was outside a private residence and in my initial excitement I made the foolish error of thinking I had immediately found what I was looking for. The same tell tale signs were there, slapdash concreting alongside paving slabs. But just as I was about to take a celebratory sip of weak lemon drink, I spotted from the corner of my eye a white line on the road that would alert a vehicle driver that parking there would be an offence according to current traffic management laws, bylaws and regulations.

So I set off once more and stopped at the next dropped down kerb I encountered. This one was easy to rule out even for a novice spotter of dropped down kerbs disguised as a badly repaired stretch of pavement such as myself. The bold yellow writing spelling out SCHOOL and the insouciant artisan flourishes of obtuse concrete angling leading into the roadside. When the two were combined this was a stretch of pavement that simply screamed dropped down kerb and only a fool could park there and not expect to receive a PCN.

By now I was hungry so I ate my sandwiches and drank thirstily from my flask of weak lemon drink. For many more hours I walked the streets of North Shields trying to find a matching dropped kerb that had been randomly disguised as a badly repaired stretch of pavement but to no avail. I returned home a broken man resigned to the fact that for some unknown reason my local authority had chosen a dropped kerb close to my home to be used as a pioneering revenue generator by disguising it as a badly repaired stretch of pavement and fining unwitting drivers £75 a time for parking adjacent to it.

After another glass of weak lemon drink I did some research into the fining of motorists for parking adjacent to dropped down kerbs, especially dropped down kerbs with no markings. The TMA 2004 does not use the LLA&TfL 2003 act as an empowering act and makes no reference to the act at all. Therefore the contravention of parking adjacent to a dropped footway is controlled by section 86 of the TMA 2004. Section 86 is imposed as if by order under section 6 of the RTRA 1984. Therefore, the parking restriction is required to be signed, because the TMA 2004 unlike the LLA&TfL Act 2003 does not contain a clause negating the need for a traffic sign as is required by reg 18(1) of the Traffic Order Procedures 1996. If you disagree with this could you please explain your reasons fully as required and guided by the Secretary of States Statutory Guidance.

Apropos of nothing I have created a personal law about correspondence relating to PCNs. I haven’t told you about this law and nor have I made available any indicators that this law is in place but I am sure that you will gladly obey this law regardless. With that in mind I must insist that your reply to this letter must be sent by carrier pigeon. Unfortunately I will have to apply a charge of £75 for the feeding, watering and return of your pigeon, but I am happy for this to be offset against the £75 fine you have issued.

Yours sincerely

Ross Lewis

Posting the letter

After finally getting some ink for my ancient printer. The letter was posted at 15:38 today.


Now we wait.