Find Key Cases

This case highlights that if a motorist makes a clean air zone payment to an unofficial website, they remain responsible to the charging authority for the penalty and charge. While in this case the motorist did not intend to avoid the charge, the circumstances described amount to mitigation that the adjudicator does not have the power to take into account. The authority is entitled to enforce the full penalty amount.

This case clarifies that a clean air zone charge applies from midnight to midnight. A vehicle remaining in a zone after 11.59pm becomes liable for the following day’s charge, even if the vehicle only remains in the zone for a limited period after midnight, and only due to heavy traffic. The circumstances described in this and such a case do not provide a ground of appeal under the statutory fixed penalty scheme. They amount to mitigation that the adjudicator does not have the power to consider.

This case clarifies that a motorist seeking to take advantage of the statutory discount (50%) period must make a payment within 14 days of service of the penalty charge notice, and that making representations to the authority within the initial 14-day discount period does not cause an extension of that discount to arise.

The charging authority is not obliged to extend the discount or respond to the representations within the 14-day period. The Notice of Rejection of Representations must be issued within 56 days of receiving formal representations. By this time the motorist’s option of making a reduced payment will have expired.

This case clarifies that a motorist is expected to be aware of the prohibition against parking adjacent to a dropped footway (which applies at all times), even without the presence of signs or road markings. The dropped footway prohibition also applies when the carriageway has been raised to meet the footway.

Also made clear is that the discount period for payment of a parking PCN applies for 14 days, though the council has a discretion to extend the discount period.

This case clarifies that pay and display includes the virtual display of payment. It is the responsibility of the motorist to enter and select the correct location when using a pay-by-phone or parking mobile application, and an adjudicator cannot consider mitigation.