A period of up to 15 minutes should be set aside to deal with questions to the Committee from members of the public.
Details of the questions should be notified to the Assistant Chief Executive at least three working days prior to the meeting. Further information and a copy of the procedure are available from Member Services (Exeter 265115) and also on the Council’s web site http://www.exeter.gov.uk/scrutinyquestions
Minutes:
Councillor Prowse declared a personal interest as he is known to Mr Harry.
In accordance with Standing Order 19, two members of the public submitted questions on the civil parking enforcement process operating in the city, to which the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Development and Transport replied. Copies of the questions were circulated to Members and made available at the meeting.
The questions and a summary of the replies (in italics) are set out below.
(1) In accordance with Standing Order 19, Mr Harry addressed the Scrutiny Committee and asked the following question:-
“I recently received a ticket on street in your City for an alleged parking offence. Can the Chairman of your Committee for which this subject is responsible, assure me that the Council has fully complied with its statutory duty, in notifying me of my rights to make representations against a Penalty Charge Notice”.
Councillor Sutton (Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Development and Transport) responded to the question as follows:-
The information set out in the Penalty Charge Notice clearly conveys to the reasonable motorist how to make representations. If any motorist believes otherwise, then the avenue of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal is of course open to them.
(2) In accordance with Standing Order 19, Mr Pascoe addressed the Scrutiny Committee and asked the following question:-
Is the Committee able to advise me what expertise was applied to the first and second stage challenges on the penalty tickets issued to drivers parked at what appeared to be a lay-by in Pinn Lane, Pinhoe and also other areas of the City, when tickets have been challenged as to their validity? The reason for my question relates to my disappointment at the level of response I received at both stage one and two of the appeal process employed by the City/County Council. My penalty charge was subsequently overturned following taking it to the third stage (Independent Traffic Penalty Tribunal) however none of my concerns were addressed until this point.
Mr Pascoe made an additional comment stating that he did not feel that he had received a valued response when, in the first instance, he had been sent a standard letter seeking the necessary payment.
Councillor Sutton (Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Development and Transport) responded to the question as follows:-
Mr Pascoe’s Penalty Charge Notice was dealt with by an experienced team who have been dealing with PCN appeals since the start of the civil parking enforcement system in May 2008. All the team have had relevant training and all appeals are dealt with in accordance with set guidance to local authorities by the Department for Transport. This guidance also makes it very clear that Councillors should not, under any circumstances, play a part in deciding the outcome of individual appeals. Councillor Sutton added that the appeal process is an impartial one.
Mr Pascoe’s appeal was determined on the basis of the facts presented and the views of the highway authority were sought. On this occasion, the Traffic Penalty Tribunal took a different view to that held by City and County Council officers. That does not mean the City Council’s team did not fully and fairly consider all the relevant facts or lack expertise; it simply demonstrates the system worked as it should.
CouncillorMrs Thompson sought further clarification on behalf of the questioner relating to the expertise of the team in terms of the qualifications held by the staff.
Councillor Sutton replied that she did not know the individual qualifications of the staff. She stated that she understood that all staff had the relevant expertise and training.
Mr Pascoe asked a supplementary question as he felt that, in relation to the expertise and also with regard to stages one and two of the appeal process, the points he had raised had not been sufficiently addressed. The appeal process is a lengthy process, possibly taking up to four months to see an appeal overturned, and so he sought clarification of the appeal process when at the third stage. He felt members of the public were having their time wasted by having tickets placed on their vehicles, particularly in his circumstance when he felt he had parked lawfully.
Councillor Sutton reiterated the three stage appeal process. She acknowledged that Mr Pascoe went through stages one, two and three and the process had worked as it should.