A Tale of Two Barnets

Followers of our campaign may be interested in a new documentary film which examines aspects of life in Barnet and the concerns of its residents.  A Tale of Two Barnets, made by documentary film maker Charles Honderick, receives its premier at the Phoenix Cinema in East Finchley at 6pm on Monday 19 March. Tickets are we understand just £1 . The film itself will be shown at 7pm following a press briefing.

One of the issues that Charles Honderick looks at is parking in the borough, both the outrageous CPZ charges and the cost and (for many) inconvenience of the new Pay by Phone system.  The 30 minute film includes an interview with David Attfield who is leading the challenge to overturn the CPZ charges.

You can read more about the film (and some of the praise that it's receiving) by clicking the link below. Interest in the film is high but we understand that tickets should be available for the premier on the night on a first come, first served basis. Other screenings are also planned (again, see the website below for details).

If you can't make this, don't worry as a special fundraising screening for Barnet CPZ Action is also being planned for the summer.
 
http://ataleoftwobarnets.yolasite.com/

Legal challenge continues as appeal launched

An appeal has been lodged against last month’s ruling rejecting our legal action to overturn Barnet’s CPZ charges.  The aim of the appeal is to obtain an order from the Court  of Appeal reinstating David Attfield's legal challenge so that it can be heard at a full trial.

Why have we decided to bring an appeal?

First, because our legal advisers remain convinced of the strength of our legal case, albeit we failed to convey this at last month’s hearing.  The confidence of the legal representatives is not just hollow words:  They will be acting in the appeal on a “no win, no fee” basis.

There is also an important principal at stake  -  whether a small group of residents should be made to subsidise services for the whole borough just by virtue of the type of area in which they live.  Barnet’s stance that this is lawful is at odds with the position of other boroughs; organisations like the RAC and the AA; and even the Department for Transport.  If we stop now, Barnet will have succeeded in re-writing the rule book.   There would be nothing to stop Barnet hiking CPZ charges again.

   

By appealing, we stand to gain much more than we lose.  First, we retain the prospect that the CPZ charges will be revoked and money refunded by Barnet.   If we ultimately win, we should also be able to return much of money that has been generously  donated.  

There is also the fact that, as things stand, there is little to stop further hikes in CPZ charges in the future.   

What does this mean?

If we are to succeed, we have a long road ahead of us. 

There is no automatic right to appeal to the Court of Appeal.  We will only be granted an appeal hearing if an appeal judge recognises on reviewing the case that we have a real prospect of success.

If we are granted an appeal hearing, then that would be a very positive sign that a senior judge recognises that something may have gone wrong at last month’s hearing. 

We have a tough fight ahead and, unfortunately, an appeal increases the financial risk that David faces.  More donations will be sought to help meet this but, for the moment, we are not actively seeking money until we can show to our supporters that the legal action is getting back on track.

In the meantime, please continue to support our campaign. Tell your local councillors and MP what you think of Barnet's CPZ charges.  And please continue to spread the word about the charges and how unfair they are.   Many permits will be coming up for renewal and supplies of visitor vouchers will be replenished over the coming weeks.  It is vital that Barnet understand that opposition to these unfair charges is not diminishing.

High Court reject legal challenge

In a bitter blow today, a High Court Judge rejected our application to overturn Barnet's CPZ charges.

The decision is as surprising as it is disappointing.  We had genuinely expected the Judge to find that we had raised a serious case that needed to be decided at a full trial.

The case in the event turned on a very narrow question:  whether a Council can set resident's parking charges to raise revenue for things that have nothing to do with resident's parking (paying for travel passes for the elderly and fixing potholes in the case of Barnet).

We relied on two High Court cases which we say make it clear that parking charges need to address a parking related need (the cost of running a CPZ and the need in some areas to dampen demand might be lawful reasons to increase charges).

This is what we firmly believe;
It is what David Attfield's solicitors firmly believe;
It is what David's QC firmly believes;
It is what the RAC Foundation firmly believes;
It is even what Westminster Council firmly believed when they proposed introducing night time parking charges: they argued that the charges were needed to dampen demand,  not to raise revenue to fix potholes.

We need to think carefully about our next steps.  Legally, there is merit in taking the question of whether CPZ residents should pay for travel passes and potholes to the Court of Appeal.  But we must assess what the cost of this would be and whether we have the necessary support.  We will keep you posted.

We leave you with some food for thought:  If Barnet and the Judge are correct that parking charges can always be used to pay for a Council's transport spending,  then there is scope for Barnet to double or even treble the current charges.  Barnet makes about £5 million profit a year from parking but spends around £15m on transport (mainly paying for bus passes).  How much more of the burden of paying for travel passes and potholes will Barnet try to offload onto CPZ residents?