The access exception did not cover waiting outside the destination (2026)

Case 2250374557 / 2025-12-19 / Adjudicator Carl Teper

Station Parade

“Whilst the signage indicates an exemption for Vicarage Fields, it does not include waiting outside the gates of Vicarage Fields.”

Carl Teper

The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham alleged a pedestrian-zone contravention at Station Parade. The motorist relied on the signed exception for Vicarage Fields, but the CCTV showed the vehicle parked at two positions outside the gates.

Carl Teper found that the access exception did not extend to that waiting. The activity was also not within the permitted loading arrangements described in the decision. On 19 December 2025, the appeal was refused because the reasons given did not establish a permitted activity.

The adjudicator treated the remaining circumstances as mitigation already considered by the authority, not a legal exemption. This was a finding about the activity and positions recorded in this case. It did not decide that every necessary pause when obtaining access must fall outside an access exception.

Read this alongside the allowed delivery appeal, case 2250313643. There, the documented purpose and the authority's own untimed access wording supported the claim. Here, reliance on the destination name did not establish that the waiting was authorised. A Code 54 appeal needs to connect both the journey and any stop to the conditions of the actual exception.

Source and case reference

Use case reference 2250374557 in the London Tribunals register to find the official decision. This commentary distinguishes the adjudicator's finding from a possible argument in a different case; previous tribunal decisions do not bind another adjudicator.