Edinburgh law lecturer launches £15,000 crowdfunding appeal to challenge city council over £60 parking ticket

By on

Raised £180 so far

📸 via Instagram (sowmymouthshut)

A law lecturer locked in a two-year legal battle over a £60 parking ticket plans to take action against the city council that fined him, and hopes the generosity of others will fund the judicial review.

Andrew Newell, a lecturer in law, business and hospitality at Edinburgh College, woke one February morning in 2017, to find the charge slapped on the windscreen of his Vauxhall Vectra. He had allegedly parked on the pavement outside his Pilrig Heights flat in Edinburgh.

The livid law lecturer disputed the charge, arguing he had parked on a different patch of tarmac to the pavement (pictured below). He even submitted photos which, he said, proved the area where he left his car shared the same ‘brick design’ as parking bays — as opposed to the ‘dark tarmac’ pavements. Edinburgh city council upheld the fine, which was subsequently reviewed and stayed by the Parking and Bus Lane Tribunal for Scotland. Newell then forked out the £60 fine.

📸 via Andrew Newell

Two failed appeals later, and after selling the car in question, the determined lecturer now plans to bring a judicial review.

The 2019 Legal Cheek Firms Most List

Newell set up a crowdfunding page a fortnight ago in an attempt to raise £15,000 to cover the costs for the action. So far, the 33-year-old Edinburgh Napier law grad, has only mustered £180.

“With parking in Edinburgh becoming the most expensive in Scotland and the parking enforcement officers issuing Penalty Charge notices with unbridled enthusiasm, I feel it is time to review the appeals procedure to ensure a fair and impartial hearing is provided to the public,” he writes.

Newell, who describes himself as “a very focused, driven, extravert who is determined to achieve the high goals I personally set,” on his LinkedIn, is optimistic about raising the cash required. “I’m sure there are other people in Edinburgh who’ve been in a similar position,” he told Edinburgh Evening News. “Hopefully they’ll contribute.”

A spokesperson for the city council said: “We are satisfied that the parking ticket was issued correctly and two separate independent appeals have fully vindicated this.”

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek's careers events:

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub



“a lecturer in law, business and hospitality”


Wee Jock McTavish LLB (Edinburgh)

Well, he cannae spell “extrovert” so watch this space for his pleadings being struck oot, the noo!



15k for a £60 ticket? Just pay the fine…



Did you read the article?

He paid the fine already. He wants the money to fund a judicial review, for clarity over the law.

I doubt he’ll get enough donations though…



He eventually did cough up, but is a busybody who is messing with the judicial review system.



The man has an LLB from Napier. Says it all!


🧸 🍼

Aye, should be called “Nappybum University” – he’s spat his dummy oot because he couldn’t put his toy car where he wanted to and couldn’t take “no” for an answer!



My parents used to threaten me with Napier University, although “Nappy” University in my mother’s strong forgein accent. They said it was where I’d end up if I flunked in school.



What a middle class life you must have led .



Greenburg Glusker, give this man a job!



Why? I thought GG only employed top, top, top of the tops peeps. From the comments about “Nappybum” uni, it and he, are perhaps not the top, top, top of the pops…



Wouldn’t it have been better to have not paid up and forced the council to issue a simple procedure claim form. He could have then defended it with perhaps a couple of hundred pounds at risk at the Edinburgh Sheriff Court?



Exactly, or tak them to small claims instead of JR.



Is it me, or does the narrative and photograph above not explain where he actually parked ?



No, it’s just you.


Parking bays to the right of the flower box on the brickwork.

He’s parked on the brickwork to the left of the flower box, adjacent to the yellow lines. He wants to argue that the brickwork indicates that the area is not part of the highway, which is tarmac.



What exactly will he be JR’ing? What’s the breach or error?


Mr. Procedural Jr.

He’s bringing judicial review on the basis of principles of procedural fairness (formerly referred to as ‘natural justice’), arguing that the administrative decision-maker is obliged to provide an opportunity to make representations. Based on the wording of the crowdfunding appeal, it sounds like he’s looking for an oral hearing, which he has zero chance of getting. If he’s merely looking for a right to make written representations, it sounds like this is already provided by the internal appeals process.



Thanks for your reply.



How would the JR cost £15k for a £60 parking ticket?



What is the time limits for that matter? By the time he got it crowdfunded, won’t he be out of time for JR?


A non-knee mouse

Christ why are lecturers so up themselves?


Christ himself

Sorry, I’m not sure.



Since Legal Cheek have once again been forced to close comments on the Jolyon – I’m working class, really I am – Maugham QC threatened to sue them:

Who else thinks that Jolyon Maugham QC is an irritating, pretentious, upper class, hypocritical, virtue-signalling twit?



He should have been given a PCO, and he’s right about the implications of the decision not to give him one.



I agree except that he is a twat rather than twit.



“He is the son of David Benedictus, although they did not meet until Maugham was 17, and he was brought up by his mother, Lynne Joyce Maugham, and his adopted father Alan Barker in New Zealand.[1][4][5]”

Given this is his wikipedia entry (presumably self written) I’m not sure how he can even begin to talk about himself as working class (if he does).



Can I just ask who has been threatening LC with litigation over the comments?

All the funny stuff is deleted without trace and then the comments close very quickly leaving only bland comments.

Watch the site traffic go 👇🏽



A lot of these ombudsman type appeals processes end up becoming captive to the industry they’re supposed to adjudicate on (the Financial Ombudsman is well known for being biased in favour of the big financial companies for example), so it does ring true what he says on his crowdfunding page about the person hearing the appeal saying he agrees with him but refusing to find against the council, its the type of thing which could have happened. He’s right to go to court to try to get it looked at independently, just not sure JR is the correct route.



Another morning, another power w*nk



While I appreciate that this man is a lecturer of (some) law who works in Edinburgh, the headline “Edinburgh Law Lecturer” is a bit misleading given he lectures a bit of law on some business and hospitality course at a college.


Comments are closed.

Related Stories