Author Topic: 1 minute over in Loading Bay  (Read 1055 times)

0 Members and 22 Guests are viewing this topic.

1 minute over in Loading Bay
« on: »
Hello.
Parked my van in a loading bar 10am-4pm for around 12 minutes at 3.50pm to make a delivery.
By 4.01pm was issued a PCN for being in loading bay.
I thought 1 minute was a bit over zealous. Any chance of getting this cancelled.
Just was waiting for delivery note to be signed.

Surly for this to issued at 4.01pm the CEO would have started writing the PCN before 4pm

Thank you.

https://www.instantstreetview.com/@51.514997,-0.163152,177.52h,-6.56p,1z,zOJoDQfvRFsfo6NtmK79Hg

https://www.flickr.com/photos/198914587@N07/53104530116/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/198914587@N07/53105034268/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/198914587@N07/53104941205/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/198914587@N07/53104941195/in/dateposted-public/

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Re: 1 minute over in Loading Bay
« Reply #1 on: »
The first question is, does the 10 minute grace period apply to your vehicle which over-ran the end of the parking period.

The problem is that the 10 minute rule applies to vehicles that have overrun their time in a designated parking place. However at 4pm, does the bay cease to be a "designated parking place". Some adjudicators will say the 10 minutes applies but some not. I have to say, that if the bay times are when it is a designated parking place, then ergo, it follows that it isn't outside those times. Others will disagree with me.

Anyway, have a read of this: -
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/561/regulation/2/made

The other aspect is the sheer money-grubbing trivialty of the PCN. If it were me, I'd be taking them all the way on this one.

Re: 1 minute over in Loading Bay
« Reply #2 on: »
Given the ruling on the use of CCTV it is arguable that this is not a red route at all but a designated bay so the GP should apply and it is also the wrong contravention  but not simple by any means i would like to see CP's view on this

Re: 1 minute over in Loading Bay
« Reply #3 on: »
There are two possibilities for the PCN.
On is that the CEO was quick off the mark and didn't allow any grace period....
Second and IMO more likely is that the CEO saw no evidence of loading so issued a PCN.

As you were making a delivery, you should be able to provide proof of that.
I would deal with it in that respect to start with, dear sirs, I was loading, here's some proof.
Then see what comes back.

Re: 1 minute over in Loading Bay
« Reply #4 on: »
There are two possibilities for the PCN.
On is that the CEO was quick off the mark and didn't allow any grace period....
Second and IMO more likely is that the CEO saw no evidence of loading so issued a PCN.

As you were making a delivery, you should be able to provide proof of that.
I would deal with it in that respect to start with, dear sirs, I was loading, here's some proof.
Then see what comes back.
Yes, that's what I was thinking.
I will try that first as I have a delivery note.
Thank you.

Re: 1 minute over in Loading Bay
« Reply #5 on: »
One argument that can be pursued here is whether the CEO was wearing the appropriate type of uniform, which depends on whether it was a PCSO employed by the MET police, or a "proper" civil enforcement officer.

However in the first instance I'd go with @DancingDad's suggestion.

I have requested all the designation orders & TMOs for red routes in Westminster, I've spotted more than one red route TMO with drafting issues so you never know what might turn up.
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

Re: 1 minute over in Loading Bay
« Reply #6 on: »
@plane340 the traffic order is The GLA Roads and GLA Side Roads (Westminster) Red Route Consolidation Traffic Order 2008 and the relevant entry appears to be item 4 on page 67, but are you still with us?
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

Re: 1 minute over in Loading Bay
« Reply #7 on: »
@plane340 the traffic order is The GLA Roads and GLA Side Roads (Westminster) Red Route Consolidation Traffic Order 2008 and the relevant entry appears to be item 4 on page 67, but are you still with us?
So I appealed for a second time on 29/8/23 with delivery note and a short explanation.
Checked today as not heard anything. Still on hold.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Re: 1 minute over in Loading Bay
« Reply #8 on: »
DVLA action means they're likely to send a notice to owner without responding to the informal representations. Make sure to check the status on the TFL website at least once every 10 days or so.
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order