Free Traffic Legal Advice

IMO this has nothing to do with parcels and everything to do with:

1)In a special enforcement area a vehicle must not be parked on the carriageway in such a way that no part of the vehicle is within 50 centimetres of the edge of the carriageway.

The car was not 'on the carriageway' therefore the contravention, which is based in statute and is absolutely clear, did not occur, irrespective of the contravention description used by London Tribunals and the Mayor of London. Enforcement authorities should know the statutory provision which underpins this description.

The contravention can only occur if a vehicle is on the carriageway, which the CEO's photos show it was not

The authority seems to have conflated and confused the London-wide prohibition of parking on the footway, which refers to ROAD, with the TMA prohibition which does not. In the alternative, they seem to consider the DYL, which have been misplaced on the footway, to represent the edge of the carriageway, unless it is believed that it is lawful to place more than 30 2-feet long and 2-inch high unmarked obstructions in the carriageway. Clearly not. These mark the edge of the carriageway and what lies beyond cannot be on the carriageway.

The alleged contravention did not occur and the PCN must be cancelled.

Carriageway is not defined by misplaced DYL!

IMO this has nothing to do with parcels and everything to do with:

@H C Andersen Thank you, this is very interesting. I guess it comes down to whether the paved land is private or highway land (carriageway, footway, verge). Or is that irrelevant?

Below is a draft for the appeal. Would this be ok to send or should I add more detail?


I wish to challenge this PCN on the ground that the contravention did not occur.

The relevant prohibition applies only where a vehicle is parked on the carriageway. The CEO’s own photographs show that my vehicle was not on the carriageway, but on the paved hard-standing beyond the clear edge of the carriageway (defined by the raised setts / kerbstones).

for a half metre cubed parcel the loading exemption would come into play if its from amazon you can get a picture of it and the return label this would be good evidence of loading

for a half metre cubed parcel the loading exemption would come into play if its from amazon you can get a picture of it and the return label this would be good evidence of loading

Ok, but should I add this to the appeal or would that just weaken the statutory-based argument?

@Hippocrates @H C Andersen @Pastmybest @Incandescent

Thank you all for your input. How about this hybrid approach?

I make representations against this PCN on the ground that the contravention did not occur.

The prohibition in law applies only where a vehicle is parked on the carriageway more than 50cm from its edge. The CEO’s photographs show that my vehicle was not on the carriageway but on the paved hard-standing beyond it, the edge of the carriageway being clearly defined by the raised setts/kerbstones. On that basis, the statutory conditions for this contravention were not met.

In the alternative, even if the authority were to assert that the paved area is part of the carriageway, the vehicle was stationary for less than two minutes solely for unloading purposes. Loading and unloading is a recognised statutory exemption, and the stop was both brief and necessary.

For these reasons, the contravention alleged did not occur and the PCN should be cancelled.

@Incandescent

Thank you, that makes sense. Would you say going with my last draft would be ok then to cover both arguments?

I'd include details of what you were loading to add credibility.