Author Topic: Haringey / 62(s) / Parked with one or more wheels...  (Read 992 times)

0 Members and 102 Guests are viewing this topic.

Haringey / 62(s) / Parked with one or more wheels...
« on: »
Hi

I received the attached ticket today.
I was parking on the entrance of the driveway for loading. Happens to be I was parked a bit outside, and when the officer came I realized and drove away. He mentioned to get one very unclear pic.
Any base to appeal this PCN?
Thank you all in advance.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/WRGWcsrGj6QmfZhm6
It is the driveway with the green closed gate (was open obviously).

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: February 04, 2024, 10:33:53 pm by cp8759 »

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Re: Haringey / 62(s) / Parked with one or more wheels...
« Reply #1 on: »
YOu would seem not to have attached the actual PCN, which we need to see, all sides of it, so please do so. From what you say, it is a Reg 10 PCN, served by post because you drove away thinking you'd get away with it. Not so, unfortunately, since the Traffic Management Act 2004 came into force.

The double-yellows also have double kerb-blips indicating No Loading 24x7, so you may struggle with this one

Re: Haringey / 62(s) / Parked with one or more wheels...
« Reply #2 on: »
@sruli please post the PCN, do not attach it, see the guidance here on how to post properly.

Also were you loading on your own or was someone helping you?
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: Haringey / 62(s) / Parked with one or more wheels...
« Reply #3 on: »
Hi

The only thing I received is the attached PCN by post.
I am uploading it again as a image.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Re: Haringey / 62(s) / Parked with one or more wheels...
« Reply #4 on: »
I am sure the reason for issuing the postal PCN is wrong.  Surely it should state that a PCN was in course of preparation, but the vehicle drove off before it could be served. At no time, according to the OP's narrative, was any action taken against the CEO.

Re: Haringey / 62(s) / Parked with one or more wheels...
« Reply #5 on: »
Did you speak to the civil enforcement officer at all?

Also, what were you unloading, and was there anyone else with you?
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: Haringey / 62(s) / Parked with one or more wheels...
« Reply #6 on: »
Did you speak to the civil enforcement officer at all?

Also, what were you unloading, and was there anyone else with you?

Hi
I told him I am loading. I was loading 4 big bags of shopping.
There was no one with me.

Thanks in advance

Re: Haringey / 62(s) / Parked with one or more wheels...
« Reply #7 on: »
I told him I am loading. I was loading 4 big bags of shopping.
There was no one with me.


Is this all the adjudicator would see when the CEO's notes are presented at adjudication?

If your response is totally comprehensive, true and supported by the notes then you should win.

We don't see 'prevented' PCNs often and IMO they put owners on the back foot because implicit in their use is an on-site issue between the driver and CEO and IMO adjudicators would look askance at this.

Re: Haringey / 62(s) / Parked with one or more wheels...
« Reply #8 on: »
@sruli I'm not sure if you've made representations but you're almost out of time. If you've not challenged yet, send this:

Dear London Borough of Haringey,

I challenge liability for PCN ZN11022819 because nobody prevented the CEO from serving the PCN at the roadside, in such circumstances service of a postal PCN is a procedural impropriety.

It follows that the PCN must be cancelled.

Yours faithfully,

Send this via https://haringey.tarantoportal.com/ and keep a screenshot of the confirmation page.
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