Author Topic: Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place not designated for that vehicle.  (Read 1687 times)

0 Members and 151 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hello!
I parked in Kingston (London), specifically at The Triangle, to drop off a heavy parcel. It's a small road of around 8 bays. As you enter you see signs mentioning that the parking is free for one hour. As the first 6 bays were taken I parked in one of the last two bays.
I was surprised to see a PCN when I returned (I was gone for only 3 minutes). Apparently these last two bays are mix use parking bays (loading only and 1 hour free) depending on the time of day. The CEO was still there when I returned. The Goods Only vehicle loading is applicable up to 12pm, after which there is free parking. I had parked at 11:40am.

My points of contention are:
1) The sign is not parallel to the road. It is slightly offset, unhelpfully pointing away from the bay, and therefore was not visually impactful or obvious, particularly in light of the earlier signs for the other bays.
2) the top of the sign referring to goods only vehicles was partially obscured by the hanging flower pot right next to it
3) The CEO was still there, I made the above two points to him and also told him that a 'Loading Only' marking on the ground would be more useful and visually impactful. It was he who pointed out to me that the Loading Only markings are there, but virtually wiped out. He even suggested I should take a photo of it and use it in my appeal if I wish.

Do I have any grounds for appeal please, or is this a lost cause? In particular are the Loading Only markings on the road compulsory or not? I couldn't tell from the Traffic Signs Manual (see figure 13-52 on page 172): https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c78f895e5274a0ebfec719b/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-03.pdf

Front and back of PCN: https://ibb.co/k2qJ39Gx and https://ibb.co/PGCwppSV
Picture 1 from CEO: https://ibb.co/s9pPVxpk
Picture 2 from CEO: https://ibb.co/FLgJtn1N
Google Satellite view showing my direction of travel and where I parked: https://ibb.co/WQfbyHq
Image showing the badly faded Loading Only  marking circled in red https://ibb.co/0Rw61LYn

Image showing the partially obscure top plate, this is the one not parallel to the bays: https://ibb.co/GfwLhvxs
Two signs like this visible immediately before the bay I parked in: https:/ibb.co/RGz0dSP2

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


GSV link to the location please,  telling us exactly where you parked.

Hi, GSV link here, the red pin is where I parked https://maps.app.goo.gl/h6aHxRun1QLs61ne8?g_st=ipc


Yours is not a 'goods vehicle'.

You made a mistake, it happens.

IMO, everything else you've mentioned is not material as regards a defence and I wouldn't risk anything on it.

But IMO you should make informal reps of the conciliatory kind to see what happens.

Thanks,I will make an appeal
So to be clear
1) ‘Loading’ markings on the bay itself are optional? This would have hands down been more noticeable and grabbed my attention
2) signs are allowed to be offset, to some extent, to the road? For future reference this is good to know, although I’d say it’s indicative of poor maintenance by a council.
3) it’s acceptable to put a planter next to a sign and have it partially obscured? If I didn’t notice this sign in daylight, I’d hate to know how people could see it at night. To me it’s just common sense not to have a plant right next to a sign, shame there isn’t a regulation about this.

Hold fire. Do you want a technical appeal re the wording first?
IF YOU RECEIVE A MOVING TRAFFIC PCN PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE MAKING A REPRESENTATION:

https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/moving-traffic-pcns-missing-mandatory-information-the-london-local-authorities-a/msg102639/#msg102639


How do we get more people to fight their PCNs?

https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/how-do-we-get-more-people-to-fight-their-pcns/msg41917/#msg41917

If you do not even make a challenge, you will surely join "The Mugged Club".

I am not omniscient. cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

My e mail address for councils:

J.BOND007@H.M.S.S.c/oVAUXHALLBRIDGE/LICENSEDTOEXPOSE.SCAMS.CO.UK

Last mission accomplished:

https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/southwark-to-r

Sure, how does that work?

It's always useful to look back at the views in GSV for previous years.
In 2018, the bay is restricted to loading only 7am to 7pm, on all days of the week, (no days on the sign means all days).  So the carriageway by the bay has Loading Only painted by the bay.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/2V7Fv1ujMMe39sb5A

But some time between 2018 and the next GSV view of 2019, the restriction changed, to make the restriction far less onerous. Maybe there were local complaints. The carriageway text was removed/painted over, and the sign one sees today applied. Clearly the carriageway text would have been misleading for a the new period when only loading is allowed, of 8.30am to Noon Mon-Sat. In addition, Sundays became completely unrestricted.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/qnFXMMzyZ33wPkDr5

The OP doesn't tell us, but it is quite clear that the sign was not read when parking, and only read after the OP returned to his car. When parking in a marked bay the motorist is under a duty to establish what restrictions might apply to the bay, and look for the sign. Here the bay is very short with room for only two vehicles and the sign is positioned so it is easy to find.
Frankly, I see little of merit in the suggested points for representations. Of course Hippocrates has suggested a 'technical' appeal based on wording, which I assume is the PCN. It must be said that whilst such appeals have been won against various councils, they were all won at the adjudicators, London Tribunals, with the full PCN penalty in play.


Sure, how does that work?

Ref: PCN  VRM

I challenge this PCN as follows:

The wording of the PCN in terms of the 28 days period is wrong since it does not comply with Schedule 2 para. 2 @  https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/schedule/2

(d)that the penalty charge must be paid within the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the alleged contravention occurred,

In light of this procedural impropriety please cancel the PCN.
IF YOU RECEIVE A MOVING TRAFFIC PCN PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE MAKING A REPRESENTATION:

https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/moving-traffic-pcns-missing-mandatory-information-the-london-local-authorities-a/msg102639/#msg102639


How do we get more people to fight their PCNs?

https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/how-do-we-get-more-people-to-fight-their-pcns/msg41917/#msg41917

If you do not even make a challenge, you will surely join "The Mugged Club".

I am not omniscient. cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

My e mail address for councils:

J.BOND007@H.M.S.S.c/oVAUXHALLBRIDGE/LICENSEDTOEXPOSE.SCAMS.CO.UK

Last mission accomplished:

https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/southwark-to-r

Sure, how does that work?

Ref: PCN  VRM

I challenge this PCN as follows:

The wording of the PCN in terms of the 28 days period is wrong since it does not comply with Schedule 2 para. 2 @  https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/schedule/2

(d)that the penalty charge must be paid within the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the alleged contravention occurred,

In light of this procedural impropriety please cancel the PCN.

Hello, I received a standard notice of rejection to my informal appeal here https://ibb.co/hpx30FZ
Next step is to wait for the Notice to Owner? I need to do some digging on the London Tribunals page to see if there is a precedent for this having been successfully challenged

Sure, how does that work?

Ref: PCN  VRM

I challenge this PCN as follows:

The wording of the PCN in terms of the 28 days period is wrong since it does not comply with Schedule 2 para. 2 @  https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/schedule/2

(d)that the penalty charge must be paid within the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the alleged contravention occurred,

In light of this procedural impropriety please cancel the PCN.

Hello,
I received a NTO. Do I still stand a decent chance at tribunal with the above argument? I haven't been able to find any precedents yet.
Images of the NTO below (I'm on day 13 from the date of the NTO, was away for work for part of that).
The NTO does state that the penalty charge must be paid no later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which "the NTO is served". How do I know when it was served? It's not necessarily the same date as the posting date.
https://ibb.co/N2Bh0P0S
https://ibb.co/fYSx2JKN
https://ibb.co/n8fVVcMx
https://ibb.co/jvY7FLKH
https://ibb.co/RTyP211C

Quote
The NTO does state that the penalty charge must be paid no later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which "the NTO is served". How do I know when it was served? It's not necessarily the same date as the posting date.
There is an Act that defines expected mail delivery times, that for 1st Class post being 2 days from date of posting. ALl postal PCNs have a date and the law is that they must be posted 1st Class on the same day.  Quite how one proves otherwise is beyond me.