Author Topic: Cornwall, Contravention Code 86 Not parked correctly, The Crescent Bude, FA13404009  (Read 49 times)

0 Members and 84 Guests are viewing this topic.

My girlfriend parked in one of the few spots left in the car park, it has black markings so we thought we would be allowed to park there. Come back to a PCN on the car. The front bumper was over the line a small amount but lots of cars where parked the same so im pretty sure the PCN is for it being in the black box which i would assume is a marked bay or space, just wanted some advice if this should be challenged or if we are in the wrong and should just pay. Thanks in advance!

(Not the best picture but the car was well within the lines everywhere but the bumper hanging over by about an inch)





Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Well, sorry to be the bringer of bad news ! There was a bay where you parked, but the council decided to remove it, so black paint was painted over the white bay markings. This at least is my view from looking at your photo. Painting over obsolete carriageway and car park markings with black paint is common practice, and normally becomes an issue when the black paint wears away.

GSV is very out-of-date for this location, (2015) but I suspect the bays on that side of the group have been removed to make for more manoevre space. Was the space behind you painted out as well ?

Yes the space behind was the same.

Try submitting informal, non-confrontational representations on the lines that you saw what seemed to be a bay and parked. Explain that you were not aware of the practice of painting over bay markings if the bay is removed, and tell them the offence will not occur again. Ask for the PCN to be cancelled on this ocasion. OK, they will probably refuse them, but at least they'll have had to do some work for the money !

Contravention didn't occur. The traffic order will almost certainly say park in bay markings, but not what colour they are.

No need to talk about paint. 

IMO, the PCN is defective but I agree with the soft approach at this stage.

But I would consider adding...

For the information of the authority, I would also like to point out defects in the PCN which misstates the 28 and 14-day periods(the PCN gives 23rd and 3rd when in fact these are 22nd and 2nd) and also qualifies the period for paying the penalty by reference to submitting a challenge when this is incorrect: the 28-day period is unqualified in the regulations.

Wait for others and pl post the back of the PCN.