3. Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not working
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not working  (Read 1099 times)

0 Members and 608 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #15 on: »
Upon reviewing your photograph of the entire parking bay, it is apparent that it serves a dual purpose as both an electric vehicle charging bay and a disabled parking bay.

You mentioned the electric vehicle charger was inoperative, and the PCN indicates you were fined for parking in a disabled bay without displaying a badge.

You have grounds to appeal.



Despite parking in the designated electric vehicle charging bay, the charger was regrettably not operational, leading to the unfortunate penalty for parking in a disabled bay.

Given the faulty charger, I consulted the security staff. I enquired whether I needed to move my vehicle, and the staff said that, since the charger was not working, I did not need to move my car because it was an electric vehicle.

I paid the parking fee and obtained a pay & display ticket. However, upon returning to my vehicle, I discovered a Penalty Charge Notice affixed to it.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2024, 08:54:33 pm by Pressman »
Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #16 on: »
It's not a shared use bay, it's a bay with conflicting markings and signs, which conflict is NOT resolved by reference to the Ts and Cs board.

The council will argue the toss, but IMO would lose at adjudication if it got that far.

So what exactly are the markings and sign supposed to mean?

The sign is clear: electric vehicle parking - only while charging.

So if it's not charging?

Then as regards the sign it's not complying. In which case code 71 applies:

71 Parked in an electric vehicles’ charging place during restricted hours without charging. Off-street car parks.

What they have no basis for doing is claiming that despite the sign making no reference on this point, the markings mean that the bay is available to BB holders(on what terms I've no idea) and therefore the appropriate grounds are as in the PCN.

IMO total nonsense.

As is the PCN where it states at the top of page 1: 'Woking Borough Council as agents Acting for Surrey County Council', and then on page 2: 'Enforcement Authority..where the contravention occurs on street Woking Borough Council act as agent for Surrey County Council'.

So, who is the enforcement authority given that the first statement is not conditional or limited but contradicts the subsequent reference?

A PCN must state the enforcement authority.

And yet SCC state:
Parking enforcement and fines
The changes to enforcement
Since 1 April 2023, on street parking enforcement in Surrey has been carried out by NSL, working on our behalf (Surrey County Council). Prior to that date it was carried out by the borough and district councils, on our behalf, and they continue to carry out parking enforcement in their car parks.

What a total f*****g shambles.

And the order doesn't refer to electric vehicles*(why would it, it's dated 2005), I'm surprised it doesn't refer to chariots.
*- or electronic payments!
« Last Edit: August 03, 2024, 10:45:11 pm by H C Andersen »
Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #17 on: »
As an electric vehicle owner with personal experience in charging, I prefer home charging for its convenience and cost benefits, especially with a solar setup and no VAT so I understand that dual-use bays can be confusing for new EV drivers.

In this case, the driver wasn't charging due to a malfunctioning charging point. Woking has two options here:

They could adopt a strict approach and enforce the penalty notice, arguing that without charging, the vehicle is improperly parked in a disabled bay. This would be a rigid application of the rules.

Alternatively, they could demonstrate flexibility and cancel the penalty notice, recognising that the driver did not charge due to an out-of-service charging point and made an effort to seek assistance.

I recommend appealing this decision. It's worth seeing how Woking responds, as they might show some leniency given the circumstances. Be ready to assert your position—this case presents a strong argument.

Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #18 on: »
Quote from: H C Andersen on August 03, 2024, 10:23:14 pm
As is the PCN where it states at the top of page 1: 'Woking Borough Council as agents Acting for Surrey County Council', and then on page 2: 'Enforcement Authority..where the contravention occurs on street Woking Borough Council act as agent for Surrey County Council'.

So, who is the enforcement authority given that the first statement is not conditional or limited but contradicts the subsequent reference?

A PCN must state the enforcement authority.

Please could help me understand this point. Is the PCN not allowed to be written in the form it currently is?

Quote from: H C Andersen on August 03, 2024, 10:23:14 pm

And the order doesn't refer to electric vehicles*(why would it, it's dated 2005), I'm surprised it doesn't refer to chariots.
*- or electronic payments!

What legal point can you quote to support the fact that a valid TRO is required to enforce a PCN?

Is there a relevant TC case or judicial review that I can rely on please.
Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #19 on: »
I wouldn't worry about technicalities at the first informal challenge and just go with the obvious appearance of it being a charging bay that also accommodates disabled drivers and the advice given to you concerning the inoperative charger.
Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #20 on: »
OP, the markings, signs and the noticeboard conditions posted are a mess.

The contravention did not occur. You accept that you parked in a signed electric vehicles only bay and were not charging, in which case the contravention should refer to electric vehicles.

There is no basis for the council to claim that you parked in a disabled bay - while it was in force- because there is no signage to this effect.

It stands to reason that 'electric vehicles ONLY - while charging' is unambiguous and does not allow vehicles displaying a BB to park.
Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #21 on: »
Thanks for all the advice to date. Since I recently lost my job, I have been struggling to find a new one and got distracted.


Appreciate a review of the appeal below,

Quote
I am writing to formally appeal against the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) issued to my vehicle, registration number [Vehicle Registration Number], on [Date of PCN]. The PCN was issued under contravention code 87, alleging that the vehicle was parked in a designated disabled bay without displaying a permit. However, I believe this PCN was issued incorrectly for the reasons outlined below.

The vehicle was parked in a dual-use bay that is designated both for use by electric vehicles for charging and for disabled users. The driver of the vehicle parked within the bay using entitlements permitted to them under Paragraph 3(g) of the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) currently effective at the location, it states:

"The driver of a vehicle shall not permit it to wait in a reserved bay within a parking place unless the bay has been specifically reserved (as indicated by a sign or other writing) for his or her particular class of vehicle or person."

As an electric vehicle, the vehicle in question qualifies under the provisions allowed by the TRO as the bay is permitted to be used by electric vehicles. Therefore, the PCN issued under contravention code 87 is not applicable to the circumstances in which the vehicle was parked.

Furthermore, if the bay has any other intended usage beyond what is clearly indicated, the registered keeper submits that the signage and road markings are insufficient and potentially misleading to drivers. Proper signage is crucial to ensure that drivers are fully aware of any restrictions in place and comply with any relevant parking requirements.

Given the above, I respectfully request that the PCN be cancelled. I have attached relevant documentation and photographs to support my appeal.

I look forward to your prompt response and trust that this matter will be resolved in a fair and just manner.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2024, 05:59:16 pm by FaeLLe »
Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #22 on: »
Council evidence has been made available on the portal now. Please help indicate if this changes anything.


Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #23 on: »
Quote from: H C Andersen on August 03, 2024, 10:23:14 pm
It's not a shared use bay, it's a bay with conflicting markings and signs, which conflict is NOT resolved by reference to the Ts and Cs board.

The sign is clear: electric vehicle parking - only while charging.

So if it's not charging?

Then as regards the sign it's not complying. In which case code 71 applies:

71 Parked in an electric vehicles’ charging place during restricted hours without charging. Off-street car parks.
Quote
And the order doesn't refer to electric vehicles*(why would it, it's dated 2005), I'm surprised it doesn't refer to chariots.
*- or electronic payments!

So if the TRO doesn't refer to specific conditions for parking bays can they be enforced through only signs for PCN's issued under TMA 2004?
Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #24 on: »
IMO no.

All signs and markings do is to give notice to drivers of provisions(restrictions) within an Order. They cannot invent restrictions which are not underpinned by an Order.
Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #25 on: »
Thanks for the inputs everyone. Council has cancelled the PCN a few weeks ago.

Response from council: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BnzOe0LlKGlGnYGrn2YPC63QhxsnD3bJ/

Representations made:

Quote
We am writing to you today to make submissions regarding the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) issued to the registration number VRM, on 02 AUGUST 2024.

The alleged contravention stated within the PCN did not occur. The PCN was issued incorrectly for the reasons outlined below.

The PCN was issued under contravention code 87, alleging that the vehicle was parked in a designated disabled bay without displaying a permit. However, the driver of the vehicle had sufficient authority granted to them to park in the alleged parking bay where the contravention was said to have occurred.

The vehicle was parked in a dual-use bay that is designated both for use by electric vehicles for charging and for disabled users. The driver of the vehicle parked within the bay using entitlements permitted to them under Paragraph 3(g) of the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) currently effective at the location, it states:

"The driver of a vehicle shall not permit it to wait in a reserved bay within a parking place unless the bay has been specifically reserved (as indicated by a sign or other writing) for his or her particular class of vehicle or person."

Since the vehicle to which the PCN was issued is an electric vehicle, the vehicle in question qualifies under the provisions allowed by the TRO as the bay is permitted to be used by electric vehicles.

Therefore, the PCN issued under contravention code 87 is not applicable to the circumstances in which the vehicle was parked.

Furthermore, if the bay has any other intended usage beyond what is clearly indicated, the registered keeper submits that the signage and road markings are insufficient and potentially misleading to drivers. Proper signage is crucial to ensure that drivers are fully aware of any restrictions in place and comply with any relevant parking requirements.

Given the above, I respectfully request that the PCN be cancelled. I have attached relevant documentation in the form photographs to support my appeal.
- The first attachment clearly shows the PCN was issued in a vehicle where EV's are entitled to park (by virtue of council signage).
- The second picture shows the relevant bay under discussion when it is empty; this demonstrates the shared-use nature of the parking bay.

I look forward to your prompt response and trust that this matter will be resolved in a fair and just manner.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Registered Keeper
Logged
Re: Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not workin
« Reply #26 on: »
That was a long-winded challenge - they must have lost the will to live and given up.

It isn't a shared use bay as we said - it's a charging bay that accommodates disabled drivers.
Logged
Funny Funny x 1 View List
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »
  3. Shared use bay - Electric charging & Disabled - TMA 2004 PCN - Code 87 PCN issued instead of 71 - Charger not working