Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: LemonTootski on April 05, 2024, 07:23:06 pm

Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: Incandescent on May 08, 2024, 11:31:46 pm
A loud and hearty Well Done !

(Oh, and a Flat White coffee for me !)
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on May 08, 2024, 09:09:31 pm
Dear Sirs,

Allow me to buy you a coffee.

Is an iced moche/latte too modern for you, or would a standard cappuccino do?

(https://i.ibb.co/t8RYXT4/Rep.png)

Thanks cp8759, Mike/Incandescent, and all others for your contributions to this thread.

One thing I've learned (and for anyone else reading this): Keep the damn stamped envelope!. Even the date notices sent can be deemed a procedural impropriety, thus rendering the PCN unenforceable -  3(1)(a) of Schedule 2 to The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions is a bummer !

TFL also were never able to provide DTES video recordings of this 'contravention', so this is also another aspect to pursue.

Let's hope the wording of this representation helps others in a similar situation with this PCN.

Thanks again so much.

Best regards
LemonTootski
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: cp8759 on April 28, 2024, 09:30:25 pm
@LemonTootski just to set your expectations, TFL will reject anything you say because if they reject and you pay, they get to keep the money.

This is the sort of PCN that is only ever going to get cancelled by being appealed to the tribunal.

As for the CCTV footage, it's obvious it's not been processed against this PCN, because on the TFL website the case status would have an entry stating "DTES footage requested" or something similar, but no such entry appears on the PCN history.

Frustrating as it might be, you'll just have to phone up and ask them again. You could also try emailing redroutes@tflenforcement.com and CCCorrespondence@tfl.gov.uk
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 25, 2024, 05:29:46 pm
heyHey all,

Sorry. Just wondered if there was any update on the above wording and non-dvd?
Have couple of days to lodge my rep.

Any comments or feedback would help.

Thanks.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 23, 2024, 03:07:43 pm
Hi There,

Just re-visiting this one.

On April 8th, I made a request for an SAR Appeals pack DVD footage regarding the alleged contravention. After waiting for a week, I received DVD footage of a different, unrelated PCN.

On the following Monday, April 15th, I contacted TFL again, specifically asking for footage related to this PCN (GXI4013572). Once more, after waiting for a week, I received the same incorrect DVD footage, which was completely unrelated to the alleged contravention at Cobalt Square, South Lambeth Rd SW8.

Upon contacting them for a third time today, the phone operator informed me that they could only provide what was available. Consequently, I can only assume that there is no video footage available for this particular PCN, and I am wondering if this hinders my ability to fully submit my representation.

However, the phone operator did mention that I could still proceed with lodging my rep to the best of my ability.

So with time against me, by 25th April, I aim to lodge the above worded rep:

Quote
Dear Transport for London,

The alleged contravention did not occur because the markings at the location in question do not correctly reflect item 19 of Schedule 2B to The GLA Roads and GLA Side Roads (Lambeth) Red Route Consolidation Traffic Order 2007, furthermore the combination of lines and marking is unauthorised because there appear to be a series of bays which have double red lines running through them, and this layout is not permitted and is liable to cause confusion.

Lastly the PCN does not comply with the requirements imposed by the second part of paragraph 3(1)(a) of Schedule 2 to The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022, and that is a procedural impropriety.

It follows that the penalty charge notice must be cancelled.

Yours faithfully,

Effectively, this is questioning the procedures surrounding appropriate marking, and the timing (date) of issuance of the PCN.

Do you think this is sufficient?
Is it worded correctly, or is there anything you could expand on this?
Should I add any info about the missing footage? And more importantly,
Would you state the PCN is enforceable given the proposed rep?

Thanks, and look forward to your reply.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: cp8759 on April 15, 2024, 09:25:20 am
At this point I'd suggest you submit the representations as I drafted them, this ensures the deadline cannot be missed, and you can still pester them for the CCTV footage.

The key thing is we want the DVD before you get the notice of rejection, so when it comes to evaluating your chances of winning an appeal to the tribunal we have all the information to hand. We have to assume the representations will be rejected because TFL are greedy and want the money.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 15, 2024, 03:13:30 am
Hi,

Thanks for correction of the terminology Rep vs Appeal. And of course, apologies - i am totally aware and appreciative of all your time and in no way meant to rush.

In actual fact, the time to get put in this rep is not due for 28 day af i believe (26 April) so there is still time.

Interestingly, despite me calling to request this video footage on 8 April, TFL still have not sent it.
On 8 April I called for footage of two alleged contraventions or two separate PCNs. I received one DVD, but not footage pertaining to this case.

All calls to TFL are recorded, and I have the reference number of the logged request for video footage for this case.

Should i call them again?, or would determining that they have not honoured my request for video footage help my case should it go to appeal? "I have requested video footage of the alleged contravention on 8 April, but they have not complied".

Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: cp8759 on April 14, 2024, 05:39:46 pm
@LemonTootski please bear in mind most of us work full time doing something else, so we can only get round to responding when time allows.

The first thing you must understand is you are not making an appeal, you are only making a representation to Transport for London. Only if your representation is rejected, can you then make an appeal to London Tribunals.

If you're keen on making a representation before you get the video, this will suffice:

Dear Transport for London,

The alleged contravention did not occur because the markings at the location in question do not correctly reflect item 19 of Schedule 2B to The GLA Roads and GLA Side Roads (Lambeth) Red Route Consolidation Traffic Order 2007, furthermore the combination of lines and marking is unauthorised because there appear to be a series of bays which have double red lines running through them, and this layout is not permitted and is liable to cause confusion.

Lastly the PCN does not comply with the requirements imposed by the second part of paragraph 3(1)(a) of Schedule 2 to The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022, and that is a procedural impropriety.

It follows that the penalty charge notice must be cancelled.

Yours faithfully,

Make sure to keep a screenshot of the confirmation page.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 14, 2024, 04:41:20 pm
Anyone have any advice as per wording ?

Would really help.
Thanks.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 12, 2024, 07:49:07 pm
Hi

So i have to now sstart thinking about drafting my appeal - using those two arguments set forthwith:

- PCN is not enforcable because :


3.—(1) The information to be included in a regulation 10 penalty charge notice is—
(a) the date of the notice, which must be the date on which it is posted,

and perhaps the other point i discovered?

(4) For the purposes of paragraph (3) “working day” means any day except—
(a)a Saturday or a Sunday.

I tried to draft some wording for the appeal but ffell flat ! hehe

Could soomeone help draft an afficial appeal? - also is there any case precedent where an appeal was upheld because of these clauses?

ANy info would heelp

THanks
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: cp8759 on April 08, 2024, 10:50:29 pm
I unfortunately don't have the date stamped envelope the PCN has arrived in, but the issue still holds:

But, cp8759, I believe this challenge is now wrong.

It appears that regulation 3(1)a-- may have been updated:
You're looking in the wrong place, it's paragraph 3(1)(a) of Schedule 2 here (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/schedule/2/paragraph/3).

The PCN was not served on 30, that's the day it was drafted. It probably wasn't served until 4 April.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: Incandescent on April 08, 2024, 10:31:27 pm
Look in Schedule 2 3(1)(a)
CP8759 seems to have mis-typed the Schedule Number
No he didn't ! I should have gone to Specsavers !
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 08, 2024, 09:42:18 pm
Thanks so much for this.

I knew this somewhere in the back of my mind, but couldn't quite pinpoint the terminology.

I remember reading back in the (now) old (and sadly missed) Pepipoo forums, appeals being upheld on the enforcement of contravention where the date of notice differed from the date posted - but just didn't have the legal acumen to draught a response.

I unfortunately don't have the date stamped envelope the PCN has arrived in, but the issue still holds:

But, cp8759, I believe this challenge is now wrong.

It appears that regulation 3(1)a-- may have been updated:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/regulation/3 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/regulation/3)

3--(1)a no longer says:
Quote
the date of the notice, which must be the date on which it is posted

The Regulation appears to have been modified by Statutory Instruments in 2024. So the clause  now says:

Quote
3--(1)a may be served by first class (but not second class) post


So the 'date of notice/date posted' challenge may not be valid. cp8759, can you affirm this is now the case?

I also spotted another clause. 3--(4)a now screams at me, about notices should be served on a working day:

Quote
(4) For the purposes of paragraph (3) “working day” means any day except—
(a)a Saturday or a Sunday.

As this PCN is notice was served on Saturday 30 March, is TFL in violation ?
Look forward to hearing your thoughts.<br><br>

Best
LemonTootski
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: cp8759 on April 08, 2024, 06:44:00 pm
Another point to keep in reserve for the tribunal:

(https://i.imgur.com/pHmi6d1.png)

The 30th March was a Saturday and paragraph 3(1)(a) of Schedule 2 to The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022 provides that:

3.—(1) The information to be included in a regulation 10 penalty charge notice is—
(a) the date of the notice, which must be the date on which it is posted,

TFL have confirmed under FOI that Royal Mail only collects post Monday to Friday, so this PCN couldn't have been collected by Royal Mail prior to 2 April.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 08, 2024, 11:28:48 am
Good advice. Will definitely heed.
I guess 13 April is the cut off date.

Thanks Incandescent.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: Incandescent on April 08, 2024, 10:27:30 am
Don't ignore that 14 days hold period. If the DVD hasn't been received within about 10-12 days phone them. It is important not to go beyond the date for submission of representations.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 08, 2024, 09:53:08 am
I've ordered the DVD from TFL, and true to form they will put the PCN on hold for another 14 days whilst this is being sent to me within 15 days.

Will keep you posted.

Thanks
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 07, 2024, 12:09:38 am
will do, first thing.
thanks
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: cp8759 on April 06, 2024, 11:28:58 pm
Could you give me a sample template text on how to write an appeal ?
I can but it's somewhat unwise to go in blind, I really recommend you call TFL on Monday (the number is 0343 222 3333) and ask for the video, they will send you a DVD in the post and put the penalty on hold while you wait.

Once you've got the DVD post the video on here and I'll draft something for you.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 06, 2024, 06:52:24 pm
Hi Administrator,

Thanks so much for looking into this.

''please give us the PCN number and the number plate so that we can start doing some basic checks.''

So the PCN is : GXI4013572
Number plate T8 NUX

Could you give me a sample template text on how to write an appeal ?

Best
LemonTootski
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: cp8759 on April 06, 2024, 03:57:32 pm
Well there's no such thing as loopholes, though there are aspects of the law that TFL doesn't like.

Starting with the basics, please give us the PCN number and the number plate so that we can start doing some basic checks. Also please phone TFL first thing on Monday (0343 222 3333) and ask them for the video, they will send you a DVD in the post and put the penalty on hold while you wait.

A few preliminary issues we can put forwards at the representations stage:

1) There is no evidence of any upright sign, and the High Court has ruled that the requirement for an upright sign applies to double red lines just as much as it applies to single red lines. With no upright sign, there is no authority to serve a postal PCN under regulation 11 of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/regulation/11), so service of a postal PCN is a procedural impropriety.

2) There layout is unauthorised, see https://maps.app.goo.gl/1bod6Gi5oZTGva379 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/1bod6Gi5oZTGva379). You can't have double red lines running through a white bay (or indeed through any sort of bay), so it is understandable that this would cause confusion, I would be confused as well (and I know much of the The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 off by heart, sad as that may be).

As for the tribunal stage, there is a flaw in the notice of rejection template currently used by TFL, as per these cases:

Nayeem Haque v Transport for London (2220767288, 15 November 2022) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KavlK0nNvWS2eI9ICkqjBQRg9-L-2mHc/view)
Mike Welch v Transport for London (2230428700, 18 November 2023) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ijJW4O3zHz-LOkVRi4QHmdf983n1yyJ8/view)
Lubavitch Synagogue v Transport for London (2230535074, 5 February 2024) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xokOkjdoJf0e5CBjBP7smnErCrMxps0m/view)
Commercial Plant Services Ltd v Transport for London (2240018512, 12 February 2024) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qwj3XYfPvFZBh-ag3HYuQEUHtFXwxvHf/view)
Mathew Mathai v Transport for London (2240062219, 15 March 2024) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QoDnU5djhqtHMDDHbPiHIhVOC7KmHxIZ/view)

Though obviously this point can't be raised until we get to the tribunal.

There's other matters to be raised at the tribunal stage, such as whether they can prove the road is a GLA road in the first place (they seem to struggle with that).

The traffic order is The GLA Roads and GLA Side Roads (Lambeth) Red Route Consolidation Traffic Order 2007 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Dj3SU_pz5tYD0mCOjP2Qe9o6esTuzCzu/view) as amended by The GLA Roads and GLA Side Roads (Lambeth) Red Route Consolidation Traffic Order 2007 A203 and A3 GLA Roads (South Lambeth Road And Clapham Road) Variation Order 2008 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JhKdgzGPWA2XKxgc50UE5drL5QYV0jRw/view), The GLA Roads and GLA Side Roads (Lambeth) Red Route Consolidation Traffic Order 2007 Variation Order 2011 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NkEApuf27LFk859WNCdOEjcJYjUX40Oq/view), The GLA Roads and GLA Side Roads (Lambeth) Red Route Consolidation Traffic Order 2007 London Cycle Hire Scheme Variation Order 2011 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/12KSz7Tz4tkVy_164Pi7DXidnfwRPUHJZ/view) and The GLA Roads and GLA Side Roads (Lambeth) Red Route Consolidation Traffic Order 2007 London Cycle Hire Scheme Variation Order 2013 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/14GOpVkwKtZ3deQOqmYG6Ah6bxiJd-d4E/view) (there are other amendments but none that affect South Lambeth Road).

I'm not convinced entry 19 on page 98 of the 2007 Order is marked correctly, it sort of depends on where you measure the southern boundary of Cobalt Square, the exact location of which looks as clear as mud. Not sure we'd need to rely on that but it'll be worth exploring further down the line.
Title: Re: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: Incandescent on April 05, 2024, 11:20:18 pm
Quote
I'm just writing to see if there is any precedent to appeal this.
There certainly is precedent, and, more inportantly, success ! However I'll wait for the administrator CP8759 to come on here and explain it, as it is beyond my competence.
Title: PCN (46) Red route/clearway - TFL: Opp. Cobalt SQ, South Lambeth Rd SW8
Post by: LemonTootski on April 05, 2024, 07:23:06 pm
Greetings and Salutations.

I received a PCN on 30 March 2024 for a contravention which occurred on 26 March 2024.

At 07:34, I pulled over into onto what I thought was a loading bay, as my mobile device had fallen off my phone holder and I was lost, trying to find directions.
But fundamentally, my short stop was necessary as my car was overheating and I needed to cool the engine down.

(https://i.ibb.co/kXGT9qb/1.png)

I've included photos from the camera operator, and Google street view photos indicating where I stopped.

I'm not too au fait with signage/regulations as per the enforceable nature, nor any loopholes.
I'm just writing to see if there is any precedent to appeal this. Perhaps some arcane ruling regarding the enforceability for this regulation.

Any advice would be of great help.

Yours,

LemonTootski


(https://i.ibb.co/0fSbr3w/Redacted-1.jpg)


(https://i.ibb.co/kXGT9qb/1.png)
(https://i.ibb.co/NtJYRhN/2.png)
(https://i.ibb.co/pLvxKTD/5.png)
(https://i.ibb.co/m8tM36Y/Redacted-3.png)