Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: S.M on May 21, 2024, 12:28:10 am
-
Sorry I had never used it before. I have started a new thread now.
-
Hi there, I was just checking how it went as I received a penalty in the same road (High road turning into Harringtom, E11). The sign on the left was not visible because of a tree and I was looking left when I turned for cars coming in the opposite direction. No advance warnings that i could see either. Can someone help? Many thanks
Please start your own thread if you want advice. Sometimes we don't hear for a long time, or even ever, how a case has gone
-
Hi there, I was just checking how it went as I received a penalty in the same road (High road turning into Harringtom, E11). The sign on the left was not visible because of a tree and I was looking left when I turned for cars coming in the opposite direction. No advance warnings that i could see either. Can someone help? Many thanks
Please to have a read of
https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/
and start your own topic with a brief account of the circumstances and all sides of the PCN, redacting only your name & address, with a GSV link to the location. By all means include a link to this thread.
-
Hi there, I was just checking how it went as I received a penalty in the same road (High road turning into Harringtom, E11). The sign on the left was not visible because of a tree and I was looking left when I turned for cars coming in the opposite direction. No advance warnings that i could see either. Can someone help? Many thanks
-
;D
Thanks for your help on this one :)
My absolute pleasure and it was very nice to meet you. All the best. :)
-
Outcome (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WKkcnlKnHvleGaRQbJAHXAdguC9sf-mt/view).
-
;D
Thanks for your help on this one :)
-
;D
-
PM sent. We need to adjourn which is no problem.
-
I'll message you.
-
Hi. Yes please if you would be able to represent that would be great.
So we are appealing on the basis of no advance signage?
-
Currently there is a problem with their notices of rejections because they do not tell you that an adjudicator can extend time.* I would also state there is a plethora of signage which is confusing.
* 2170241413 and 218033612A.
I have looked at the photos and video. Surely, you would not have seen the sign on the left because of the tree?
Also, failure to consider your point about no advanced signage (though this is not legally necessary).
If you want one of us to represent you, I am free.
Submissions need to be filed at least 7 days before the hearing date.
-
Yes i did ask for a personal hearing and ticked all the boxes apart from the 8-10 a.m slots.
Post the date when you have been given it.
Received appeal pack with hearing date of 01/08/2024 @ 15.30
hearing pack attached. on page 42 the council has submitted couple of pictures of the actual sign of the restriction but nothing to show advance warning signs before turning right.
https://file.io/8GJ811s2YwpW
-
Yes i did ask for a personal hearing and ticked all the boxes apart from the 8-10 a.m slots.
Post the date when you have been given it.
-
Is there anyone that can guide me in terms of what to include in the application that i will make to the tribunal? Thank you
Normal MO is just to register your appeal online under 'the contravention did not occur' and state that you rely on your formal representations.
Then wait to see if they contest. If they do they will send an evidence pack and also upload that to the tribunal portal.
Come back here immediately if they do. their 'case summary' will normally give you some clues about how you might then respond.
I have appealed and will report ASAP whenever I receive their contest. Btw is there a timeline when this will be done? or is it a case where the council will decide when it goes ahead?
I hope you opted for a personal hearing? These can be done by telephone.
the council should provide an evidence pack I think it's 7 days before the hearing.
I'm sure someone will correct me on that.
Yes i did ask for a personal hearing and ticked all the boxes apart from the 8-10 a.m slots.
-
edit parrot.
-
Is there anyone that can guide me in terms of what to include in the application that i will make to the tribunal? Thank you
Normal MO is just to register your appeal online under 'the contravention did not occur' and state that you rely on your formal representations.
Then wait to see if they contest. If they do they will send an evidence pack and also upload that to the tribunal portal.
Come back here immediately if they do. their 'case summary' will normally give you some clues about how you might then respond.
I have appealed and will report ASAP whenever I receive their contest. Btw is there a timeline when this will be done? or is it a case where the council will decide when it goes ahead?
I hope you opted for a personal hearing? These can be done by telephone.
the council should provide an evidence pack I think it's 7 days before the hearing.
I'm sure someone will correct me on that.
-
I have appealed and will report ASAP whenever I receive their contest. Btw is there a timeline when this will be done? or is it a case where the council will decide when it goes ahead?
Make sure you have asked for a personal (face-to-face or telephone) hearing (never, ever, a decision on papers). You will then be given a date and time for the hearing, and the council must submit an evidence pack 4-5 days before the hearing date.
-
Is there anyone that can guide me in terms of what to include in the application that i will make to the tribunal? Thank you
Normal MO is just to register your appeal online under 'the contravention did not occur' and state that you rely on your formal representations.
Then wait to see if they contest. If they do they will send an evidence pack and also upload that to the tribunal portal.
Come back here immediately if they do. their 'case summary' will normally give you some clues about how you might then respond.
I have appealed and will report ASAP whenever I receive their contest. Btw is there a timeline when this will be done? or is it a case where the council will decide when it goes ahead?
-
Is there anyone that can guide me in terms of what to include in the application that i will make to the tribunal? Thank you
Normal MO is just to register your appeal online under 'the contravention did not occur' and state that you rely on your formal representations.
Then wait to see if they contest. If they do they will send an evidence pack and also upload that to the tribunal portal.
Come back here immediately if they do. their 'case summary' will normally give you some clues about how you might then respond.
-
Is there anyone that can guide me in terms of what to include in the application that i will make to the tribunal? Thank you
-
I have received a notice of rejection of representation - For some reason the appeal should be made direct to the adjudicator. Is that the correct process?
I was thinking first they should reject the appeal and I will state that "I require you to reconsider my informal representations as my formal representation"
Usually
In stationary traffic offences where the PCN is affixed to the vehicle the driver, who may or may not be the registered keeper, has the chance to pay or challenge the PCN. If neither happens this is followed by a NtO (Notice to Owner) sent by post to the person named on the V5C. The registered keeper then has the opportunity to make representations. If these are rejected, then the RK may pay or appeal to the tribunal.
For moving traffic offences the PCN has to be sent to the RK, so it serves as NtO and rejection of any representations means RK may pay or appeal to tribunal: there is no informal challenge stage.
For further detail see
https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/understanding-enforcement-process
Makes sense now - thank you
-
I have received a notice of rejection of representation - For some reason the appeal should be made direct to the adjudicator. Is that the correct process?
I was thinking first they should reject the appeal and I will state that "I require you to reconsider my informal representations as my formal representation"
Usually
In stationary traffic offences where the PCN is affixed to the vehicle the driver, who may or may not be the registered keeper, has the chance to pay or challenge the PCN. If neither happens this is followed by a NtO (Notice to Owner) sent by post to the person named on the V5C. The registered keeper then has the opportunity to make representations. If these are rejected, then the RK may pay or appeal to the tribunal.
For moving traffic offences the PCN has to be sent to the RK, so it serves as NtO and rejection of any representations means RK may pay or appeal to tribunal: there is no informal challenge stage.
For further detail see
https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/understanding-enforcement-process
-
I have received a notice of rejection of representation - For some reason the appeal should be made direct to the adjudicator. Is that the correct process?
I was thinking first they should reject the appeal and I will state that "I require you to reconsider my informal representations as my formal representation"
Notice attached
(https://i.ibb.co/CKMH7NV/PXL-20240701-165953776-1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/9HVrTzy)
(https://i.ibb.co/qNnMGqc/PXL-20240701-170004662-MP.jpg) (https://ibb.co/c6vc5fZ)
(https://i.ibb.co/Rj5nZL5/PXL-20240701-170022144.jpg) (https://ibb.co/HhJv1mJ)
(https://i.ibb.co/Y83Y9J5/PXL-20240701-170034068-1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mtG1sdn)"
-
@S.M the order you have linked is a parking TMO, the one for the pedestrian zone is The Waltham Forest (Prescribed Routes) (Pedestrian and Cycle Zone) Traffic Order 2021 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WI_Q1xZmlXJmJ5HP1lQ-WiWmcAzEO5_P/view) as amended by The Waltham Forest (Prescribed Routes) (Pedestrian and Cycle Zones) (Amendment No. 3) Traffic Order 2022 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XyXl--1uiEkP7OUZYk3wdsEqnTAHCVWk/view).
Let us know when you get the rejection, realistically this will only get cancelled at the tribunal.
Yes will update as soon as I hear from them. thanks
-
@S.M the order you have linked is a parking TMO, the one for the pedestrian zone is The Waltham Forest (Prescribed Routes) (Pedestrian and Cycle Zone) Traffic Order 2021 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WI_Q1xZmlXJmJ5HP1lQ-WiWmcAzEO5_P/view) as amended by The Waltham Forest (Prescribed Routes) (Pedestrian and Cycle Zones) (Amendment No. 3) Traffic Order 2022 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XyXl--1uiEkP7OUZYk3wdsEqnTAHCVWk/view).
Let us know when you get the rejection, realistically this will only get cancelled at the tribunal.
-
Looks OK. Basically, you're just setting things in motion for an appeal at London Tribunals, because they will reject your reps no matter what they contain, as that's how councils game the system to make money.
Sent - let`s now wait
-
Looks OK. Basically, you're just setting things in motion for an appeal at London Tribunals, because they will reject your reps no matter what they contain, as that's how councils game the system to make money.
-
We don't support any templates on here, but ask appellants to post a draft of their reps for review before submission.
Your reps should emphasise the total lack of advance warning of the restriction. I would leave out the fact the sign does not reflect the TRO for now.
Dear Walthamforest Parking Team,
I would like to appeal PCN FR62440790 based on insufficient signage. There are no advance warning to inform motorists that they are unable to turn right from Leytonstone High Road onto Harrington Road.
Furthermore, the placement of a single sign at the start of Harrington road makes it very dangerous for motorist and pedestrians as a driver could panick and cause an accident was he to see the sign when entering Harrington road.
=============================
Is the above ok?
-
We don't support any templates on here, but ask appellants to post a draft of their reps for review before submission.
Your reps should emphasise the total lack of advance warning of the restriction. I would leave out the fact the sign does not reflect the TRO for now.
-
I looked on your GSV link, and there are no advance warning signs in either direction. The April 2022 view shows the signs as closed. So is the restriction only at term time ? The July 2021 view shows the signs fully open indicating the restriction. So I see two arguments against the contravention itself
1. No advance warning means it is a dangerous restriction as the turn in is off a busy road, and a right-hand turn in especially so, because what is the motorist supposed to do when seeing the sign ? Jam his brakes on in the middle of the road and back out ?
2. The sign may not reflect the TRO because if the restriction in the TRO is term-time only this should be on the sign. There is a similar situation at Royal Albert Way, where "Flying Motorbike" signs just light-up at the start of the restriction. Not conveying the TRO restriction in the signs is against the council duty in LATOR 1996 Regulation 18
Yes the sign is only there at term time. https://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-03/T11%2824%29%20Experimental%20Traffic%20Orders%20%28ETMO%29%20-%20LSE%20CPZ%20conversion%20to%20LS%20CPZ.pdf
Should I send an appeal now and is there any template i can use?
-
I looked on your GSV link, and there are no advance warning signs in either direction. The April 2022 view shows the signs as closed. So is the restriction only at term time ? The July 2021 view shows the signs fully open indicating the restriction. So I see two arguments against the contravention itself
1. No advance warning means it is a dangerous restriction as the turn in is off a busy road, and a right-hand turn in especially so, because what is the motorist supposed to do when seeing the sign ? Jam his brakes on in the middle of the road and back out ?
2. The sign may not reflect the TRO because if the restriction in the TRO is term-time only this should be on the sign. There is a similar situation at Royal Albert Way, where "Flying Motorbike" signs just light-up at the start of the restriction. Not conveying the TRO restriction in the signs is against the council duty in LATOR 1996 Regulation 18
-
Hi Folks,
The other half was doing some shopping and she turned into a restricted road during school hours. She turned right from Leytonstone High Road onto Harrington Road - Google Maps Link - https://maps.app.goo.gl/cpLMFdWJxmr9x5LY9
When driving on Leytonstone high road - there are no advance warning regarding vehicles not being able to turn right. Given that someone has to focus on oncoming traffic + pedestrians and cyclist, it makes it very hard to see the signs at the start of the road.
If there is a van parked up in the corner, it makes it even more difficult to notice the sign (Dashcam video). I`m not sure if the council expects drivers to just reverse back onto oncoming traffic in this situation.
I have attached the council video and a dashcam video I`ve taken a day after receiving the PCN - Is this something that can be appealed?
Please note Date of notice is 13/05/2024.
Council Video - https://streamable.com/kelz21
Dashcam Video - https://streamable.com/kpx1pq
(https://i.ibb.co/JmJVXvN/PCN1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/NtB5w9X)
(https://i.ibb.co/tQWGfYb/pcn4.jpg) (https://ibb.co/xXRkvzM)
(https://i.ibb.co/zQT5Fdq/pcn3.jpg) (https://ibb.co/djwctZ8)
(https://i.ibb.co/cNZ7Hwt/pcn2.jpg) (https://ibb.co/qRcPfC9)