Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Sg2024 on December 03, 2024, 07:11:22 pm
-
In any event Lambeth's website is all over the place at present with threats appearing in many legislations to increase the privce.
-
Dear members,
I am so pleased to share that I received my correct/revised decision stating that my appeal has been upheld - Hurray !! Many Thanks for the advice and support - it is highly appreciated.
For the benefit of other members in future, here is the reasoning.
----
At this scheduled personal hearing the Appellant attended in person but the Enforcement Authority did not attend and were not represented.
A contravention can occur is a vehicle is stopped on a restricted bus stop or stand. The Penalty Charge Notice was issued under Regulation 10 of the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022(the '2022 General Regulations') on the basis of a record produced by an approved device.
A bus stop clearway or bus stand clearway is one of the circumstances referred to in Regulation 11(1)(b) of the 2022 General Regulations, as an exception to the requirement that a penalty charge notice may be served only by the fixing of a notice to the vehicle by a civil enforcement officer who has reason to believe that a penalty charge is payable with respect to it.
There appears to be no dispute that the vehicle was stopped at this bus stop in Dulwich Road, as shown in the closed-circuit television (cctv) images produced by the Enforcement Authority.
The Appellant says that he is aware that he cannot stop on the bus stop and drove to park into the parking bay adjoining it but immediately realised there was not enough space. The Appellant explains that as he was trying to move on, the flow of traffic prevented him from doing so immediately as there were two oncoming vehicles and a cyclist, so he had to wait to avoid an accident.
I have had the opportunity of hearing the Appellant personally and accept what he tells me. The Adjudicator is only able to decide an appeal by making findings of fact on the basis of the evidence actually produced by the parties and applying relevant law. Considering all the evidence before me carefully I cannot find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, a contravention did occur. Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
-
All correspondence in this instance should be in writing.
-
Interesting. Sent an email as well for future documentation. Will post the group when I receive any further response / correspondence. Thanks a ton again !!
-
You should write not just phone.
A thought from left field:
How alert will the authority be to this error?
If you weren't to pay the full penalty then the authority could serve a Charge Certificate as follows:
d)where P has made an unsuccessful appeal to an adjudicator under the 2022 Appeals Regulations against a notice of rejection and sub-paragraph (c) does not apply[it doesn't], the date on which the adjudicator’s decision is served on P.
As yet, this decision* has not been served. So if the authority were to act upon the first notification they could issue a CC prematurely. This could get the whole issue referred back to the (hopefully different) adjudicator.
*- I interpret 'decision' not to be just allowed or rejected but to encompass the adjudicator's reasons. IMO, to interpret otherwise would deny the appellant the opportunity to consider applying for a review - which is a standard part of the appeals procedure- because they wouldn't have sufficient info and as the service of the decision is integral to this part of procedure then so it would be here.
But first confirm your conversation in writing and then let's see the written decision.
-
Thank you so v much. I am not keeping hopes high tbh. But quite disappointed with the process. I have called up the Tribunal as advised who mentioned that they have raised this with the case management and shall get back to me, perhaps in coming days.
-
See paras. 10, 11 and 12(2)(a) https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/576/schedule/1
The review 'clock' won't start ticking until the decision is served on you.
-
Call the tribunal and ask them to put up the correct decision on your case.
We can then look at it to see if it warrants a review (but have to say that's unlikely).
-
Thanks again. He only countered me, and didnt give any specific reason.
1) You were in the wrong lane not in the traffic
> Yes, because I was looking to park ahead in the parking lane, where the car just parked and seemed like there would have been space, but it was a misjudgement on my part, but I tried to then manouver right and move on, but it was late, since there were incoming vehicles
2) There was not enough space to park
> Correct, but thats in hindsight. There was space, but the vehicle ahead of me parked just before of me when I was driving towards it, and it would have been visible if only the council provided the video just before where it starts.
3) You had the left indicator on.
> Yes, since I was looking to park, but I changed it on realising not much space
4) Referred me to the picture where the car from behind seemed long behind
> Yes, but that's in the picture. Please look at the video where you can see that it would have bumped into me if I had turned right.
-
It's obvious that the wrong decision has been attached to your case so you'll need to contact the Tribunal.
But as it is the wrong decision, and therefore an admin. error, this cannot change what actually transpired at the hearing which at present only the OP knows.
OP, putting the wrong decision to one side, what did the adjudicator give as their reasons at the hearing? Did they refer to 'one of several cases' at that time or is this something you've latched on to later?
-
Fully concur with you and it's my bad. I had forgotten about the PCN, until yesterday morning when fortunately I realised the hearing in the afternoon. I went in person, hoping it would make a difference - but didn't. The adjudicator read standard procedural disclaimers and then asked me to explain my side of the things. which I did. Then he kept countering me but you had a left signal and you did stop, I made counter-arguments (similar to my response), he looked visibly annoyed. Thereafter he asked me to leave and said that he will review the video and make his decision. That was it.
Not much in the Council pack - it seemed all in line. there are pictures from the video - I have attached below.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Well you stopped engaging with us so we couldn't advise on your appeal.
But it appears they've pasted in the wrong decision or adjudicated the wrong case - what exactly happened?
What is in Lambeth's evidence pack?
It looks like asking for a review is the way to go.
---------
Case Details
Case reference 2240558779
Appellant Sandeep Goel
Authority London Borough of Lambeth
VRM KN64WNU
PCN Details
PCN LJ31265469
Contravention date 16 Oct 2024
Contravention time 14:50:00
Contravention location Dulwich Road
Penalty amount GBP 130.00
Contravention Stopped on a restricted bus stop or stand
Referral date -
Decision Date 29 Jan 2025
Adjudicator Henry Michael Greenslade
Appeal decision Appeal refused
Direction Full penalty charge notice amount stated to be paid within 28 days.
Reasons
This is one of several appeals I am considering together arising out of Penalty Charge Notices issued in respect of the same vehicle, on different occasions.
A contravention can occur if a vehicle is driven so as to fail to comply with a prohibition on certain vehicles.
There appears to be no dispute that the vehicle was at this location, as shown in the closed circuit television (cctv) images produced by the Enforcement Authority.
The vehicle is seen to pass the sign which, as the evidence clearly shows, indicates that, except for buses, taxis and ‘BG’ permit holders, all motor vehicles are prohibited at all times.
The Appellant’s case is that
It does remain the responsibility of the motorist to check carefully at all times whilst driving their vehicle, so as to ensure that they do so only as permitted. This includes making sure that they comply with all restrictions and prohibitions indicated by the signs.
The sign, on each side of the carriageway, is that prescribed by Diagram 619 at Item 12 in Part 2 of Schedule 3 to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, as indicating ‘Motor vehicles prohibited’. The sign is illustrated in the current edition of the Official Highway Code.
The sign, on each side of the carriageway, is that prescribed by Diagram 619.1 at Item 12 in Part 2 of Schedule 3 to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, as indicating ‘Motor vehicles except solo motor cycles prohibited’.
The penalty charge is £130. The amount of the penalty charge is set by the Transport, Environment and Planning Committee of London Councils and approved by the Mayor of London with the authority of the Secretary of State. Under Section 4(8)(a)(iv) and 4(10) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 the enforcement authority must accept the reduced penalty of £65 if paid within 14 days of the date of the Penalty Charge Notice. This is different from some other types of Penalty Charge Notice, where the relevant date is service. Once this period has expired and, for whatever reason including appealing to the Adjudicator and/or making representations to the authority, the charge remains unpaid then the full penalty becomes due.
Section 4(18) of the 2003 Act provides that in determining, for the purposes of any provision of the Act, whether a penalty charge has been paid before the end of a particular period, it shall be taken to be paid when it is received by the authority concerned.
The Enforcement Authority did, in exercise of their discretion, reoffer the reduced penalty period in their Notice of Rejection and whilst I note all that the Appellant says regarding the circumstances, the Adjudicator is only able to decide an appeal by making findings of fact on the basis of the evidence actually produced by the parties and applying relevant law. The Court of Appeal has affirmed that the Adjudicator has no power to consider mitigating circumstances of any description, including reducing the amount of the full penalty charge.
Applications for time to pay the Penalty Charge Notice must be addressed to the Enforcement Authority direct.
Considering all the evidence before me carefully I must find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, a contravention did occur and the Penalty Charge Notice was properly issued.
Accordingly, this appeal must be refused.
-
In hindsight, I could have prepared better. This was my response and I made similar arguments in person. I should have also mentioned about the absence of signpost - do you see it in the video (in my first post above) btw?
++++
Dear Sir / Madam,
On the 16 October 2024, London Borough of Lambeth issued a parking charge notice highlighting a 47J contravention (Stopped at a restricted bus stop/stand). As the appellant I wish to refute these charges on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur. I have laid out the circumstances and supporting grounds below:
As can be easily gauged in the evidence video (though limited) provided by Lambeth, I drove into the bus stop box to park into the parking box immediately ahead of it. I had requested the council to provide the full video (before where it starts, so it can be more clearly seen, but they have not provided). I was trying to park in the parking space ahead before realizing not enough space and then the traffic prevented me from driving ahead. The two incoming vehicles and a cyclist prevented me from driving ahead, otherwise I could have likely injured a cyclist or bumped into another car. Once they moved on, I promptly turned into the right lane and drove on. At no stage while the car was into the box, there was any loading / unloading or another reason to stop into the box.
I fully understand and appreciate the "No-Stop" rule, but I believe the council is incorrectly applying the rule similar to a yellow zig zag box / box junction where a car must only enter when there is a clear passage ahead and can exit promptly without stopping for even for traffic ahead. But I don't believe the two are the same because when a similar bus-stop with "no-stop" restriction is on a single lane road, a car can stop in the box due to traffic ahead. So, the box junction rules do not apply.
Furthermore, even though no-stop restrictions apply at all times on red (or double red lines) without any need for a sign-board, if there is traffic on the road (for example) a red light or changing lanes, a car can pause temporarily for these reasons (i.e. traffic ahead or change lanes) etc as has been the case for me.
For these reasons, I believe that the council is incorrectly applying the rule and propose that this appeal should be upheld and that Lambeth should be required to withdraw PCN Number LJ31265469.
+++
-
I have only just joined this thread. What were your reps and appeal details?
-
Hi all,
Thanks for your responses / help before. I had my Tribunal hearing yesterday that I went in person. The adjudicator I must say was unwilling to properly engage in conversation. In any case, no grudges, he ruled against me. However, their response is pretty absurd. I have three problems with their response. As always, would appreciate views from the learned members on this forum:
1) First line on page 2 - "This is one of several appeals I am considering together arising out of Penalty Charge Notices issued in respect of the same vehicle, on different occasions."
> Not true!! It was just one PCN and no other PCN. So factually incorrect !!
2) "The Appellant's case is that"
> Missing completely.. Proves my point above on bias and not really listening to my argument.
3) "The vehicle is seen to pass the sign which, as the evidence clearly shows, indicates that, except for buses, taxis and 'BG' permit holders, all motor vehicles are prohibited at all times."
> There is no sign on the video or pictures. I have revisited the video, pictures as well as gone there again in person - And I couldn't find any such sign boards there. I may be wrong, but would appreciate if anyone can point it on the video above.
I will pay up the PCN in coming days, but fundamentally I find this all wrong and system skewed against. The councils are acting as for-profit corporates and PoPLA seems like a sham!!
I was told that the only recourse I have is to go to the High Court for wrong interpretation of the law. Is that really the case?
Many Thanks!
SG
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Ah, that gives me more confidence. Thanks again. Will update the post on how I progress with the next stage for the benefit of others in future.
-
Nothing to do with box junctions.
It's a no stopping clearway but doesn't apply in a traffic queue if you are obviously in a queue and not close to the kerb out of line.
I'd say you have a reasonable chance but you need to be clear what you'd say to the adjudicator should Lambeth contest it.
-
Thanks v much for sharing your thoughts and prompt responses. As I think more, I am inclined to take my case to the tribunal. Here are my additional arguments - I understand the no-stop rules, but this is how I see it:
1) Are the rules for bus-stop same as yellow zig-zag lines that you enter this box only when you have a clear passage ahead and can exit promptly without stopping for any reason? If yes, then I am indeed in breach. But I don't believe they are the same because when a similar bus-stop is on a single lane of road, clearly you are allowed to stop in the box due to traffic ahead. So, you can stop on the bus-stop due to onwards traffic or driving manoeuvre.
2) Similar or more strict "No-stop" conditions apply on red (or double red) lines, but you can still temporarily stop for similar reasons as above due to onwards traffic or driving manoeuvre. No?
As you can see from the video, I only stopped due to the incoming traffic which did not allow me to continue ahead. I was clearly in the wrong lane, which I am presuming was me trying to park ahead before realizing not enough space and then the traffic did not allow me to move ahead.
I might be wrong here, but open to hear if you disagree as that would give me insight into how the adjudicator may take my arguments.
-
The only option you have apart from paying is taking it to the tribunal with the full £130 at stake (if Lambeth contests it - some they don't).
You'd need a personal hearing where you'd need to convince the adjudicator you had dome something like been in the wrong lane and was just engaging in a manoeuvre.
-
To be honest, I don't even remember. I don't usually drive on this road often. I did ask in my representation for the council to furnish the video before, as its only part video but they did not. My guess is that I perhaps wanted to park in the box ahead before a late realisation that there was not much space, or realised the sign board of "No stopping" too late before I was in that lane.
-
There was no intention to stop or park on the Bus Stop.
OK, but why did you stop in the first place ? If you had to wait for some cyclists and cars to pass, you were clearly not in the traffic "stream".
-
Also, Would you mind me asking if in your views is it worth taking the chance of putting up an apeal or better to just pay up. i.e. if you were in my shoes, would you appeal? I am usually minded to appeal by default but frankly quite unaware of the precedence here. Thanks again.
-
Thank you for the prompt response @stamfordman. My representation was the same that I was waiting for the cars and cyclist to pass which was part of the traffic. There was no intention to stop or park on the Bus Stop.
-
We have another case here that is much more clear cut. These are strictly no stopping contraventions. The bus stop clearway puts you on notice as such and the sign seals the deal.
In your case you may get away with persuading an adjudicator you were engaged in a driving manoeuvre as there was a bit of yellow line ahead and you couldn't squeeze in.
But what was your representation? There is no informal stage with this.
Other case:
https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/lambeth-council-pcn-stopping-in-a-restricted-bus-stop-dulwich-road/
-
Hi all,
I would really appreciate any thoughts / views on this PCN as it seems a bit ridiculous to me honestly. This is the 3rd council PCN I have received in the last 12 months, two of which were pulled back by them when I formally appealed given how stupid they were, but wanted to check if I have sufficient grounds to appeal again or not ?
This relates to a PCN for 47j (stopped on a restricted bus stop/stand) at Dulwich Road. I did not do any loading/unloading and only stopped and when I saw the no stop sign, I carried on. Since I was in the left most lane with the bus stop and cars parked ahead and there was moving traffic on my right lane, I clearly had to let them pass before I could move ahead. I clearly put the right signal lights and moved swiftly when they passed ahead. There was no loading or unloading from the car or stopping for other reasons. I would have clearly driven into a cyclist or another car if I hadnt stopped.
Are the rules for 47j same as that for a yellow zigzag lines on the road, where we are not allowed to stop, except unless we are turning right?
Again appreciate any thoughts here. I need to respond by the end of this week to avail the benefits of the discounted payment window if I do need to take that option, else would formally appeal should that be the views from more educated members on this forum.
Here is the link to the video in the PCN - hopefully this makes the situation clear.
https://youtu.be/IpZJoA4-KnY
Also, the response to my informal appeal states as follows (if helpful): "We sent you a PCN because our camera evidence shows your vehicle stopped in a bus stop (there are yellow markings on the road with "Bus Stop" or "Bus Stand" written inside them). Stopped vehicles make it hard for buses to pull in which endangers passengers getting on and off....... I have investigated your case and am satisfied that your PCN was issued correctly. I appreciate you did not inted on committing the contravention and understand the circumstances described within yrou representation. Please be advised that it remains the driver's/keeper responsibility to ensure that the vehicle was proceeding in accordance with the restriction in place."
Thanks in advance.
SG