Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: gbawekanu on September 06, 2023, 04:07:51 pm
-
The pcn is wrong. Says 28 days from service not from alleged contravention date. Two adjudicators agree with me. I can be the representative at the tribunal. Email mrmustard@zoho.com
-
What have you submitted?
I have just followed your instructions above to register the appeal. I have not yet drafted the appeal points. Planning to use the draft I wrote earlier, unless board members think it is inadequate.
If you get rejected and go to the tribunal the council will, if they fight on, produce the PCN and I can check it for legaility at that point.
Message to everyone else, keep all your paperwork safe, it may be useful. I'm a bit boring. I still have paperwork on cars I sold years ago which has enabled me to make mis-selling claims for the emissions cheating which has already led to one modest payout.
I have now received the original PCN as part of the council's evidence. Please see the PCN below.
https://imgur.com/a/sRNRWZG
-
What have you submitted?
-
If you get rejected and go to the tribunal the council will, if they fight on, produce the PCN and I can check it for legaility at that point.
Message to everyone else, keep all your paperwork safe, it may be useful. I'm a bit boring. I still have paperwork on cars I sold years ago which has enabled me to make mis-selling claims for the emissions cheating which has already led to one modest payout.
I have submitted the appeal and will post the PCN when the council produces their evidence. Thanks
-
Forget the detailed appeal for now. Just register online: Contravention did not occur, I rely upon on my formal representations and will submit full submissions when I receive the council's evidence pack. Choose: personal hearing.
-
If you get rejected and go to the tribunal the council will, if they fight on, produce the PCN and I can check it for legaility at that point.
Message to everyone else, keep all your paperwork safe, it may be useful. I'm a bit boring. I still have paperwork on cars I sold years ago which has enabled me to make mis-selling claims for the emissions cheating which has already led to one modest payout.
-
I still want to see the Pcn please
Unfortunately, I have lost the original PCN.
I only have the Notice to Owner.
This is the draft of my appeal to the tribunal.
APPEAL AGAINST PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE-- NO. XXXXXXXX
The Charge
Contravention 21 – Parked wholly or partly in a suspended bay or space.
My appeal is therefore based on the following ground:-
(1) Penalty notice is ambiguous and misleading
The penalty notice refers to ‘4 car spaces outside 19 -25 Atherton Street'.
There are no marked spaces, therefore 4 car spaces and 19-25 is an ambiguous description which is extremely confusing to the average driver.
When I parked my car, I read the suspension notice and diligently made sure that I left the required 4 car spaces behind me from 19 Atherton Street.
In my formal appeal, I have asked the council to show me how it arrived at the conclusion that there were less than 4 car spaces behind my vehicle at the time that I parked. Furthermore, I requested the council to provide me with a copy of whatever evidence they have that proves this point (including their definition of the length of a "car space" and the legal argument they intend to make that justifies this definition) so that I can make an informed decision about taking this case to the parking tribunal.
The council has failed to respond to both requests, so I am not able to effectively defend myself at the tribunal.
With respect, I would refer the adjudicator to ETA 2210026624 and the review of that decision.
Extract of the adjudicator ruling
“I have considered the totality of the evidence before me and I find that I cannot be satisfied on balance that the signage which highlight the suspension is adequate or clear for the purposes of the
authority discharging their duties in demonstrating that the reasonable driver would have been aware of the exact length of the suspended bays. There is some ambiguity as to the length of a bay and further the exact length of the suspension was not properly marked out end to end in order to avoid any ambiguity.
I find therefore given the totality of the evidence before me on balance, which includes lack of adequate signage and the fact that the Appellant's vehicle is seen parked at the very edge of what might be the 5 suspended spaces, then this leads me to the conclude there is some ambiguity as to
whether there is an actual contravention. For these reasons I therefore allow the appeal.”
I would respectfully ask that the PCN be cancelled on the above ground.
-
I still want to see the Pcn please
-
They haven't re-offered the discount, so it is now a no-brainer to take them to London Tribunals, because the penalty remains the same and there are no additional costs. You can make the additional point to your previous reps that most motorists don't go around with tape measures in their car to measure whether they comply with asuspension or not.
-
My formal appeal to the council has been rejected.
I received the Notice of Rejection today, the link which I have attached below.
In the appeal, they stated 'The 20 metre (4-car) space outside 19-25 Atherton Street was suspended ....'
There wasn't any '20 metre' written on the suspended sign.
https://imgur.com/a/0lB1H5k
-
I would add to my previous point:
There are no marked spaces, therefore 4 car spaces and 19-25 is an ambiguous description because a driver is left thinking does this mean:
a. 4 car spaces measured from no. 19 and how long is a car length; or
b. the whole of the length of road between 19-25;
Ambiguity, which is hardly aided by the lack of a side-on photo from the CEO for reasons which the adjudicator might find odd...in addition to the authority's stance that there is no ambiguity which could only arise if they formed this view based upon the notes only. A photo paints a thousand words.
-
Case Reference: 2210026624
Link here (https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1A-bK7Wjd4eBujkmSMqYwBuX3u-GeNLyy).
-
Case Reference: 2210026624
-
I had a very similar situation a few years ago and won on appeal at London tribunal.
If your case supports the OP it would be helpful for him to have the case number so he can add it in support of his own case.
-
I had a very similar situation a few years ago and won on appeal at London tribunal. In summary, the adjudicator sided with me as on balance there was too much ambiguity around whether a contravention occurred. I post below an extract of the adjudicators concluding comments:
The appellant in evidence before me highlighted referring to his written submissions, videos and photographs that the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 provided at schedule 7, part 5 paragraphs 2(4) and 2(5) that generally where bays were divided to indicate a parking space
then the length of the space was not to be less than 4500 with the maximum length of a parking bay
maybe 6.6 m when considering spaces for disabled badge holders. Therefore on his calculations
(using videos to demonstrate his calculations and position of his car) at 4.5 metres, 5 car spaces
would be approx. 22.5 metres and his car was parked at least at 24.1 metres.
I have considered the totality of the evidence before me and I find that I cannot be satisfied on balance that the signage which highlight the suspension is adequate or clear for the purposes of the
authority discharging their duties in demonstrating that the reasonable driver would have been aware
of the exact length of the suspended bays. There is some ambiguity as to the length of a bay and further the exact length of the suspension was not properly marked out end to end in order to avoid any ambiguity.
I find therefore given the totality of the evidence before me on balance, which includes lack of
adequate signage and the fact that the Appellant's vehicle is seen parked at the very edge of what might be the 5 suspended spaces, then this leads me to the conclude there is some ambiguity as to
whether there is an actual contravention. For these reasons I therefore allow the appeal.
-
Thanks Grant Urismo
Appeal submitted.
-
It's going to be difficult to produce definitive evidence about what exactly 4 car spaces means, so I suggest putting the burden of doing that on to the council. I'd go with something along the lines of:
"When I parked my car I read the suspension notice and diligently made sure that I left the required 4 car spaces behind me. If the council believe that there were less than 4 car spaces behind my vehicle at the time that I parked, I require the council to provide me with a copy of whatever evidence they have that proves this point (including their definition of the length of a "car space" and the legal argument they intend to make that justifies this definition) so that I can make an informed decision about taking this case to the parking tribunal."
-
There's got to be a better way of phrasing...not sure what at the moment?
But minimum length suggest that the council could define each space as 5.275m.... ie exact 4 spaces for the 21.1m available.
It's the ambiguity that counts for me.
Suspended outside 17 to 25 but no specific limits, the only clue being 4 car spaces.
Is this centre to centre, edge to edge and if the latter, leading edge or outside edge or one of each?
TSRGD gives a minimum space length as 4.5m, average UK car is 4.4m, British Parking Association recommends 4.8m for parking bay length, even if the council allocated 5m per space, it still doesn't fill the area that the authority seems to be claiming and means any minimal overlap into "their" space is trivial, especially as they are not clear on the exact limits.
-
Thanks DancingDad.
I am planning to send the draft below as my appeal. Any suggestions please?
"The measured span between the starting point at 19 Atherton Street and the conclusion at 25 Atherton Street is 21.1 meters. According to The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD), a parking bay must have a minimum length of 4.5 meters. This unequivocally demonstrates that the vehicle is not situated within the designated area for four parking spaces as indicated on the suspended parking sign."
-
TSRGD puts the minimum length of a parallel parking bay as 4.5m
Even if that figure is used there is still 3.1m spare with 4 "standard" cars parked...or rather not parked.
-
I just measured the distance between 19 and 25 and the distance is 21.1 metres.
I found on the website below that the average car length in the UK is around 4.4 metres.
https://www.nationwidevehiclecontracts.co.uk/guides/ask-nvc/understanding-car-size-and-dimensions#:~:text=What%20is%20standard%20size%20car,1821mm%20wide%2C%20and%201534mm%20tall.
-
Can you go and get a tape measure and measure the distance from the start of 19 to the end of 25?
I reckon there's space for more than 4 cars, in which case the signage is ambiguous. It doesn't matter if 5 estates wouldn't fit, as long as 4 average cars could fit behind your car and before the boundary between numbers 19 and 17, then you cannot have been in the suspended area.
-
This was the evidence I previously sent.
https://imgur.com/a/Exg4sq9
Here is the rejection of the appeal by the council
https://imgur.com/a/8GbJMdT
-
So let's see this "pictorial evidence" you plan on sending please.
-
Here is the link with the PCN and reg numbers
(https://i.imgur.com/Ek4jGWN.jpeg)
-
Please re-instate Reg.mark and PCN number.
-
Please see the draft of my initial appeal to the council that was rejected below. Any ideas on what to add/remove for the next challenge?
"I am writing to formally appeal the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) I received on 22/06/2023 for an alleged parking violation at Atherton Street. I respectfully request that you review the circumstances surrounding this incident, as I firmly believe that the ticket was issued in error.
According to the PCN, I was accused of parking in a suspended parking zone between 19 to 25 Atherton Street. However, I would like to bring to your attention that I was, in fact, parked directly in front of 27 Atherton Street, which was not part of the suspended area. I have attached pictorial evidence that clearly shows my vehicle parked legally in front of the aforementioned address during the time specified on the PCN.
I kindly request that you carefully review the attached evidence, which clearly demonstrates that my vehicle was not parked in a suspended zone. I trust that upon examination, you will acknowledge the error and promptly cancel the penalty charge.
In light of this situation, I kindly ask for your understanding and swift resolution to rectify this matter. I appreciate your attention to this appeal and I kindly request that you respond in writing to confirm the cancellation of the PCN. Should you require any further information or clarification, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter."
-
@cp8759 Sorry for going awol, work has been busy lately.
I appreciate your assistance in obtaining the suspension logs. From what I've seen, they appear to be in order. Or do you think there's any information within them that could be useful for my appeal?
I've recently received a Notice to Owner from the council.
(https://i.imgur.com/olk861q.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/xcwtFRL.jpeg)
-
@gbawekanu you seem to have fallen off the face of the Earth?
Anyway here are the suspension logs:
(https://i.imgur.com/4gsGWYH.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/hUxnc7R.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/Z7GV5z4.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/9vwxFFR.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/1UVFs6F.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/dWRRDnm.png)
-
I've ordered the suspension logs.
-
When you get the NTO post it here we will check it for errors and one of us will draft you a representation
-
Sorry, cannot accept this, but c'est la vie. There is no reason for a driver to even look at a traffic sign ahead of them when the one they've already and very recently passed showed no additional restriction.
If true...
But it is for the authority to prove IMO in order to meet their 'adequate information' burden.
-
The council don't have to establish that there was a sign on 19/21, that there was will be assumed unless OP can show different or challenge the council on it and council fail to address.
-
I am only making one point re signage i.e. that the council must establish that there was a suspension sign o/s 19/21 because:
It is the one last passed by the OP;
It is the only one within the suspended area.
Thr council have not as far as we know included this in their evidence.
The point which derives from the sign ahead is their casual reference to being one car length ahead. If they can be as approximate with their measures, which in this case if taken literally must establish that the OP's car was not within the suspended area, then it undermines their credibility as regards their certainty that the car was in the area based upon a single imprecise photo taken at an oblique angle.
-
......
IMO, given the traffic direction and that the only sign you had passed was o/s 19/21 then it is whether this sign carried a suspension sign which is key and not a sign which wasn't even in the suspended area. IMO, the authority's burden is to show that the only sign post situated within the suspended area carried a suspension sign, not one 'one car length ahead'.
But there isn't any evidence to this effect as far as I can see. OP, do you have other photos showing a suspension sign o/s 19-21? .......
That the sign the council is relying on is ahead of the vehicle is irrelevant, a driver is expected to check signs when they park, even if they are ahead of their direction of travel.
The point re signage outside 19/21 is more valid, if there was no suspension sign on that, then the alert motorist would not only see the normal sign but be entitled to rely upon it.
-
The parking place is continuous and extends from the junction with Abercrombie to well beyond the boundaries of 19-25;
There are no internal markings indicating parking spaces;
Traffic signs are situated o/s the flank wall of 19/21 and at the junction with Abercrombie;
The authority's response in support of their rejection states 'a suspension sign was visible one car length in front of the vehicle'.
IMO, given the traffic direction and that the only sign you had passed was o/s 19/21 then it is whether this sign carried a suspension sign which is key and not a sign which wasn't even in the suspended area. IMO, the authority's burden is to show that the only sign post situated within the suspended area carried a suspension sign, not one 'one car length ahead'.
But there isn't any evidence to this effect as far as I can see. OP, do you have other photos showing a suspension sign o/s 19-21?
..and 'one car length ahead of your car' means the rear of your car couldn't have been within the suspended area - not the strongest point, just picking up on their so-called rationale.
-
The suspension sign specifically says 4 car spaces outside of 19-25.
Where are the spaces?
The authority seem to be taking is as the parking bay outside of 19-25 including all the frontage of the two end houses.
Being as they seem to lack clarity on their suspension sign, penalising for what would only be a minimal intrusion into the area fronted by no 25 seems a bit rich.
As does the one CEo photo we have that is taken at an angle, visually increasing any overlap.
-
Yes, let us see the complete PCN, cover nothing up and then we can study the complete picture.
You have a chance at the tribunal but we are one step ahead of ourselves as you do not have the Notice to Owner yet (and it should already have been sent but is not late enough to be out of time).
-
We certainly need to see the PCN itself but in the meantime here is a link to the temporary parking suspension authorisation for Lambeth as granted by the DfT. It dates from 2012 but appears to be the current one. Note the difference as between "Parking Suspension" as authorised and "Parking Suspended" as per the sign in the photograph. Also the different positioning of the No Loading wording. Unfortunately I think too minor to get you off at LTs as the meaning is clear. Better to concentrate on the position of the car.
https://assets.dft.gov.uk/trafficauths/case-3523.pdf
-
Here from the photos a good chance but first you must make formal representations to the council when you receive the NTO. It is that representation that is subject to the 56 day limit
Here
https://goo.gl/maps/ED7WDRgdt8egx2gW7
IMO the photos do not prove a contravention
-
Please post up both sides of the PCN (unredacted) and a GSV link to ther location. Were there any other Council photos?
-
Hello fellow forum members,
I'm seeking your advice on whether I have a strong case to escalate my parking ticket appeal to the tribunal. Here's a brief rundown of the situation:
Parking Suspension Location: The council indicated that a parking suspension was in place between 19 - 25 Atherton Road.
My Parking Location: On the day in question, I parked in front of 27 Atherton Road, which is outside the suspension zone. (The council claimed the rear portion of my car fell within the suspension zone)
Timeline: I appealed against the ticket on 26 June. They only responded to my appeal on 6 September, which, to my understanding, exceeds the 56 days allowed for a response.
The council rejected my appeal. Given these circumstances, do you believe I have a good chance at the tribunal? Has anyone faced a similar situation or have insights about the 56-day rule?
Appreciate any guidance or experiences you can share. Thanks in advance!
https://imgur.com/a/Exg4sq9
https://imgur.com/a/Op29Urk
https://imgur.com/a/8GbJMdT