Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: bertie21980 on April 21, 2025, 11:02:02 pm

Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: Hippocrates on May 29, 2025, 09:53:41 pm
I got one the other day and will PM you.
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: bertie21980 on May 29, 2025, 09:12:32 pm
Sorry that I知 a little late with this post, but I致e just begun dealing with a similar PCN relating to this location. Having checked the signs at the location I知 confident that the main pedestrian zone signs and the advance warning sign(s) do not comply with the TSRGD. I知 just waiting for a reply to a FOIA request and I値l be able to add more detail. This is on top of the other grounds already mentioned.
I had to google what TSRGD is. It still bothers me that I received this PCN despite sings telling me I was allowed to use this road if I was delivering. Why not have the camera placed so it can show that I was loading there?

Just noticed that the appeal letter mentions that I could apply for an exemption the next time I use this road.

Anyway, I hope it goes well for you
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: bertie21980 on May 29, 2025, 08:41:27 pm
Yes, I did received the letter back a few days ago and it was a success ;D  Thank you guys for all the help. I did decided on the delivery evidence as being my primary grounds for representations but also mentioned about the error of the PCN regarding the truncation.

Apologies for not responding earlier. Had an issue with my phone but its ok now. Very thankful for all the help :)

(https://i.ibb.co/4w8nRqZ9/appeal-success-letter.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nq7NMGsZ)
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: H C Andersen on May 29, 2025, 03:52:01 pm
PCN dated 4 April.
Latest date for submission of reps was 5 May.

So OP, have you submitted your reps and if so pl post a copy and tell us how and when these were submitted.

Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: John_S on May 29, 2025, 02:08:47 pm
Sorry that I知 a little late with this post, but I致e just begun dealing with a similar PCN relating to this location. Having checked the signs at the location I知 confident that the main pedestrian zone signs and the advance warning sign(s) do not comply with the TSRGD. I知 just waiting for a reply to a FOIA request and I値l be able to add more detail. This is on top of the other grounds already mentioned.
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: Incandescent on April 28, 2025, 10:03:41 am
I disagree with this - where there's no contravention or as here the traffic order has an exemption to the contravention, that should be the primary ground for representations.
+1
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: stamfordman on April 28, 2025, 09:37:57 am
I disagree with this - where there's no contravention or as here the traffic order has an exemption to the contravention, that should be the primary ground for representations.
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: bertie21980 on April 27, 2025, 10:18:33 pm
Ok then this will be my appeal...


I am writing to challenge the Penalty Charge Notice: WA92081137

I wish to make this appeal on two points. Firstly, I make this collateral challenge re. the validity of the PCN. The period in which you may serve a charge certificate is wrongly expressed as it is truncated. Please see Schedule I of the 2003 Act which clearly states from the date of service as provided at paragraph 5(2).

Secondly, although the road is restricted to motor vehicles, there is a clear sign showing that there is an exemption for vehicles for loading to be able to access that road. On the day in question, I had a delivery to collect at the Jack and Beyond shop on Battersea High Street, which were to be delivered to two locations in the Central London area.

I have attached documents showing details of the delivery including the recipient name, the address and the time of the completed delivery. I have also attached a document from my company providing additional information about my delivery.

Hopefully, in light of the above information provided, you will see that its necessary to cancel the ticket.


Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: Hippocrates on April 27, 2025, 08:33:20 pm
Please use my post above re the PCN and make it your first point.

I make this collateral challenge re the validity of the PCN. The period in which you may serve a charge certificate is wrongly expressed as it is truncated. Please see Schedule I of the 2003 Act which clearly states from the date of service as provided at para. 5(2)

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/schedule/1/enacted

In light of the above, please cancel.


***
A case won: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eBqcDMk8dp08Xgxs1BP9IzxXz8n5Jv6s/view
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: bertie21980 on April 27, 2025, 02:43:28 pm
The PCN vailidity?
Are you saying the PCN is invalid? I can use that in my appeal as well? It does seem confusing in that it says I should pay the 」130 charge but it will be reduced if paid within 14 days, suggesting they will refund me back by 50%
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: Hippocrates on April 27, 2025, 01:32:38 pm
The PCN vailidity?
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: bertie21980 on April 26, 2025, 04:56:42 pm
There are issues outstanding:

Is the PCN addressed to you by name?
You referred to your 'employer', please explain what form the proof of delivery would take.

I raise these points because we (too often) see accounts which start with 'I have received' only to find that vans are company-owned, that PCNs are addressed to the company, that 'someone in the office' has simply passed it on with an instruction to get it sorted and that an employee(or sometimes contractor) will make reps only to find that they're disregarded because only the person to whom the PCN is addressed may make reps.

Let's just get the fundamentals clear pl.



If the PCN isnot addressed to
Ah I see. The PCN is addressed to me as its my van. The company I work for is a self employed role. I have appealed in the past using the notes that my company send to me but I think its the first time I will be appealing about an offence where I have to prove that I was allowed to access a particular road.

Anyway, here is the appeal that I have written...

----------------------------------

I am writing to challenge the Penalty Charge Notice: WA92081137

I am a delivery driver for a company called Gophr and I deliver regularly within the City. These range from street-based retail outlets to corporate clients with penthouse offices and security arrangements. On the day in question, I had a delivery to collect at the Jack and Beyond shop on Battersea High Street, which were to be delivered to two locations in the Central London area.

Although the road is restricted to motor vehicles, there is a clear sign showing that there is an exemption for vehicles for loading to be able to access that road.

I have attached documents showing details of the delivery including the recipient name, the address and the time of the completed delivery. I have also attached a document from my company providing additional information about my delivery.

Hopefully with that in mind and with the documents attached, you will see that its necessary to cancel the ticket.

https://ibb.co/LDFxFvnH
https://ibb.co/RkNqcBMP

(https://i.ibb.co/jPhnsn1P/battersea-hs-delivery-details-edit.png) (https://ibb.co/NdxcbcHd)

I have deleted out the customer names, address and phones numbers from the delivery sheets
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: H C Andersen on April 25, 2025, 08:17:23 am
There are issues outstanding:

Is the PCN addressed to you by name?
You referred to your 'employer', please explain what form the proof of delivery would take.

I raise these points because we (too often) see accounts which start with 'I have received' only to find that vans are company-owned, that PCNs are addressed to the company, that 'someone in the office' has simply passed it on with an instruction to get it sorted and that an employee(or sometimes contractor) will make reps only to find that they're disregarded because only the person to whom the PCN is addressed may make reps.

Let's just get the fundamentals clear pl.



If the PCN isnot addressed to
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: bertie21980 on April 25, 2025, 01:34:01 am
I haven't written anything yet as not had the time :-[ but I will get on to it from tomorrow evening. I will post on here for others to see
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: Hippocrates on April 24, 2025, 10:42:47 am
What have you written?
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: bertie21980 on April 23, 2025, 12:30:28 am
The PCN is invalid as they state they can issue a charge certificate 28 days from the date of the notice.  Back later. The rest of the PCN please.

I make this collateral challenge re the validity of the PCN. The period in which you may serve a charge certificate is wrongly expressed as it is truncated. Please see Schedule I of the 2003 Act which clearly states from the date of service as provided at para. 5(2)

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/schedule/1/enacted

In light of the above, please cancel.
That's all they sent me. Just the two pages which shows the front and back of the PCN
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: Hippocrates on April 22, 2025, 01:10:36 pm
The PCN is invalid as they state they can issue a charge certificate 28 days from the date of the notice.  Back later. The rest of the PCN please.

I make this collateral challenge re the validity of the PCN. The period in which you may serve a charge certificate is wrongly expressed as it is truncated. Please see Schedule I of the 2003 Act which clearly states from the date of service as provided at para. 5(2)

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/schedule/1/enacted

In light of the above, please cancel.
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: Incandescent on April 22, 2025, 10:10:21 am
I get quite disgusted by this CCTV enforcement where there is a clear exemption, because to get it, one has to through all the rigamarole of submitting reps against a PCN. No doubt traders just add the penalties onto their prices to save the hassle of submitting reps, and then getting refused due to "lack of proof".
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: stamfordman on April 22, 2025, 10:04:24 am
Traffic order says:

Nothing in Article 3 of this Order shall apply to: -

(b) any vehicle requiring access for the purpose of loading or unloading;

https://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/media/7887/tm_1822.pdf

This is from the 2020 experimental order - I assume it's been made permanent.

Official paperwork should see this off.
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: H C Andersen on April 22, 2025, 09:56:39 am
But I will have to get additional information from my employers just to make sure.

Good.

And to be sire from our perspective:

You are the registered keeper of the vehicle and the PCN is addressed to you?

The delivery/collection was being undertaken in the course of your employer's business and therefore the proof would include headed works order/instruction and delivery/collection documentation? 
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: bertie21980 on April 22, 2025, 01:58:54 am
Yes, I was doing a delivery from the cake shop on that road which I believe is called Jack and Beyond. Fortunately, I do have evidence of that delivery so I will appeal with the documentation. But I will have to get additional information from my employers just to make sure.

I would have thought they was a better way than to give out an PCN. If the camera was better placed, then it would have observed my vehicle coming to a stop just after that bend.

Anyway, thanks for the input  :)
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: Incandescent on April 22, 2025, 12:13:24 am
Quote
I believe there is a sign stating that if you are loading then its ok to go through there.
Yes, the sign allows people loading/unloading within the restricted area to enter, but you have to submit reps that you were engaged in loading, giving the address, and hopefully some collateral to show you had to pass the sign in order to carry out the loading.
If you were not loading in the restricted area, just passing through to load soemwhere else, then I don't think you have any case for cancellation of the PCN.
So please tell us more.
Title: Re: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: stamfordman on April 21, 2025, 11:18:12 pm
Yes you can see signs part way down the road but they are very poorly placed.

There is or was a market day sign before the turn but Saturday only - looks like it's now 24/7.

(https://i.ibb.co/8gbYBmSY/w1.gif)
Title: 52m - Failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicles - Battersea High Street SW11
Post by: bertie21980 on April 21, 2025, 11:02:02 pm
Hello everyone,

I have received a PCN for driving through a road that's prohibited to motor vehicles. I have driven through this road a few times before but this is the first time I have received a notice. I believe there is a sign stating that if you are loading then its ok to go through there. Anyway, here is the PCN...

(https://i.ibb.co/YTNFMj9D/battersea-pcn-1edit.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fGXz50R8)

(https://i.ibb.co/Dfz4BdmF/battersea-pcn-2.jpg) (https://ibb.co/ZzGdQ9vr)

google street view (https://maps.app.goo.gl/cWEmGik8AZLhEq7L8)

As this is the first time I have received this PCN, I'm not sure if the description below the prohibited sign has changed recently. Unfortunately, the evidence the council has shown does not clearly show my vehicle going through any prohibited sign. Here is one picture from the website...

(https://i.ibb.co/HD2Qry2D/batterseahs2.jpg) (https://ibb.co/N63zLq36)

And here is what I believe is the sign which clearly shows I'm allowed to go through if I'm loading but it's 2 years old...
close up view (https://maps.app.goo.gl/VwZ1fqzCTugNR49r9)

So what should I do? Should I send in a appeal stating that I'm allowed to load as there is a notice below the no motor vehicle prohibition sign, or should I say there no clear evidence of any motor vehicle prohibition? Maybe I should mention both?