Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: muchveggie on October 22, 2023, 01:30:38 am
-
Thanks for your response Mr Mustard.
If that's what you would recommend, then I'm happy for you to represent me. Would you recommend I write the points you've written above in my Notice to Owner form?
Thanks.
-
I recommend that you don't make your own representations as although the facts of the bay lines & signs are easy to deal with the technical arguments are better handled by someone like me who has been round the PCN block 2000 times with 1700+ wins.
I think the Notice to Owner is deficient in that:
- it does set out that the council can consider other reasons than the ones listed to cancel the PCN but doesn't include the phrase 'compelling reasons' which is in the legislation.
- Just above 'payment options' it sets out that the Notice of Rejection will tell you how you may Appeal if rejected. The Notice to Owner should do that by telling you the 'form and manner' of how to Appeal.
- In the 'making representations' section I think the line about 'lack of evidence' fetters the dicretion of the council. Their duty is to consider any representation which is made, whether supported or not by evidence.
- The council refer to the 'Parking and Traffic Appeal Service'. PATAS is no longer called that, since 2015.
Lambeth usually show up to tribunal Appeals. The representatives know me well & that they will be in for a friendly but fierce fight.
I can be emailed at mrmustard@zoho.com
-
OK, I need to spend time comparing the NtO to the legislation and will respond during the week.
-
Hi Mr Mustard,
I appreciate yourself and everybody else has busy days, I was by no means rushing you or anyone, I was simply wanting to take away the workload and write it myself for it to be checked. Stating that I was travelling, was not a way in making it urgent but an excuse to showing why I had written it so quickly - tone sometimes does not come across in writing. Furthermore, I had only received the notice to owner letter yesterday so I posted it here as soon as I could.
-
You can't expect a same day service from volunteers with jobs, families, hobbies etc (I have 6 guests for dinner tonight). If you are away for less than 4 weeks there is no urgency (other posters please note that whilst things may be urgent for you, perhaps because you leave things until the last minute, we may have, and I do, another 100 PCns we are fighting at the same time so it isn't necessarily urgent for us).
-
I've attached the Notice to Owner.
I'm travelling tomorrow so I'm looking to send the notice to owner today.
What do you think of the following?
I am writing to challenge the alleged PCN based on the grounds that the contravention did not occur. At 19:15 on 20th October 2023, I had
parked my vehicle on the basis that the resident permit restriction was applicable from 8:30am to 6:30pm given that this was the time plate in closer proximity to where I had parked my vehicle. Directly opposite my vehicle, on the other side of the road, the same parking restrictions applied from 8:30am to 6:30pm (please see enclosed evidence). Further than the 8:30am to 6:30pm time plate from my vehicle, there was another time plate with a parking restriction change from 8:30am to 8:30pm, however the changeover of the parking bays indicated by the demarcation lines was covered by another vehicle which was parked at the time I had parked, and there was therefore no way of knowing the separate parking bay was in enforce. The response by Lambeth Parking Services to my initial representation stated "there are demarcation lines separating the parking bays with the accompanied time plate", however this response did not consider the situation I had explained of there being a vehicle covering the demarcation lines separating the bays at the time I had parked.
According to the Traffic Code, where there is a change in parking bays, templates should be side by side, with arrows pointing in the direction of the respective bays being shown, however in this case, the time plates were on two separate poles. Furthermore, the Traffic Code states that signs/time plates should be sited in line with the transverse lines separating individual spaces to emphasise that a particular sign does not apply and in the instance of my case, where a vehicle had covered the demarcation line, there was no way in knowing that a different parking restriction applied - the placement of the time plates completely opposes guidance and laws outlined in the Traffic Code.
I request a review of my appeal on the ground that the separate parking bays were only indicated by the demarcation lines which were concealed at the time by a vehicle and that driver confusion was not minimised as practically as possible by the traffic authority given that the separation of the parking bays was not indicated by time plates being placed where the demarcation lines are nor were they placed side by side as stated in the Traffic Code.
I've also selected the alleged contravention did not occur over the traffic code which is alleged to have been contravened was invalid; would you agree with that?
Thanks very much!
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Please post clear scans of all pages
-
Hello,
Just received my Notice to Owner... do your recommend I put down exactly what I put in my initial representation?
-
OK, we just wait and do it all again later once you have a Notice to Owner.
Many of my battles are third round knockouts rather than stopping the opponent in round 1 (the one you just fought) or round two (Notice to Owner)
-
I got a response back from Lambeth council which I have attached where I don't even think they read what I had written!
Is it worth progressing this further or just paying the PCN?
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Have you kept a copy and did you get a receipt/acknowledgement?
Yes, I've received the email of acknowledgement! fingers crossed.
My response was:
I am writing to challenge the alleged PCN based on the grounds that the contravention did not occur due to the lack of clear signage differentiating the resident permit parking restrictions. At 19:15 on 20th October 2023, I had
parked my vehicle on the basis that the resident permit restriction was only applicable from 8:30am to 6:30pm - this time plate was in very close proximity (as shown in attachment 3) to where I had parked my vehicle. Directly
opposite my vehicle, on the other side of the road, the same parking restrictions applied from 8:30am to 6:30pm (attachment 2). At an approximately equal distance from my vehicle as the 8:30am to 6:30pm time plate, there was another time plate with a parking restriction change from 8:30am to 8:30pm, however the changeover of this parking restriction was not clearly indicated; at the time I had parked the vehicle, there was an existing vehicle
which was parked, covering the lines separating the road's different parking restrictions, and this therefore was not visible to me at the time. The proximity of the two different time plates is shown in attachment 1.
Given that two different parking bays (one restriction from 8:30am to 6:30pm and the other from 8:30am to 8:30pm) are side by side, two signs side by side, with arrows pointing in the direction of the respective bays should have been, but were not shown. Furthermore, the signs/time plates were not sited in line with the transverse lines separating individual spaces to emphasise that a particular sign does not apply and in the instance of this case, where a vehicle had covered the floor marking, there was no way in knowing that a different
parking restriction applied - this opposes guidance and laws outlined in the Traffic Code.
On the ground of there being a lack of clear signage separating two different parking restrictions with no combined sign at the changeover point as stipulated in the Traffic Code, the PCN contravention did not occur.
-
Have you kept a copy and did you get a receipt/acknowledgement?
-
and that is why you come to FTLA.
This case on Barrie's site is an analagous situation
https://www.appealnow.com/parking-tickets/moses-barnet-parking-tickets/
Thanks Mr Mustard! I have sent my informal challenge citing the traffic code and how it states that two different parking bays should have two signs side by side, with arrows pointing in the direction of the respective bays. As well as the signs/time plates were not sited in line with the transverse lines separating individual spaces to emphasise that a particular sign does not apply.
I'll keep updates on whether this appeal is accepted or rejected.
-
Thanks for your reply! It says on the PCN '28 days beginning with the date on which this penalty charge notice was served' - isn't that the same as what you state of 28 days from the date of alleged contravention? I don't quite understand what the difference in wording is.
I strongly recommend you take up Mr Mustard's offer.
I would also suggest it would be worth getting a photo of the bay divider marking, you can see here https://maps.app.goo.gl/RtxnK2aNNkQscp1SA that is was very worn some 3 years ago, and it could well have disappeared entirely in the meantime.
-
and that is why you come to FTLA.
This case on Barrie's site is an analagous situation
https://www.appealnow.com/parking-tickets/moses-barnet-parking-tickets/
-
The 28 days is wrongly expressed. The adjudicator agreed with me in case 2230423809 last week. Should be 28 days from date of alleged contravention. For free representation email mrmustard@zoho.com
Thanks for your reply! It says on the PCN '28 days beginning with the date on which this penalty charge notice was served' - isn't that the same as what you state of 28 days from the date of alleged contravention? I don't quite understand what the difference in wording is.
-
I had to go back on GSV to 2018 to find it; the divider between the two bays: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/E9WT1w2vdJvJ4yoD6
As you can see, it is very worn. This plus the stupid way the signs have been installed gives you a fairly good case to present at the adjudicators. Similare cases have won in the past.
Where there is a situation like this, the two signs should be mounted on a single pole side by side at the dividing line, preferably with arrows to indicate applicability.
Thanks for your response. Would you recommend a specific way for my to write my challenge on this PCN e.g. citing laws etc. ? Any help would be much appreciated!
-
The 28 days is wrongly expressed. The adjudicator agreed with me in case 2230423809 last week. Should be 28 days from date of alleged contravention. For free representation email mrmustard@zoho.com
-
I had to go back on GSV to 2018 to find it; the divider between the two bays: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/E9WT1w2vdJvJ4yoD6
As you can see, it is very worn. This plus the stupid way the signs have been installed gives you a fairly good case to present at the adjudicators. Similare cases have won in the past.
Where there is a situation like this, the two signs should be mounted on a single pole side by side at the dividing line, preferably with arrows to indicate applicability.
-
Hello,
Thanks for your response.
Contravention code: 12
GSV location:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/4NJ55eBrRzMjWB3N6
(https://i.imgur.com/BHQqCSJ.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/ywbdFpE.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/a2IUdOW.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/4s7B3MT.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/ciB1Sqs.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/OIAL5Et.jpg)
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Have a read of this
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/
For meaningful advice you need to ppost up both sides of the unredacted PCN, any Council photos (can take a couple of days to appear on the Council website) and a GSV link to the location.
-
Hello,
I was wondering if I could please get advice and guidance on appealing a parking contravention on Rushcroft Road Brixton - Lambeth council for retrospectively parking on residents permit.
I had parked on Rushcroft Road at 19:15 (highlighted in orange on the attached image). Directly on the opposite side of where I had parked, the resident permit was 8:30am to 6:30pm. Slightly ahead of where I had parked (on the right hand side of the attached image circled in green), the sign said resident permit from 8:30am to 8:30pm which I believe is why I had been issued a ticket - but where the confusion lies is that there was another sign, about the same distance behind me (on the left hand side of the attached image circled in green) stipulating resident parking was from 8:30am to 6:30pm.
I was issued the parking ticket at 8:25pm.
There were also no markings on the floor to indicate that this was a new parking zone.
I quickly took a picture of the sign but couldn’t get a picture of my car as I felt the area was unsafe and there was someone who appeared to be following me.
Any help on how I can appeal this would be great.
Thanks very much.
[attachment deleted by admin]