Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: mfarrell on October 31, 2023, 01:42:54 pm
-
Outcome (https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1D8Y6QB8mPmt74hlPNrGi2e94uoll_ocD).
-
PM sent.
-
Let’s go for it! Happy for you to represent me. Is there a cost?
-
@mfarrell please do not register an appeal yet.
Assuming you want to appeal, first you need to decide if you'd like someone to represent you, which I'm happy to do. With the way the TPT portal works, if you register the appeal yourself there's no way for a representative to be added later on, so you'd be on your own all the way through.
-
Register your appeal now.
Grounds:
Procedural impropriety;
Contravention did not occur.
Add ...further representations will be made once the authority's evidence has been reviewed.
Your appeal cannot withdraw your reps, they're part of the evidence. But what you can do is to draw out and emphasise the relevant issues and add matters which arise from their NOR.
We'll do this once you've registered your appeal.
-
Hi all,
Update on appeal:
I recieved my notice to owner and made a representation. Unsurprisingly it was rejected. I have attached my notice of rejection and my representation. Please let me know if i should resubmit the same to the tribunal or add.
Few points i took away from the rejection. 1 is it normal to reapply the discount period? admission of guilt in the hope i would pay? 2 - Did not address the poor sign conditions. Failed to comment on any of my photos. 3 although they comment a post was 10 meters away from my car, on the photo i sent of my drivers view, you can not see it as it blends into the tree trunk, and like i said i did not pass it. 4 - No comments to the points made about the essex act legal requirements
Please let me know your thoughts, thank you :)
Representation:
"I believe the penalty is unjust, and I kindly request a thorough review based on inadequate signage and a lack of proper notice.
Upon entering Marine Avenue from Ronald Hill Grove, I parked approximately a quarter into the road outside number 53. At this point, I had not passed any signs advising me of any parking restrictions. I walked back towards Ronald Hill Grove to Westleigh School without encountering any signage that would indicate parking restrictions. It was only upon returning to my car 30 minutes later that I discovered the PCN.
During my inspection of the road afterwards, I observed that the signs indicating parking restrictions began halfway down the road. Furthermore, several signs in the road were defaced and unreadable. Google street view shows these signs in the same defaced state two years ago, which demonstrates a consistent lack of upkeep and a failure to ensure the signs are clear. As per my understanding of the Essex Act, there were no signs upon entry to the road advising of any restrictions in place. I have attached photos as evidence to support these claims.
In accordance with the Essex Act 1987, I would like to draw your attention to the following points:
Section 6(6) states that a person who contravenes a notice displayed under this section shall be guilty of an offence.
The Act defines 'notice' for the purposes of 6(6) as a traffic sign (Section 5(5)).
Section 2 (Interpretation) defines a 'traffic sign' as having the meaning given by Section 64 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act.
The relevant authority (Secretary of State) has made regulations under the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, 2016, under which the only traffic sign permitted to convey the prohibition in the Essex Act is a circular sign with a red border incorporating the black image of a vehicle on a white background.
The only sign in the vicinity of the location is shown in the enclosed photo. It does not meet the criteria of a 'Traffic Sign' as defined, and therefore, it is not a 'notice' as required. Consequently, the council has failed to sign the prohibition lawfully, and I believe the penalty charge should be revoked.
Photo appendix:
Photo 1 – Entrance to Marine Avenue that I used. This photo shows there are no signs to indicate any restrictions on grass verges.
Photo 2 – This photo shows another angle of the entrance to Marine Avenue, again there are no signs to indicate any restrictions on grass verges.
Photo 3 – This photo shows my view/driver's view going down the road where I parked on the right at the telegraph pole, again no visible signs to indicate any restrictions on grass verges.
Photo 4 & 5– This photo shows a signs further down the road that I did not pass. These signs has been completely defaced and is unreadable.
In light of the inadequate signage and the council's failure to comply with legal requirements, the penalty charge should be revoked"
Photo of my drivers view: https://i.postimg.cc/RCG1qCrx/Photo-3.jpg
Notice of rejection 1:
(https://i.postimg.cc/kX1wHV8v/IMG-1274.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/2jx049SJ/IMG-1275.png)
-
Am I reading the document wrong?
I'm not sure what document you're reading, but the reference to "(6) A person who contravenes .....a notice displayed under this section [6] shall be guilty of an offence" is a reference to the Essex Act 1987 which is here: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1987/20/pdfs/ukla_19870020_en.pdf
As above, you should just use DancindDad's draft for now.
-
Thank you. I am just preparing my challenge as the notice to owner would be due after today. I’m just having a look at the traffic act at the points raised just so I know where they are for my own reference.
I can’t see to find “ Note that it's 6(6) which provides that:
(6) A person who contravenes .....a notice displayed under this section [6] shall be guilty of an offence”
Am I reading the document wrong?
-
Talk about plenty of grounds: the PCN wrongly gives the payment deadlines from the date of service rather than the date of the contravention, and there's an 0870 number on the back of the PCN that opens the same avenue we used in Paul Bateman v Derbyshire County Council (DJ00037-2209, 10 November 2022) (https://drive.google.com/uc?id=11TEzgfHFInCTo-JTFFtWJ8pbIXnMvJCd).
For now I'd just go with DancingDad's suggestion.
-
Seems worth taking wot HCA writ above.... from after 2 the offences are...
to the end.
Head it with
Dear Sirs
REf PCN XXX?
The Contravention Did Not Occur
And end it with Hugs and Kisses (or your preferred closing)
It's got all that is needed
-
Can't remember the last time we had an 'Essex Act' issue.
OP, although it's a local Act, it's still covered by the Traffic Management Act.
So, 2 issues for me:
How must the offence be enforced;
What conditions apply to the the prohibition?
Parking contraventions outside Greater London
4(1)Outside Greater London there is a parking contravention in relation to a vehicle if it is stationary in circumstances in which any of the offences listed below is committed.
(2)The offences are—
......
f)an offence under section 6(6) of the Essex Act 1987 (c. xx) of leaving a vehicle on any land in contravention of a prohibition under that section (prohibitions relating to verges and certain other land adjoining or accessible from highway);
Note that it's 6(6) which provides that:
(6) A person who contravenes .....a notice displayed under this section [6] shall be guilty of an offence.
The council may therefore issue PCNs under the TMA.
The Act also defines 'notice' for the purposes of 6(6) as follows:
5(5) '..a notice..shall be a traffic sign'.
Section 2, Interpretation, defines a 'traffic sign' as having the meaning given by Section 64 of the Act[Road Traffic Regulation Act].
The 'relevant authority' [Secretary of State] has made regulations under the 1984 Act[Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, 2016] under which the only traffic sign permitted to convey the prohibition in the Essex Act is given at Schedule 5 to these Regulations(and Schedule 7 for repeater signs). In both cases these are circular with a red border incorporating the black image of a vehicle on a white background.
The only sign in the vicinity of the location is shown in the enclosed photo. It is not a 'Traffic Sign' as defined and therefore not a 'notice' as required and consequently the council has failed to sign the prohibition lawfully and the PCN must be cancelled.
-
Here is the PCN in full.
Still not paid as I believe I have a case with the help from everyone on here
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Photos:
(https://i.imgur.com/7UE6hR5.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/CPsm6aZ.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/yW39PTI.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/6Ie2AeK.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/hhl6kcx.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/5tJixt5.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/sAsirxZ.jpg)
It's section 6 of the Essex Act 1987 (PMB I've fixed the link in your post above to make it clickable), and this is the relevant part:
(https://i.imgur.com/kfrwdh4.png)
Two points arise: the sign needs to be in a conspicuous position (which appears to be a higher standard than the standard of adequacy created by LATOR, conspicuous seems aking to the "bound to be seen" test that applies in private parking cases), and if the land is part of the highway then the sign needs to be a TSRGD compliant sign, which the one seen here most definitely isn't.
So we have plenty to go on, are you the registered keeper and do you have the V5c?
-
That is the gist of it, if a PCN is issued then a regulatory sign is needed but we need to see the PCN in full
-
I'm certainly querying the details of what they believe allows them to penalise under TMA2004
Even if it does derive from the Essex Act, that defines Traffic Signs as per S64, RTRA 1984
Which comes back to TSRGD, at the time I believe TSRGD 1981 would be in force and guess what, No Parking on verges signs were included in that.
Which comes back to the sign that they are relying on is not a Traffic Sign and I seriously doubt that it would have been authorised in that format.
Edit
Ah well, bit of research and the Essex Act is included within Schedule 7(4) of TMA, specifically Section 30 (which seems to be harbour land) and S6(6) which is grass verges
(f)an offence under section 6(6) of the Essex Act 1987 (c. xx) of leaving a vehicle on any land in contravention of a prohibition under that section (prohibitions relating to verges and certain other land adjoining or accessible from highway);
But it still requires and is stated within the section, a proper Traffic Sign
-
From what i can see of the sign they are relying on an a local act of parliament (the essex act 1987 s8 ) https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1987/20/pdfs/ukla_19870020_en.pdf
If this is so then a PCN is not the correct route they may take. It is a criminal matter
But please post the whole of the PCN so we can be sure
-
Traffic Court offers online submissions AFAIK.
-
As long as you follow the appeal process properly (and pay up if you lose), it's impossible for a PCN to end in a CCJ. The most that will ever be at stake is the non-discount penalty, which in this case is £70.
-
I recon i may appeal this then. If i go to the tribunal i wont get a CCJ or anything will I?
Also will i need to appear in person or have a telephone conversation?
-
Since when does a blue notice referencing a local bylaw be classed as a Traffic Sign?
It isn't within TSRGD and I doubt that it has been authorised by Sec of State when perfectly good signs to prohibit are available within TSRGD
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/5/made
Part 3 item 7.
I even doubt that the bylaw is sufficient to allow enforcement under TMA 2004 though a TRO may be present.
I also suspect they are wrong n charging higher level penalty.
Code 64 is specifically for Essex only but Patrol do not show higher or lower
This seems a right pig's ear.
-
Having had a look on GSV, I think you have a good case on totally inadequate signage of the restriction. However, you'll have to take the double-or-quits gamble of waiting for the Notice to Owner, submitting reps again, then, when refused, take them to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
-
Please post up their rejection.
Here is the rejection https://postimg.cc/5655R3p6
-
Please post up their rejection.
-
Hello all,
I am hoping you can steer me in the right direction on a recent PCN i recieved for parking on a grass verge. I did not see any signs warning me of this and on inspection of the road after the ticket, i noticed a lack in signage and even a compleatly defaced sign.
I have appealed informally within the 14 day 50% discount but this was rejected without even taking my points into consideration or providing any explaination.
The ticket was issued in Marine Avenue in Leigh on sea. I pulled into this road from Ronald Hill Grove and parked outside number 53 as seen here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/gLBzN6JmJRt4ZwAZ7 I then walked back up towards Ronald Hill grove.
I did not pass any signs to warn me of the restriction. No sign on entry, and the first sign is further down the road which i did not pass. If you look on google maps you can see one sign is also defaced 2 years ago and still like that now!
I have looked at other roads that have grass verge restrictions and there are signs as you enter or on the first verge you pass.
Is there any regualtion on how close a sign needs to be on the enterance to the road?
my PCN is here: https://postimg.cc/n9xHfbBN
PCN OS13882827
My appeal read as:
"On the day in question, I entered Marine Avenue from Ronald Hill Grove and parked my vehicle outside of number 53. During my journey into Marine Avenue, I did not encounter any signs that informed me of any parking restrictions on the grass verges. Additionally, there were no signs on the grass verges themselves up to the point where I parked. This lack of visible signage gave me no reason to believe that I was in violation of any parking regulations.
I also want to emphasize that, as I left my vehicle and walked back up to Ronald Hill Grove, I did not come across any signs that would have alerted me to the parking restrictions in place. The photo of the sign that was taken as part of the ticket clearly shows a sign further down the road, which I did not see at the time of parking.
In light of my appeal, I took it upon myself to inspect the area after receiving the ticket. To my surprise, I discovered that one of the signs was vandalized and, as a result, completely unreadable. This further adds to the confusion and lack of clarity regarding the parking restrictions in the area.
To support my appeal, I have attached a photo from Google Maps that was taken approximately two years ago. This image clearly shows the absence of any visible signs on the grass verges, corroborating my assertion that the signage in the area is unclear and insufficient to inform drivers of parking restrictions.