Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - The_Hock

Pages: [1] 2
1
Okay,

I have an update on this case.

I was waiting for the NoRoR to be sent by my company to me, however, this did not materialise.

My company has now informed me that a Charge Certificate has been issued and they are panicking and saying that they need to pay it immediately. The charge is now £195.

I have logged on to the RKBC website to try and manage the PCN, but it says "Case Closed", I presume this means that my company have paid.

My question is:

Can I still appeal the PCN to the adjudicator?

TIA

2
Hi CP,

I've already had the NtO, I am awaiting the NoR, is that what you meant?

Regards
Yes

After receiving an email on 19th June advising that a NoRoR had been sent as a hard copy to the keeper, I sent an email to my company and they advised that they have still not received it.

Am I right in thinking that I should wait it out and rely on the Council surpassing the time limit as per the regs to send out the NoRoR?

3
Hi CP,

I've already had the NtO, I am awaiting the NoR, is that what you meant?

Regards

4
Hello,

After much wrangling with my company, where I had to get their authority to act - I have received an email advising that they are rejecting my appeal and the Notice of Rejection will be send by hard copy to my employer, which I will have to get them to forward to me.


5
Hi cp8759,

I have sent the representations as advised. Thank you for all your help.

My company are wobbling a little bit and worried about any potential impact of non-payment. I have told them that I am making representations and to hold out, as if I do lose at adjudication I will pay and not let it impact the company in a negative manner (I.e CCJ)

Cheers

6
Hello,

I have been informed by my company today that the Notice to Owner has been received by them, here is a copy of it.


upload

Any suggestions?

7
So the council cannot suspend the bay for the parking of Diplomatic Vehicles as there are no provisions on the order for doing so. Therefore, the suspension is invalid in that respect.

Also, a TTRO would be required to suspend the bay, however, the council are yet to provide this. Therefore, it is possible that they haven't suspended the bay at all.

However, as they haven't allowed dispensing a bay for diplomatic vehicles in their Traffic Management Order in the first place, they were unable to suspend the bay for diplomatic vehicles, which takes me back to point one.

The sign is also non compliant as I found their approved suspension sign and they have omitted the flap at the bottom, which is the only approved sign from the DfT.

I find it funny that they haven't provided the TTRO and it seems difficult to get hold of. Essentially, if they haven't suspended the original TMO/TRO they have essentially still got a pay by phone parking bay with a meaningless yellow sign with some fancy writing on it.

8
I have received a letter from RBKC today enclosing a map of where the contravention took place and "The Kensington and Chelsea (Charged for Parking Places) Consolidation Order 2023", which is the same as you posted.

The only section I noticed within Article 13(4) - "Any person duly authorised by the Council may suspend the use of a parking place or any part thereof whenever he considers such suspension reasonably necessary for the purpose of providing temporary parking space for any class of vehicle authorised from time to time by the Council."

Do you think they will rely on this to say that they have authorised Diplomatic Vehicles as a 'class' of vehicles? I have never heard of a Diplomatic Vehicle being a different class of vehicle, however, I am yet to be shocked.

Regards.

9
The traffic order for this location would appear to be The Kensington and Chelsea (Charged-For Parking Places) Consolidation Order 2023, the only limb that allows parking to be suspended in order to provide parking to some other vehicle is at article 13(f):

for the purpose of providing temporary parking space for a goods carrying vehicle, where that vehicle is required for the transportation of equipment that is necessary for work that is being carried out to a property in the vicinity of that parking place;

That is obviously intended for construction vehicles and cannot possibly apply to diplomatic vehicles, so the suspension is ultra-vires. If the suspension is ultra-vires, the bay was not suspended at all so the contravention cannot possibly have occurred.

I have made some further enquiries to rule out a TTRO but odds are that the council simply don't know what they're doing, which is surprisingly common.

Hi CP,

I guess that I am waiting for the NtO to come through and raise this as the main reason that the contravention did not occur.

I am always happy to admit to a mistake, however, I have a strong belief that the authorities should adhere to their legal obligations. Otherwise, we operate in a society where the authorities can operate without adherence to the legal processes and as a lay person we have to abide to all of the laws.

10
@The_Hock the five minute thing you've heard from a CEO is not a thing, certainly not when it comes to suspended bays. However as pointed out by Incandescent, a suspension that allows parking is not a suspension, see Jessica Cole v London Borough of Camden (2190083960, 28 March 2019)

Please give us the PCN without any redactions, as per the guidance here. I'd like to get the parking suspension logs but I can't really do that without this information.

Also please can you confirm whether you're the registered keeper and if so, is the address on the V5C up to date?

Hello cp8759,

Thank you for your reply and thank you for citing the case from Jessica Cole, that appears to be useful in my instance.

I will post the PCN on here below. I am not the registered keeper as the vehicle is owned by my company, but, I have made them aware that I want to challenge the PCN and to pass any correspondence on to me.


11
I have sent the Parking Services team this email tonight:

"I have received your refusal letter.

As part of my process to further appeal this PCN, I am making a formal request for the paperwork relating to Traffic Regulation Order and Temporary Traffic Regulation Order for Scarsdale Place.

Therefore, please can I request the following:

1. The Traffic Regulation Order for the Pay By Phone bay in Scarsdale Place (located outside Holiday Inn Hotel).
2. The Temporary Traffic Regulation Order (TTRO) that regulates the suspension of the parking at the bay aforementioned in point 1 for the date covering when the PCN was issued.
3. The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea's official policy on Parking Suspensions and how they are implemented."

12
It is a public document, so you can ask for it.

I only ask because I did request it before and they didn't send the correct information. My worry is that they won't send the right information.

What do you think of the points I have raised so far?

13
Is there a quick way to get a copy of the TTRO?

I had emailed the council before I sent my challenge in, however, they only sent me a copy of the map and not the actual Traffic Regulation/Management Order or the Temporary Traffic Regulation Order.

Any help appreciated - thank you.

14
WE need council photos and a copy of the response

Hi pastmybest,

The link to the rejection Letter is at the bottom of the first post. The council photos are included in that as they put them with the notice of rejection.

15
Copy of PCN attached.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Pages: [1] 2