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 - LondonTraveller84

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17
1
Also another point I'd mention now, so it helps in the wider case - I had a PCN, last year for the exact contravention, on the same road, same car I believe, but in a bay closer to the house. I won that using the same TMO excemption, although the council dropped it a day before adjudication.

Question to you all is, would it aid my case referencing that PCN or play against me? ie would the adjudcator take that as a negative and in bad light, that I've parked in a disabled  before etc.

2
On this forum it's best to wait for more views before acting if there's time but this wasn't a slam dunk in my view.

Totally understand, With my other PCN's, I've posted with a day left, then I panic and make a rash decision, based on the odd one or two replies I may get. However on this one I've posted earlier, giving enough time for response from all you experienced members.

As far as I can tell I've lost the discount at the first stage, now that it's at NTO/NOR, so it'd make sense to go all the way, even if the discount was still there, I'd find it unfair if i got penalise dfor something where what I was doing was genuinely allowed under the TMO as an exemption.

3
If the TMO permits loading in these bays for disabled permit holders

The exemption in the TMO from my understanding is that a any vehicle can load/unload without having a disabled permit or in fact any permit.

I do not have a disabled permit holder, only a permit for that zone, that would allow the car to be parked anywhere on that road, expect a disabled resident bay.,

4
Ahhh now I wish I had fought it, after reading your post, it gave some re-assurance.

I based it on the fact we had discussed the service of the PCN and I believe it wasn't a solid case, ie we came to the conclusion it was considered served, at the point I took it, hence this argument was out of the window.

But I think as a whole it would have come down to the adjudicator on the day, so a 50/50 gamble.

5
Hi Guys,

Received a NOR, seems like they've ignored the TMO and their focus is that the warden did not see us loading hence the ticket, even though we've provided evidence showing the table coupled with the fact we even went to the warden shocked, to let him know the situation and that we had to go get the table.

Not sure what else i can add to my case for adjudication, other than hihglight why the warden would not have seen us, but that this doesn't discount the fact that we were still loading.

I understand with a loading bay you may have to remain with the car at all times or close, so your visible to the warden, I see no such requirements in the TMO for loading/unloading on a disabled bay.


Attached NOR:
https://ibb.co/wNxztf5F
https://ibb.co/hFSYFGwN
https://ibb.co/QjFSXsr1


6
Just an update, I've decided to bite the bullet and pay, as odds looked small on both potential arguments we considered (PCN not being issued on car and the the zero payment) :(

7
Having received this on teh 15th or dated 15th, would it be 14+2 ontop? so instead of 29th being the last day, it'll be 31st?

8
A gamble though right? to hope I get the right adjudicator, also then to justify the argument with substance, as I can imagine all I'd say is how can you pay for something that is free and thats it :/

I can mention the service wasn't done, but think the adjudicator will know as do redbridge, it doenst matter, as it was served later on when i decided to find the warden :(

9
Council responded last week, I assume best to bite the bullet and pay? as only chance I have is the zero payment route but its a risky one?

https://ibb.co/xNH5ZCc

10
I've sent my formal appeal using the advice given, will keep you guys posted

11
OP - do you have a NTO. If so what is its date.

Yes it's dated 18/06/2026. I can attach here if required.

Please stop calling it a Disabled......, I find it confusing

Sorry, thought i'd be specific in case the council try and be smart, what you've said makes more sense.

I'll use your structure/template, and the bulk of my reply where i was having a go, and  reword the last bit to

I invite the authority to reconsider its position before it is necessary for me to formalise the above in representations during ajudication.




12
Going to send across the formal appeal later today with the below, feel like having a dig and aim at them!


I would ask the Council to explain how it can justify and support the following statement made in its response to my appeal:

"The loading exemption you referred to does not apply in Disabled Residents Permit bays. These bays cannot be used for loading or unloading, even for short periods, and even where the activity is continuous. Parking in such a bay without displaying the required permit is a contravention, regardless of the reason for stopping."

This statement is inconsistent with the relevant Traffic Management Orders, namely TMO '27 East Ham Disabled Residents No. 1 Order 2005, read together with TMO 2017 No. 14 (EH) (DRPH) (SPA) (No. 1, 2005) (Amendment No. 11) Order 2017.

Those Orders clearly provide multiple exemptions under which a vehicle may lawfully wait in a Disabled Residents Permit bay. In particular, Articles 11.1(g) and 11.1(h) expressly permit a vehicle to wait in the bay for the purpose of loading or unloading, including the removal of furniture to or from a dwelling house, provided that the vehicle does not wait for more than 20 minutes. These provisions are explicit exemptions that apply during the prescribed hours and directly contradict the Council's assertion that loading and unloading are never permitted in such bays.

I request that the Council explains the legal basis upon which it claims that no loading exemption exists, despite the clear wording of the applicable Traffic Management Orders.

I also request that the Council cancel this Penalty Charge Notice immediately.

Finally, I strongly recommend that the Council provides appropriate training and guidance to the officers responsible for considering representations. The response I received demonstrates either a fundamental misunderstanding of the applicable legal exemptions or a failure to properly consider the legislation relevant to this case. Neither outcome is acceptable and undermines confidence in the fairness of the Council's enforcement process.

13
But we wasn't parked in a loading bay, he was on a street with double-yellow lines that normally bar parking

Correct, this was more for where his been parking recently, which is a loading bay. :)

Noted - Have advised him go ahead and pay the discounted rate, which is much cheaper then London rates!

Thanks all for reviewing this one.


14
A loading bay must have a sign to show whatever loading restrictions there may be, for instance restricting the bay to vehicles built for the carriage of goods

Does this mean that then technically it becomes a invalid PCN, or it can be fought on this ground and won without fail?

15
Yep a shame! sometimes the right people need to be in power to put these lot in their place! and that'd only happen with hefty fines for them! back to the topic :) I'll go ahead and using the 2 clauses, and assuming the adjacent is a broader term for across the road somewhere near or further down.




Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17