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 - shoebedoe

Pages: [1]
1
Dear All,

Thanks for your help so far. Both appeals got rejected a few days ago only responding to my points on visibility, please see attached responses separately for:

BT19586168 and

BT1958618A

Can you please have a look and advise?

Many Thnaks

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

2
Thank you all for your help!
Below is what I sent to Brent Council last night:
Fingers crossed!

Dear London Borough of Brent,

I challenge the liability for PCN BT19586168 and BT19586168A on the ground that the alleged contravention did not occur. After parking  the vehicles I would have walked north-west towards my house at number 40, and there was no parking suspension sign attached to the regulatory sign for the bay just outside my house. Having seen and knowing that sign, I was entitled to rely on it to park my vehicles.

The obligation of the council is to make clear arrangements for adequate information to be provided  about any parking restriction (and to be clearly visible and noticeable) to traffic users. This was clearly not the case in this instance for two reasons:
1) there was only one sign at No.32 St Johns Avenue for a long stretch of restriction covering houses 32-36 with no additional signs provided at the other end
2) the only sign provided was hidden from view inside a tree as shown in the attached pictures, one of which taken by the issuing officer her/himself. This made it very difficult to notice that there was a parking restriction in force on both sides of the street with the restriction on the other side clearly visible by the 2 (!) signs posted near the works taking place.

I trust you will be able to cancel the PCN on the grounds given above.

Yours faithfully,

Wolfgang Frese

3
Thanks for your points, very useful.
So are you suggesting to argue the 'book end' point on the basis that both vehicles were parked before the signs went up?
I thought the point of the book end argument is that the signs have to be up when you parked the vehicle and you are walking into the direction with no sign (although there should be another one). given the position of the scooter you say that the book end point is unlikely to work for the scooter but might work for the car. That means I should argue in different directions for each?
reg. 'making reps on a single point' the only other I have to advance is the fact that the sign was hard to see as disguised by the branches of the tree it was near to. Not sure if this would work but I have photographs proving that you can't see the sign from our house looking up the road towards the vehicles. My point is that I have checked the vehicles on the day before from outside the house but that the sign was invisible.

Thanks again for your help!

W

4
sorry, I meant No. 32-36 (typo in earlier response)

5
Hi and Thanks for your draft!
I am not sure this will bite as the car and scooter were parked outside No 34 before both signs were up.
Are you saying they should have put up a sign at No 40 so someone like me parking at No34 would see that there is a restriction on this side of the road but further up the road? Is it reasonable to ask the council to put up a sign at No 40 to signpost a restriction for No 32-26?
Or did I misunderstand your point?

Many Thanks again!

Wolf

6
No sign at this post. This post is located at No 40 and the restriction was between 32 and 36. A sign at this post would have been perfect as it is right in front of my house so I would not have missed that!

Part of my argument would be that there should have been more signs up at this side of the street as there were at least 2 on the other side where the actual works have taken place. It also seems unusual to block both sides of the street as the works continued into Saturday without the restriction signs up and cars were parked on this side without causing any problems to the flow of traffic. I guess no point in arguing this direction as the utility supplier applied for both sides and there are no grounds in questioning that...

7
Ours is No.40 so I walked North West to get home.

thanks, WOlf

8
here is the exact location of the traffic sign (in winter):
https://goo.gl/maps/smnWp48rVko5ZQEZ7

9
Hi all,
I have read a lot on Pepipoo about suspended residents bays but I wonder if anyone can help with the approach fighting 2 parking tickets (one for a car and the other for a scooter) for a 24 hour suspension in Brent.
Our car and the scooter were parked before the parking suspension was put up (apparently 19.06. which I would dispute but not sure I can without evidence). I actually parked the scooter on 21.06. but did not see the suspension sign if it was there! The residents bays suspension from House numbers 32-36 in St Johns Avenue was for utility works on the other side of the road (also had 2 parking bays suspended) which I suspect was for utilities vehicles to park and in force on 23.06.23 AT ALL TIMES (although resident parking controlled hours are from 8.30 to 18.00 Mo - Sat). I only found out from neighbours on the day of the suspension that our car had been towed to higher up the street...

I think I have 3 reasons to challenge the tickets on the following grounds:
- 4 days notice is not enough time to warn residents of a suspension and no notices have been in the letterbox
- there was only one sign for 4-5 bays outside house number 32
- the sign was too difficult to see or notice as hidden from branches of a tree right next to the sign.

Many Thanks for your help

Wolf

ticket link:
https://imgur.com/a/aT16uRr
https://imgur.com/IwlJhy9

PCN images scooter:
https://imgur.com/UmGChqx
https://imgur.com/ab6dFPt

my photos:
https://imgur.com/x7Vg6MO
https://imgur.com/2QA1jzI

PCN2 images car:
https://imgur.com/D34mrlu
https://imgur.com/zaZeMr8
https://imgur.com/72VGlHw
https://imgur.com/zc4Kbdj

my photos:
https://imgur.com/agzyA3N
https://imgur.com/Xd8GEMc

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Pages: [1]