1
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.
Dear Redbridge
Ref: PCN VRM
I make this formal representation:
The contravention did not occur as the sign referring to term time is proscribed. As per school parking restrictions, how is a driver expected to know the times of any term time in advance?
Please cancel the PCN therefore.
Yours
Reg. keeper
***
23rd September is the deadline so please please do not send it now!
The traffic order is The Redbridge (Prescribed Routes) (School Streets) (No.1) (Amendment No. 3) Order 2023, I can't see any issues with it.
What's the length of the lease? Is it a personal lease or is it through an employer?
@Sizzle89 please post the new PCN issued to you, and please don't redact the VRM or PCN number.
Also please confirm the name of the hire company.
The term time plate is an issue.
Please: go to make a representation and enter your details after clicking on all the tedious grounds which do not apply. Then screenshot what it says about the grounds. If it says choose one ground, that is another issue. Please post it up here.
https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/pcn-redbridge-31j-contravention-(yellow-box)/msg34088/#msg34088
Your 28 days have elapsed by three days. I would check the status - I cannot because you have chosen to redact the details. You could try and make out of time representations but I expect you may well be at the Charge Certificate stage.
Only you can check. If it still says £130 try and make representations and ask them to exercise their discretion.
Even just yesterday i saw someone get flashed, they must have been doing 24 on that road based on my speed. It's right by tower hill station i think it makes them a lot of money.24 is the guideline speed for the start of enforcement. The cameras don't make money people speed does.
It was heavy rain that day, and i didnt notice the speed markers or even the sign.Simply put, no. It also fails the 'common sense test' as it's a bit 'silly' to suggest that if it's raining that heavily its OK to exceed the speed limit compared to when its dry with shorter stopping distances etc!
So do you suggest i just take both on the chin and say i was the driver, with nothing to appeal?You have to say you were the driver regardless, only the driver can defend the allegation made, so you would need to be identified as that entity even if you decided to defend it.
Nothing you have said indicates a viable defence and it is generally considered foolhardy to allow the matter to go to court (by not taking up an out of court settlement) - unless you are so rich money doesn't matter - without a viable defence. There may be defences relating to the traffic order (that creates the limit) or signage (that notifies the driver of the limit set by that order) but you haven't mentioned that.