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 - Giorgio

Pages: [1] 2
1
Sorry to post yet again but I don’t think the images uploaded properly. Trying to reattach again.













2
Sorry one more point- the rejection letter says the signs were installed on the 11th Feb giving drivers enough notice. They have an image with a location stamp of Waldergrove Road and it is on a black pole with a square sign above it. The pole next to the parked car was grey and the black pole opposite had a round sign. Can we add this to our argument that it doesn’t prove signs were put up in advance or is it not relevant?
Thanks again.

3
Please excuse the lengthy post as I’ve had to reattach all previous images.

Notice to Owner has now been received. Never done this before so consulted AI and it came up with a lengthy response- but wanted to check here first if this is okay. We want to avoid having to go to a tribunal so have tried to create a strong argument but am guessing they will most likely reject whatever we write…


I am making a formal representation against this Notice to Owner on the ground that the alleged contravention did not occur.

The restriction was not properly conveyed because the suspension sign on the side of the road where the vehicle was parked was vandalised, blank and unreadable. This is clearly visible in the CEO’s own photographs.

The only legible suspension sign was located on the opposite side of the road, which does not apply to the bay in which the vehicle was parked. A motorist is not required to check signage across the road, nor can a restriction be enforced using a sign that governs a different bay.

1. The council failed in its statutory duty to adequately sign the restriction

Under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, the authority must ensure that:

“adequate information as to the effect of the order is made available to persons using the road.”

A blank, vandalised suspension sign cannot satisfy this legal requirement.

The council’s own photographs confirm:

• the sign next to the vehicle was blank
• the sign with the suspension details was on the opposite side of the road
• no readable sign existed governing the bay where the vehicle was parked


Therefore, the restriction was not adequately conveyed, and the PCN is unenforceable.

2. Established adjudicator case law confirms motorists are NOT required to check signs across the road

London Tribunals has repeatedly ruled that:

A motorist is only required to check signage on their side of the road

A sign on the opposite side does not apply to the bay they are parked in

A damaged, missing or unreadable sign makes the restriction unenforceable

Relevant cases include:

• Campbell v Camden (Case 2070377291)

The adjudicator held that a motorist is not required to cross the road to inspect signage and that restrictions must be clear from the side where the vehicle is parked.

• Al’s Bar & Restaurant v Wandsworth (Case 2020106430)

The adjudicator ruled that where signage is unclear or not properly maintained, the restriction cannot be enforced.

• London Borough of Hounslow v Mr M (Case 2180194309)

The adjudicator cancelled the PCN because the sign nearest the vehicle was damaged, even though a correct sign existed elsewhere.

These cases directly mirror the circumstances here.

3. The council’s reliance on a sign on the opposite side is legally irrelevant

The council’s rejection letter relied on a sign across the road, even highlighting it with a red rectangle.

This actually supports my case:

• It confirms the council has no readable sign on my side
• It confirms the sign they rely on governs a different bay
• It confirms the CEO did not photograph any valid sign adjacent to the vehicle


A restriction cannot be enforced using signage that does not apply to the bay in question.

4. The contravention did not occur

Because:

• the sign governing the bay was blank/vandalised
• the council failed to maintain adequate signage
• the only readable sign was on the opposite side, which does not apply
• adjudicator case law confirms motorists are not required to check across the road
• the restriction was not properly conveyed


The alleged contravention did not occur, and the PCN must be cancelled.

For the reasons above, I request that the Notice to Owner be cancelled.


Thanks again for everyone’s help.

https://ibb.co/hFWCLcBJ
https://ibb.co/VWwL3pv2
https://ibb.co/chjGPxty
https://ibb.co/50tR7pZ
https://ibb.co/XkrtrFvm
https://ibb.co/mVF4mtDB
https://ibb.co/gZhVmNdM
https://ibb.co/N6prkFdH
https://ibb.co/FbRtZsjm
https://ibb.co/9mw6mTFp
https://ibb.co/4njV86Qh
https://ibb.co/tSCX9nZ
https://ibb.co/CpJdR6VX
https://ibb.co/FLtq4K6R
https://ibb.co/hRRxnhrg
https://ibb.co/qF4mDqtm

4
Hi,

Rejection letter received today. See images below and the initial (lengthy) challenge sent.

https://ibb.co/MDqxCg4d
https://ibb.co/cSp53Gnp
https://ibb.co/9mztX1LT


I am challenging this PCN because the suspension was not properly signed.

The only suspension sign visible on the side of the road where the vehicle was parked had its entire information panel blanked out. It displayed no dates, times, location details, or extent of the suspension. A sign without operative information cannot convey a restriction.

I am attaching a photograph of the blank sign that was directly next to the vehicle and was the only visible sign when parking.

The detailed suspension sign photographed by the CEO was located on the opposite side of the road. A suspension sign only applies to the side of the street on which it is placed; it cannot apply across the road. The sign governing the side where the vehicle was parked was the blank, vandalised sign, which displayed no operative information. A motorist is entitled to rely on the signage on their side of the road and is not required to cross the street to check unrelated signs.

In the CEO’s wider‑angle photograph showing the rear of the vehicle, the blank sign is visible in the background directly in front of the vehicle on the same side of the road. This confirms that the sign governing this side had been vandalised. I am surprised that the correct procedure was not followed. Where a suspension sign has been vandalised, the CEO should report the damaged sign and refrain from issuing PCNs on that side until clear signage is restored. Instead, the CEO photographed the sign on the opposite side of the road, which cannot apply to the opposite side where the vehicle was parked.

As the restriction was not clearly or adequately communicated at the location of the vehicle, the alleged contravention did not occur. I request that the PCN be cancelled.


Any idea what happens next? Do we stand our ground as aforementioned or is it a possibility we may be rejected again and have to pay up?

Thanks for the help.

5
Hi there,

Would be grateful for some help with this PCN.

The driver received a ticket for parking in a suspended bay, but the suspension sign next to the bay was completely blank — no dates, no times, no location details.

The CEO has taken a close‑up photo of a different suspension sign further down the road on the opposite side, which has all the details on it. This makes it look as though he ignored a clear sign. However, if you look carefully at the CEO’s wider photos, you can see the blank sign in the background on the same side of the road where the car was parked (I’ve circled in red) and uploaded a photo of the blank sign up close.

My understanding is that a driver is not expected to go searching for other signs across the road if the sign directly next to the bay is blank and contains no operative information.

I’d really appreciate guidance on the correct rulings so we can put together a solid appeal.

Thanks in advance.

https://ibb.co/VfkmRvq
https://ibb.co/1fYBv76B
https://ibb.co/SDcwFQcp
https://ibb.co/R47jhP7p
https://ibb.co/NdP2BhSn
https://ibb.co/F4h2QM8y
https://ibb.co/PsGXtr13
https://ibb.co/YzyWXCJ
https://ibb.co/B5pctrWj
https://ibb.co/3yf5zBKQ
https://ibb.co/Gq6WZ1L

Google map location:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/mMFzHnUHTG6mnNhg9



6
Thanks stamfordman - that map is much clearer than the ones we had.

What would be the best way to challenge the PCNs now? Should I keep it simple and state that Tower Hamlets has no enforcement powers on that side of Ebor Street, so both the PCNs are invalid? And should I ignore the other points (two PCNs issued, CEO not serving the second one?)

Many thanks

7
Hi all,

I'm looking for advice on two PCNs issued by Tower Hamlets on Ebor Steet (EC1).

My husband was parked on the double yellow lines on Ebor Street. He is a blue badge holder for the passenger, but the badge was not displayed on this occasion.

PCN 1 was issued at 20:48 and attached to the windscreen. My husband moved the car slightly further down the same side of the road.

At 00:40, a CEO was issuing PCN 2. The CEO told him it would be cancelled and did not hand him anything, but both PCNs now appear on the system.

The side of Ebor street where he was parked is understood locally to fall under Hackney, not Tower Hamlets. Both PCNs simply state Ebor Street with no further location detail.

A few questions:
Can Tower Hamlets issue PCNs if the car was on the Hackney side of the road?
Can a second PCN be issued a few hours after the first one?
Lastly, the CEO told him the second PCN would be cancelled and did not serve it. Is this simply our word against the CEO's, and how is this usually dealt with?

Location:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ebor+St,+London/@51.5239298,-0.0757962,3a,75y,282.51h,60.8t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9E_NYgp0bfVNAyoFBRbbKQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D29.198543868957017%26panoid%3D9E_NYgp0bfVNAyoFBRbbKQ%26yaw%3D282.51049065675113!7i16384!8i8192!4m7!3m6!1s0x48761cb7368d2e9b:0x689a1035b23339dd!8m2!3d51.523889!4d-0.0757874!10e5!16s%2Fg%2F1td2gddl?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDEyMC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

Images of ticket and from CEO:


https://ibb.co/TxJ1YLdQ
https://ibb.co/8LWcppF5
https://ibb.co/8LWcppF5
https://ibb.co/VWryPDJW
https://ibb.co/XkFh0Z6z
https://ibb.co/SDQZnPkP
https://ibb.co/NnTYjdP2
https://ibb.co/C5vVF6Ys
https://ibb.co/6J7jKyWG
https://ibb.co/sdc8Lt9z
https://ibb.co/hF6V14xb

Hackney constituency wards (select Hoxton East and Shoreditch at the very bottom of the interactive map). Alternatively, there is a PDF that can be downloaded.

https://hackney.gov.uk/constituencies-wards

Many thanks for any advice/help with this.

8
Hello, I wonder if someone is able to advise please.

Have been asked to help with this so am posting here and would appreciate some advice on what they should do next?

Links to letter and payment screenshot below.

https://ibb.co/dwpyD2HC
https://ibb.co/ymBY99Ng
https://ibb.co/TxWjbmQZ
https://ibb.co/sdCMK0F4

I don’t have the original PCN but if other information is required, please let me know and I’ll try and get copies.

As far as I understand, they paid for parking, received a ticket and appealed the PCN which was rejected.

Thank you

9
Thank you for your quick reply and for clarifying the last day to appeal- I was in a bit of a panic!
Will give it a go.
Hubby is the driver and all of his details are up-to-date and correct.

10
Sorry to ask but it’s the last day to appeal and I know people are extremely busy with more complex cases- just wanted to confirm if the PCN should be paid today as I don’t think there were any real grounds to appeal.
Many thanks

11
Thank you. PCN attached and the photo evidence where you can just about see the signage to the top left of one of the images

https://ibb.co/svSLq73H
https://ibb.co/fYX2yXwQ
https://ibb.co/DPbwy8Z9
https://ibb.co/G4s1jn4R
https://ibb.co/DgpX2m7j
https://ibb.co/7dyZ0FNb
https://ibb.co/0pm6c2B4
https://ibb.co/k2sYphgL
https://ibb.co/sd1XFmS2
https://ibb.co/3yJvdB9N

Not a leased vehicle and the driver at the time (not me) is the registered keeper

12
Hi there,

Quick question. Trying to appeal a PCN although unfortunately this time, it was the drivers mistake and ticket was issued correctly.
They parked at 21:40 on a Wednesday when the sign stated no parking ‘Mon - Sat 5 pm - 8am’ at the top in yellow. Underneath is a larger sign in white saying ‘Market traders permit holders only Mon - Sun 8am - 5pm’ (seen on Google maps, link below). The driver has said they were clearly in the wrong and now just wants to pay the ticket and be done with it.
I know it’s a long shot, but is there even a small chance to try and appeal?! It was very dark at night despite the light nearby but I know it’s a weak argument and I’m presuming we’ll have to accept defeat this time. But if anyone can see anything worthy of us appealing then please do let me know.

Many thanks.

Was parked in the bay as shown in link below:


https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5850675,-0.021068,30a,90y,65.46h,80.27t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sZ3HJrtSIknumTSDQ25BFjQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DZ3HJrtSIknumTSDQ25BFjQ%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26ll%3D51.585068,-0.021068%26yaw%3D65.457878%26pitch%3D9.730995%26thumbfov%3D112%26cb_client%3Dgmm.iv.ios?g_ep=CAISEjI1LjQ2LjEuODMwNDc0Nzc1MBgAIIGBASqHASw5NDI3NTQxMSw5NDI4NDQ5OSw5NDIyNDgyNSw5NDIyNzI0Nyw5NDIyNzI0OCw5NDIzMTE4OCw5NDI4MDU2OCw0NzA3MTcwNCw0NzA2OTUwOCw5NDIxODY0MSw5NDI4MjEzNCw5NDI5ODY5OCw5NDIwMzAxOSw0NzA4NDMwNCw5NDI4Njg2M0ICR0I%3D&skid=d91b2435-4cfc-4d5b-b7f9-2cad5e387753

13
Private parking tickets / Re: Wing security limited - Haringey N8
« on: May 31, 2025, 04:09:50 am »
This is a picture of the notice. The back is blank so I have only uploaded the front. They are all for the same vehicle and were parked on Miles Road, not Moselle Close.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

14
Private parking tickets / Wing security limited - Haringey N8
« on: May 27, 2025, 04:20:53 pm »
Hi,
Wonder if you can help with a quick question. Historically, we have always parked in the bays provided, displayed the valid blue badge clearly and this has always been allowed (see signage).
Recently, we have been issued with multiple tickets despite displaying the badge.
I don’t currently have access to the ticket so cannot upload, but have previously posted on pepipoo in the past, and was told wing parking / wing security limited are not registered with the correct companies and therefore should not be able to obtain details from the DVLA, and so any of their tickets should be ignored. I have checked online and it still looks as though they are not registered but want to confirm I should still be ignoring them.
I’m presuming it’s someone new on the job and is issuing tickets to everyone or they are hoping someone contends the ticket and contacts them (as they got the location wrong each time)…

Grateful for confirmation!
Thank you


[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

15
Very many thanks - will do!


Pages: [1] 2