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 - Carlos CGD

Pages: [1] 2
1
I am handling the appeal at the tribunal against all three PCNs, I have just had this response come back from the council under the EIR:

We are unable to find a copy of the resolution.

@Carlos CGD it looks like all your neighbours have been conned and can join the "mugged club".

I would like to say a big thank you to everyone on this site for all their help.

The appeals were won and upheld at tribunal.

I would never have stood a chance without your help.

Thank you.

2
@Carlos CGD well unfortunately this thread wasn't brought to my attention when it started, and I can't reply to most threads as I'm normally swamped with tribunal appeals, but we are where we are.

I've never seen a footway parking resolution from Ealing, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't be able to produce one. I have requested it anyway, and Ealing are often quite quick at coming back to me, so there's no harm in waiting to see if it comes back before the discount expires.

Hi cp8759
Did anything come back from Ealing with regards to the parking resolution?
My discount period for the tickets ends on Sunday

3
I will not get into the footway parking issue as others have commented extensively. On the subject of "two tickets for the same offence" here is the key case from the London Tribunals (previously PATAS) to quote:

 Go into www.londontribunals.gov.uk, select Register of Appeals and then enter the case number 2110189461.

The adjudicator said in essence "A car does not commit a new offence every 24 hours if it hasn't moved in the meantime. It's a continuous contravention".

This might help you to get off one of the PCNs.

Thank you Chaseman.

Ealing have rejected both tickets for my car, including the second one even though the car hadn't been moved from when they ticketed it the first time and this can be seen clearly in the pictures.
I have attached both the rejections in the Google drive folder
under Ealing Rejection AO02268960
and Ealing Rejection AO02216923

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1tSkJe86l067leGVtVFbNzK-rqFNCgkcd?usp=sharing

They have used the same rejection for both tickets?

So it looks like I will have to go to tribunal for at least one of the tickets.

4
Are you or are you not in an area (your side of the road) where ONLY 2-wheeled footway parking is permitted according to the signs in situ?

Were you parked with 4 wheels on the footway?

No point dancing around these objective fundamentals.

That you've done this for decades etc. are subjective comments in support of which you would appear to have no objective evidence.

This is not to say it's not true, but you should recognise the challenge which you would face at adjudication.

I am parked with two wheels on the tarmaced area and two wheels on the footpath.
I don't think it looks very clear from the pictures, but the tarmac area is lowered to meet the road, so it's at an angle.
If the tarmac area is classed as the footpath and not the road, then yes all 4 wheels are on the footpath.

5
@Carlos CGD well unfortunately this thread wasn't brought to my attention when it started, and I can't reply to most threads as I'm normally swamped with tribunal appeals, but we are where we are.

I've never seen a footway parking resolution from Ealing, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't be able to produce one. I have requested it anyway, and Ealing are often quite quick at coming back to me, so there's no harm in waiting to see if it comes back before the discount expires.

Thats brilliant, thank you.

6
Thank you
I will drop him a message.

7
Did you ask for a resolution that sets aside the footway parking ban?

I can't but still think there must be a way to liaise on a collective challenge - you won't be happy if you pay and find a neighbour took it to the tribunal and won.

Yes I asked for it in the appeal letter, but they completely ignored it and never made mention of it.
Also I know a number of my neighbours already paid the reduced amount.

Also, I sent three appeals separately, one for my car, one for my wife's car and the one for the double ticket on my car.

In the rejection letter I received today, they state that I claim the car was double ticketed and that it would have to be a separate appeal and they rejected it with this one, but I did send it separately, I have a separate reference number and never mentioned the double ticket in this appeal, (I'm reading that back and it probably makes absolutely no sense).

So basically I sent three separate appeals and received three separate emails with different reference numbers, but they seem to have conflated two of them into one.

I am yet to receive the outcome on my wife's car, but seeing as it's the same letter as my one, I don't think there will be a different outcome.

I am going to stick with the appeal, because we have been parking like this for decades without any action from the council, but I've never appealed anything before, I have absolutely no idea what I'm doing but for the sheer principle of what they did and how the council went about it.
How are we supposed to know that anything has changed if they don't communicate anything to us?

8
So I received this notice as a letter of rejection to all three appeals, even though I sent them all separately they've dealt with them all as one, including the one where I was double ticketed.
Should I just bite the bullet and pay the reduced penalty or do I stand a chance at the tribunal?

Ive uploaded the letter to the google drive under Ealing Rejection of Appeals.

Link : https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1tSkJe86l067leGVtVFbNzK-rqFNCgkcd?usp=sharing

9
OP, can I try and simplify this issue pl.

Traffic signs indicate that footway parking with 2 wheels is permitted in parts of Darwin Drive.

There are no signs indicating that footway parking is permitted in Darwin Drive with 4 wheels on the footway.

There are 3 pairs of footway parking signs(a pair being footway parking is permitted to one side but not the other).

Darwin Drive house numbers are odd/even on opposite sides of the road.

One pair of signs is situated o/s no. 19 which indicates that from 19 to no. 73  footway parking with two wheels is permitted.

One pair of signs is situated o/s no.73 indicating that beyond this point footway parking is not permitted.

One pair is situated o/s no. 34 which indicates that from no. 34-no. 2  2-wheel footway parking is permitted.

Now for the crunch.....

Your car was parked with 4 wheels on the footway, contrary to the signs' permission, o/s no. ****?

Please confirm and indicate which house number should be inserted in ****.

This isn't to say that 4 wheels is not permitted e.g. plenty of contra indicators that 4-wheel parking is commonplace including a disabled parking place situated wholly on the footway without the benefit of a traffic sign indicating that this is permitted as an exception to the prevailing 2-wheel permission from which it is reasonable to deduce that the prevailing permission IS 4 wheels and not 2.

But let's get the basics in play first pl.

Thank you for the reply, apologies for getting back to this so late.
My Vehicle was parked outside number 30.

10
I am, but I think our appeals are at different stages. I have the notice to owner, I believe he is at a level two complaint with the council.

Just to emphasise that the formal appeal process (PCN/NTO/Appeal) is a completely different thing to a complaint to a Council. Both can co-exist, be at different stages and proceed at different speeds.

You asked on the other thread what the benefit would be of getting hold of "a copy of the footway parking resolution made under section 15(4) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 that applies to this road", which Stamfordman recommended, so I'll attempt to explain. For a PCN to be valid, the wording of the PCN needs to follow a set of rules AND you need to have broken a rule, AND that rule needs to have been communicated to you in the language of traffic signs. A lot of cases that we see here are won on because the council messed up one of these 3 bits, so we like to check that the council have done them all correctly. The way pavement parking works is that it's generally allowed, except in London where it's banned, except for a few bits of London where it is officially unbanned by a London Council, which they do by making a formal resolution under section 15(4) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974. The Council then put up signs that match exactly what the resolution says, and you're then allowed to park where the signs say you can. Well, that's the theory, but in practice, we often find that the signs don't match the resolution. If you prove this to a traffic adjudicator, they will tear the ticket up for you. This happens often enough for us to recommend getting hold of the resolution and checking it pretty much every time we see one of those 'you can park on the pavement' signs being relied on by a London Council.

Thank you.
I have logged my appeal to the Notice To Owner and have requested a copy of the parking resolution order.
I will attach the response from the council as soon as I receive it.

11
Ask them for a copy of the footway parking resolution made under section 15(4) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 that applies to this road.

I'm on the same road as Martin, can I add this request in to my appeal?

Of course you can.

I'm new to this, I have never argued a parking ticket before, so apologies if this is a stupid question, but, what is it and how will it help?


12
Ask them for a copy of the footway parking resolution made under section 15(4) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 that applies to this road.

I'm on the same road as Martin, can I add this request in to my appeal?

13
Are you liaising with Martin Blackwell as per the other case I posted?

I am, but I think our appeals are at different stages. I have the notice to owner, I believe he is at a level two complaint with the council.

14
You have posted a photo of a pair of traffic signs, one indicating the end of a permitted footway parking area, the other the start.

We have no context, no idea where this - and possibly others - are located and therefore their scope.

You'll need to take a few photos pl so that we have a clear idea.

The sign you've posted does NOT restrict footway parking to marked areas and if it applies to you then the council's dead in the water, they just don't know it yet.

Page 174 gives examples of the required sign for parking 'in marked bays'.

I have taken more pictures and added them to the document along with video of the rubbish truck which got stuck today and a lady had to move her car before it could get round. Then when it neared the end of Darwin Drive it couldn't get through the gap and had to reverse all the way back around.
This has never happened before and now twice in two weeks, the rubbish truck has had problems because the cars are parking further in the street than they used to so as to avoid being ticketed.
At least one car has been caught by either a van or a truck coming round.

I have written my appeal to parking services in response to the notice to owner and have included it in the file (its the PDF document title Ealing Council Parking Services)
I'm not holding much hope with parking services because I know a number of residents have already paid the fines in the discounted window, I'm not sure how this would affect my appeal or if it holds any sway.

I would be really grateful if anyone could tell me if there is anything else I should add or is it sufficient?

Thank you.

Link to Google Drive.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1tSkJe86l067leGVtVFbNzK-rqFNCgkcd?usp=sharing

15
You've blanked the location and other details. It's hard to help properly unless you do what we ask in the read this advice.

Did you challenge the PCN at first stage?

What stages are the other PCNs at?

Apologies, I have removed the blanks.

I did challenge at the first stage, I have attached the email response in the Google drive link above.
The other PCNS all have the exact same letter and response to the one attached, except the one where I was ticketed twice, that one should be here in a couple of days because it was about 2-3 days after the first ticket was issued.
I didn't challenge that one on the first stage, I didn't think there was any point after the response from the first two, and also by this time the residents had written to our local councillor so we thought parking services would see sense and would over turn the tickets, but he didn't really do anything other than contact parking services and tell them he was disappointed with their action and that they should have engaged with the residents.
Since then, we've not even had any responses from him.

The first stage rejection letter is enclosed it says we can't park on the footpath, which we don't understand, because the sign says we can and it's not like we all started to park like this out of the blue, we've parked like this for over 30 years.
Parking services know this too, because we have a small section of paved area which has the car with the red line through it which doesn't allow pavement parking and they come round and ticket people who park there, so they're always around here on their scooters.

When we spoke to one of the traffic wardens and asked why they were doing this, he said we are parking outside of the indicated area, but we don't have an indicated area?
There are other roads near by which have bays marked, but our road doesn't. It never has, so we really can't understand what's happened?


Pages: [1] 2