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 - Wilbo

Pages: [1] 2
1
What is the amount showing online.

Very sadly it's showing £75. Looks like the end of the road for this one!

Many thanks for your reply though Stamfordman.

2
Hello all,

My friend got the following 'Notice to Keeper' – I think there's a good chance of winning an appeal here having done so successfully myself on another occasion. However, the 28 day appeal deadline has passed. Does than mean she now has no option but to pay up?

Many thanks!



3
Hello all – a simple one here:

PCN says car colour is 'white' when it is in reality 'silver' or 'grey'. Is that on its own grounds to challenge the notice?

Deadline to challenge has past so waiting for NtO.

Many thanks!



4
Hello all – posting this for a friend who parked her van in a council car park and forgot to pay. She doesn't have any parking near her flat which is in the centre of the town and so has to park in the car park to unload shopping or other items. Other people would be able to park on the street but sadly this isn't an option for her.(this isn't supposed to form the basis of an appeal, I'm just providing some background).

Anyway, she got a ticket and forgot about it, and then got an NtO – photos of both are attached.

My question is: based on what you see here, is her only option to pay the maximum fine of £75 at this late stage, or has she any right to pay a lower amount? I realise the 28 day period has now passed.

Also (slim chance I know) – do you spot any irregularities with the PCN or NtO which might invalidate them and give her a chance to avoid a penalty? I've looked at the spreadsheet and there are no known flaws for Stroud, sadly, but any thoughts you have would be most welcome!

Many thanks!








5
Some thoughts.

Thank you so much H C!

I've incorporated your suggestions as follows:

I wish to appeal the above PCN, on the grounds that the driver was unaware of any restrictions in place when they parked, due to insufficient signage.

When the driver exited the vehicle they looked around for any markings which would indicate whether parking was restricted. There was a clearly-visible sign marking the entrance to the 'Ticket and Meter Zone’ at the entrance to Farrars Avenue, and into Station Road and beyond: this very obviously did not apply to the portion of Farrars Avenue in which the vehicle was parked. Nearer to where the vehicle was parked the driver noticed a smaller sign which was entirely blank apart from a single blue ‘P’ sign (a universally-recognised symbol for parking). Above this, on the same post, was a further sign forbidding heavy vehicles from parking in the area outside of the hours 8am–6.30pm. Apart from this, which clearly did not apply to the vehicle in question, there was no indication of parking restrictions in force in the street.

On returning to the vehicle and finding the PCN, the driver explored the area and discovered a sign indicating the start of a Permit Parking Area. The driver had not seen this before as it is obscured by a tree from the driver’s vantage point when entering the road, as the attached Google Street View screenshots demonstrate. The driver also examined the signs near the car and found that text informing drivers of restrictions in place had been painted over with opaque white paint, leaving only the ‘P’ symbol visible.

Subsequent research has shown that restrictions have been in place in Farrers Avenue for some years and whereas these were previously signalled by two prominent signs on either side of the carriageway (as recently as 2022), the council has let this deteriorate to only one sign on the offside footway which is now obscured (at least at this time of the year) by a leafy crown. Furthermore, the 'repeater signs’ along the street have all been painted over since at least March 2022, leaving ample time for repair or replacement.

With respect, the PCN should be cancelled and the signage improved, at least to the standards deemed necessary in 2022.


---

(Note that the car was parked very near to the repeater sign which had been painted out, not on the other side of the road to it – see attached image which I forgot to include before)

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

6
Here's my appeal - any feedback would be very welcome!


I wish to appeal the above PCN, on the grounds that the driver was unaware of restrictions in place when they parked, due to insufficient signage.

Firstly, there were ‘repeater signs’ along the length of the street but all of these had been painted out so they were entirely blank apart from the blue ‘P’ sign, which is universally recognised as a symbol for parking. Thus, when the driver exited the vehicle and looked around for parking information, they saw one of these signs nearby and reasonably assumed that parking was permitted with no restrictions. There were no times or other restrictions visible on the signs. The vehicle was parked close to the entrance to the permit parking area but there was no sign signalling the end of the area (since this is a cul-de-sac) and so there was no other signage visible to the driver when they exited the vehicle and looked around.

Secondly, the sign signalling entrance to the permit parking area was obscured by a tree (planted since March 2022) and the second entrance sign, which would have been more clearly seen, has been removed for some time. The attached Google Street View screenshots clearly show that the sign is not visible to drivers as they enter the road or indeed once they have driven some way into it. The sign is only visible once a vehicle is level with the tree itself and the likelihood of the driver actually seeing it might be greatly lessened by road conditions at the time – for instance passing a high-sided vehicle, or when observing potential hazards such as children playing in the cul-de-sac.

As can be seen from the attached Street View screenshots, in March 2022 there were two entrance signs, one on each side of the road; there was no tree obscuring view of the right-hand sign; the repeater signs along the length of the street had not been altered. By July 2024, however, the left-hand entrance sign had been removed; a tree had been planted (presumably by the council) very close to the remaining entrance sign; and the repeater signs had all been painted over leaving no information apart from the blue ‘P’ logo which indicates permitted parking.

In the ten months since then there has been ample time for the council to repair or replace the repeater signs and to trim or remove the newly-planted tree which obscures the only remaining entrance sign. They have not done so. Taken together, the issues with the visibility of the signage in Farrars Avenue are such that the driver was unaware of the restrictions in place. Therefore, I respectfully request that on this occasion the PCN please be cancelled.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

7
Op no. 10 is just inside the zone. Personally, I think it's what's not there which adds most weight to the argument i.e. you cannot have a start to a zone without an end. See p.162.

Ah sadly I don't think this line of argument will quite work since the Traffic Signs Manual stipulates that

"A sign to diagram 664.1 indicating the end of the permit holder parking area will be needed, unless it is a cul‑de‑sac." (my emphasis).

it adds that

"repeater signs are not mandatory and might not be required at all in a short cul‑de‑sac or where parking by non‑permit holders is not likely to be a problem."

Unfortunately, Ferrers Ave is indeed a cul-de-sac. Nonetheless I will mention this as I guess there was no other sign to see from the driver's POV upon parking, except from the tampered-with signage which suggest that parking IS permitted...

However, there is further bad news: the manual states that

"Where parking in an entire road is reserved solely for permit holders, it might be possible to provide signs at the entrance to the road and dispense with signs and bay markings within the road itself"

and adds that

"In order to reduce environmental impact, there is no requirement to provide an entry sign on each side of the road."

So I think that the best approach is to argue that the signage was confusing and that the driver reasonably believed that they were permitted to park in the street. What do you think?

8
Great observation! Thanks for that… I’ll work it into an appeal and post if up shortly…

9
Hi all,

Posting on behalf of a friend. Vehicle was parked in restricted zone (residents permits only). However, all signs were painted out leaving only the blue 'P' for 'parking' so the driver thought it was fine to park. There was a sign at the entrance of the road but this was obscured behind a tree (see attached screenshot from Google Streetview).

In my view the PCN isn't enforceable since the signage wasn't correct. Streetview shows that the signs have been painted out since at least July 2024 so the council have had plenty of time to repair/replace them.

Also it seems that the warden didn't observe the vehicle for more than 6 mins. Is that relevant?

Would love to know what you chaps think – any feedback will be gratefully received!!

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

10
Thank you – I really appreciate the feedback. I'll let her know!

11
Thanks stamfordman. I'm not sure of the PCN# and vehicle reg, they're blurred out. If it matters I can find out from her. She's definitely the registered keeper, I think she received the NtO around 18 Oct.
(As far as I know a property guardianship is basically an arrangement where you live in a disused building, an old school or council building etc., for greatly reduced rent in order to protect the building from squatters and for insurance purposes)

12
I believe she hasn't made any representations at all. She lives in a property Guardianship and apparently the NtO didn't arrive until after it was too late. Presumably she's out of options?

13
Thanks stamfordman,

Yes she did receive an NTO – please see both that and the PCN attached.



14
Hello all,

I'm posting this on behalf of a friend (really).

She tried paying the fine (on the day she received the PCN) but although the REG and PCN# both matched, the council website wouldn't allow her to proceed with the payment – see screenshot below. It will now allow her to pay, but the amount has increased to £75. Is there anything she can do?



15
There is an issue with the TFL notice of rejection template that may save the day
...
So I suggest you send your representation asap as you want to get it in during the discount period, then post up the notice of rejection when you get it and if there is an exploitable flaw we'll help you with the next steps.
Thank you so much, I'll do exactly as you say. Am I ok phasing it as I have (re: being the driver), or should I rewrite it?
Thanks again – this forum is fantastic!

Pages: [1] 2