3. Messages

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 - maxxxpayne

Pages: [1] 2
1
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TFL 46 Stopped where prohibited (on a red route or clearway)
« on: March 16, 2026, 09:49:58 pm »
Quote from: Incandescent on March 16, 2026, 08:05:43 pm
It is clear from going back into earlier GSV views, that the bay was longer, I reckon zbout twice as long.The last view with the full bay is 2022 : -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/vZ6zyDb3NtacdETc9
there is no 2023 view, but the next view (2024) shows the bay markings, still noticeable, but with double-red lines added: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/oqA3bt8JVCbDpgxP8
Clearly the highways department are useless at following instructions !
and the latest view (August 2025)
still shows them:-
https://maps.app.goo.gl/J9ix12KW2XDLey558

The sign for the original length bay has remained in its original position so is now incorrectly placed.

Plenty here for an adjudication at London Tribunals methinks

Thanks. Exactly my thought. On that day a couple of cars were parked behind me also so I couldn’t even see if there was a break between the bays and I simply looked at the sign that said no stopping between 7AM-7PM MON-SAT, noted it was Sunday and I was well within dotted parking bay. I’ll appeal to TfL first and take it from there.


2
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TFL 46 Stopped where prohibited (on a red route or clearway)
« on: March 16, 2026, 02:14:01 pm »
Quote from: RichardW on March 16, 2026, 12:32:10 pm
It looks to me like you were stopped about 30m further along the road at the entrance to Maples Place?

https://maps.app.goo.gl/FXVykXJzTezAKQVt5

The Lettings agency says 214 which is the reference on the PCN.

I probably was, however what was extremely confusing is that red dotted parking marking exists further along but with double solid red lines...



3
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TFL 46 Stopped where prohibited (on a red route or clearway)
« on: March 16, 2026, 09:27:54 am »
Quote from: Incandescent on March 11, 2026, 02:04:11 pm
Please post the PCN, all sides, with only name and address redacted.

I suspect your car intruded into the double-red lines, but until we see the PCN it's difficult to say. You could ring TfL and request the video, which is sent as a DVD. This will stop the enforcement for about 14 days whilst they send it out, and hopefully show why the PCN was served.



Here you go. Let's see what DVD TfL send me.

4
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Islington PCN code 52 and subsequent notice of enforcement from CDER group
« on: March 16, 2026, 09:18:20 am »
UPDATE

We wrote to TEC and the council and the council has agreed to re-issue the ticket. Have not had any communication since then but no letters from bailiff etc. so looks like they've been asked to back off.

As usual, thanks for the help.

5
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: [Haringey] Barratt Avenue N22 (junction Park Avenue) (SS16) school street
« on: March 12, 2026, 04:14:18 am »
Quote from: Incandescent on March 11, 2026, 01:45:43 pm
If it were me, I think I'd risk the extra money and take them to London Tribunals. Essentially, it is a typical Fob-Off letter. HOw do they know the advance sign is visible despite high-sided vehicles ? No, it's complete tosh.

Cheers. I’ll proceed accordingly then.

6
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / TFL 46 Stopped where prohibited (on a red route or clearway)
« on: March 11, 2026, 01:05:36 pm »
Hi There,

I received a PCN from TfL on the above contravention for parking in what I'm pretty sure was within dotted lines in what is normally a red route on Sunday, 01/03/26 at 20:28 on Whitechapel Street.

I'm very familiar with that route and have parked there on multiple occasions previously without issues.

Initially, I thought that I received the PCN due to parking at the wrong time (Red Route operational from 7AM-7PM, Mon-Sat), but looks like I have been issued one because the claim is I was not inside the dotted lines - something that I believe was not the case and not clear from the photos TfL has issued. Here are the photos from TfL and Street Views.






One thing I notice is that there are two sets of dotted red lines, one prominent, the other slightly lighter. Could it be that they have changed it and I was potentially on the lighter side of things partially (even though it's not at all clear from the photos TfL provided)? But I thought the prominent marking was for the bus stop and nothing else.

Here's the Apple Maps Link that shows what I mean.


Really confusing. Thoughts welcome.

7
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: [Haringey] Barratt Avenue N22 (junction Park Avenue) (SS16) school street
« on: March 11, 2026, 12:31:15 pm »
UPDATE:

Slightly disappointed but not wholly surprised, Haringey Council has rejected my appeal. Here's their letter:

Quote
We have carefully considered what you say but we have decided not to cancel your Penalty Charge
Notice (PCN).

We sent you a PCN because our CCTV camera evidence shows your vehicle entering a pedestrian zone when it was not allowed to. At this location there are two signs on either side of the road, these signs comply with the relevant regulations.

The red circle indicates a prohibition and is also illustrated in the current edition of the Official Highway Code. These signs are reflective and clear for all motorists to observe and comply with.

I have considered what you have explained in your representations, however I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the signage relating to the restriction was substantially compliant with the relevant regulations, clear and adequate.

As you have shown in your evidence, there is a clear advance warning sign on Park Avenue, which informs motorists of the pedestrian zone. You say that this sign was obscured by another vehicle, however the sign is positioned at a height that would still make it visible for all motorists to observe and comply with.

This sign in conjunction with the statutory signs make this restriction substantially clear. The onus therefore rests with the motorist to ensure that they comply with all traffic signs.

I'm happy to take this case to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicators if members here think I have a good case.

Thanks!

8
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: [Haringey] Barratt Avenue N22 (junction Park Avenue) (SS16) school street
« on: February 08, 2026, 12:42:49 pm »
Excellent, thank you. I'll execute accordingly.

9
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / [Haringey] Barratt Avenue N22 (junction Park Avenue) (SS16) school street
« on: February 07, 2026, 02:58:06 pm »
Hi Everyone,

We're trying to see if we should play out or not. Here's the PCN:







The driver entered a school street on this occasion while the enforcement time was in place at 9:06 AM.

There's a road side sign on the nearside approximately 30 meters away, however on this occasion a large van/delivery vehicle partially obstructed the sign and the driver failed to see this. Worse, the signage on the entrance from near side is almost impossible to see as they are not angled or anything like that for the approaching vehicles, and the driver missed this too.

Once inside, even if the driver could tell, here would be now way to tell as the street is one way and backing out of the street was not an option either due to traffic on the road.









Finally a video of the contravention.

https://youtu.be/8Dq2AXhTK40

10
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Islington PCN code 52 and subsequent notice of enforcement from CDER group
« on: January 28, 2026, 09:08:44 pm »
This is what I wrote:

Quote
We sold our flat to Islington Council on 13/06/2025 and moved to our current address on that date.

The alleged contravention occurred on 01/07/2025, less than two weeks after our move.
At that time, our vehicle logbook had not yet been updated with our new address.

We had arranged Royal Mail redirection from 07/06/2025. However, without our knowledge or any notification,
Royal Mail cancelled the redirection. We only became aware of this recently, which explains why we did not
receive any correspondence relating to this PCN.

During this period, we did receive other correspondence from Islington Council regarding our former
property, sent to our new address, which led us to believe that addressing was not an issue.

We have never previously failed to respond to or pay a PCN, and a number of PCNs paid or contested by
us are recorded on Islington Council’s PCN portal. Had we received the PCN or Notice to Owner, we would
have paid or made representations in the normal way.

We therefore respectfully request permission to file the statutory declaration out of time.


11
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Islington PCN code 52 and subsequent notice of enforcement from CDER group
« on: January 28, 2026, 07:35:39 pm »
Quote from: stamfordman on January 28, 2026, 07:23:39 pm
As you don't seem to have updated the logbook you don't have much of a case. You could provide details of dates of mail redirection.

The out of time process is designed to cover those who get PCNs during the window of moving and updating the logbook, among other things such as no-fault address errors, but the law requires speedy logbook updating to where the registered keeper is.

Since the contravention was less than two weeks from our date of move, surely we couldn't be expected to have updated the logbook?

Also, now we are slightly paranoid - what if we accidentally committed more contravention in the meantime and have more tickets in our name coming up? How do we check even?

12
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Islington PCN code 52 and subsequent notice of enforcement from CDER group
« on: January 28, 2026, 07:28:38 pm »
Quote from: stamfordman on January 28, 2026, 07:23:39 pm
As you don't seem to have updated the logbook you don't have much of a case. You could provide details of dates of mail redirection.

The out of time process is designed to cover those who get PCNs during the window of moving and updating the logbook, among other things such as no-fault address errors, but the law requires speedy logbook updating to where the registered keeper is.

Just to be clear - we're happy to pay the original PCN, but paying the debt company just feels wrong!

13
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bailiff Notice - Islington - Code 52JM Failing to Comply with a prohibition - Canonbury Place
« on: January 28, 2026, 07:27:08 pm »
Quote from: mcbassman on July 25, 2024, 10:19:03 am
Thank you very much for replying.

The lack of update to the V5C was pure negligence on my part, no excuses.

The contravention was driving into a low traffic neighbourhood, caught on a CCTV camera.

I will pay the bailiff as you suggest and will follow your very helpful guidance to see if anything can be done afterwards.

Lessons have been learnt on my part.

Hi There,
Did you get any closure on this? We had exactly the same thing in Islington council and found out yesterday.

14
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Islington PCN code 52 and subsequent notice of enforcement from CDER group
« on: January 28, 2026, 07:13:30 pm »
I assumed in the context of the conversation, that people move, PCN gets sent to old address and next thing you know debt collection agency mail in your letterbox!

Quote from: Incandescent on January 28, 2026, 10:28:23 am
Common as in thousands of TEC submissions (Statutory Declarations or Witness Statements), per year.

15
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Islington PCN code 52 and subsequent notice of enforcement from CDER group
« on: January 28, 2026, 10:17:24 am »
FYI called Islington just now.
They asked us to file a TEC and notify the debt collection agency. Apparently this is a very common thing!

Pages: [1] 2