Free Traffic Legal Advice

Thank you, hope for good at appeal stage, that would save a lot of time for all. I'll surely update the post with the outcome of this step, either positive or negative.

Hi Mr Andersen (or anyone can help),

I need to send the formal appeal today or tomorrow at least (from Thursday I'll offline for a business trip).

A final advice on the above would be highly beneficial, thank you so much in advance.

Look forward to hearing from you.

If all the uncorroborated elements are stripped out then all that remains is the CEO's photos and the PCN.

[...]

Personally, I'd approach this without reference to uncorroborated references.

Authority confirmed that contravention is instantaneous. B******s. The CEO is obliged to consider whether any exemptions might apply, namely 'loading' and 'boarding'. If you ask for the council's policy, I'm certain you'll find that at least 2 minutes' obs is required. This would have taken the CEO to 9.29 which, in accordance with London Councils' procedures, would mean that a PCN should not be issued. Put this to the council in formal reps and see what response you get.

The time you have available is more than enough IMO to draft reps for review here, amend if necessary and submit.

Thank you so much. I'll start to draft reps and post for review here, amend if necessary and submit before the 28 days (19 Dec).

Is it worth mentioning again as a point in the appeal the set of photo evidence by the CEO? Photos of: 1) my car not at all next to any timeplate visible in the surroundings, 2) a zoomed photo of a timeplate without my car in the vicinity, 3) enlarged photo of the timeplate and surroundings, with a totally different car (Mercedes) underneath the timeplate and again no presence at all of my car (Nissan) in the whole background.

More in general, there's anything I can save from my informal challenges (rejected twice) and maybe reuse for the formal representations? This is the 2nd letter I sent to the Council to informally challenge the PCN. Posting it for review and feedback.
Link --> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hh7QINy2PDErJR-HwoD9aYPE21eMhEvFbqDzj2770Qw/edit?usp=sharing

Hi, we request your advice on a collision that happened with a Virgin Media/O2 van in the private car park of our block of apartments. Your point of view would be highly appreciated, as me and my wife are shaken after all what happened. This is the story.

1) This Virgin Media/O2 van driver entered the private car park at a speed, without the necessary green visitor badge. Signage is on site and at the entrance of the block. Not sure if he checked what the rules are with the flat owner/tenant he was visiting.

2) He parked initially in the private car park of flat no. 18 and then quickly reversed, still at speed, moving into no. 10 private car park, but all of a sudden he moved up again for the 3rd time to go into no. 4 private car park. None of these car parks had anything to do with him, as he went instead to work in flat no. 17 (we have evidence of this and spoke with the no. 17 tenant). In first instance, he shouldn't have been at all in that area, as he didn't have a green visitor badge and indeed nothing to do with flats 18, 10 and 4.

3) He caused a collision with our car, while carelessly reversing and moving the van from one space to the other for 3 times, without any apparent logic. We have video of the collision, taken from the CCTV system of the apartments block.

4) He argued a lot with my wife, was not cooperative, and at the end of the conversation, he refused exchanging insurance details, including driver's name, the registered keeper's name and their address. We managed to see and therefore obtain only the vehicle registration number. This individual was driving a Virgin Media/O2 Van and wearing the full Company uniform. We asked for these details several times, including his badge number, but he refused. The tenant of flat 17 is a witness of this.

5) He also started recording and even threatened to call the Police on us (not sure for which reason).

6) After over an hour of this incident, the van was still wrongly parked in flat no. 4 private car park (while he was working in flat 17, which doesn't have a private car park) and still without any green visitor badge displayed.

- After all this, I had to report it to our block management company, which should issue the charge of £100 for misuse of the car park, as per signage and block regulations.
- I also had to report the incident to the Police, as this individual refused to exchange insurance details. Police gave me a case number.
- I'm sending a V888 form to DVLA to get the vehicle details of registered keeper, address, etc. For this, I need to obtain first a repair quote from a car body repairer.
- Obviously, I'm preparing the insurance claim, even if the damage is nothing to the van (photos were taken) and just cosmetic damages such as paint transference, scuffs, minor scratches on the rear left corner of our car.
- I'm going to open a very strong case/complaint with Virgin Media/O2. What is concerning is that this unstable individual while I write is still allowed to drive this way and even worse, enter people's homes.

Thanks for your opinions and advice on what to do. We are not "litigators", but this wobbling guy pulled us into all this.

Look forward to hearing from you.

Who is the driver?

So they went to the other sign rather than the one the CEO went to?

That's fine but you need to be clear about the event.

It's no good worrying about the CEO - in large areas they often use motorbikes and cars to patrol and here this is presumably just a commuter restriction at start of morning.

The driver is my wife. She went down the road to look for a sign (55 steps going + 55 coming back, plus the time of examination, checking the actual time etc etc), and yes, the CEO went up the road to look for a sign to photo and also take a photo of a different car near it to add as "evidence". This is well shown by the photos he took.

Basically my car was parked near pole 43 (no timeplate), CEO operated near pole 44 and wife went down to pole 42. All this comedy because of a missing sign. The whole Winnington Road, over 1,1 miles long, have timeplates on every single pole to the left side, except the pole 43!

Thank you very much all for your help, your work on this forum is very useful and highly appreciated.

The driver did the due diligence in walking down the road searching out the sign. I went there yesterday and measured with steps, the nearest signs are 55 steps down and 53 steps up. Being not a tall person, one step of mine is obviously not 1 mt, so definitely there's a length of well over 100 mt without signs, and a pole with a missing sign in the middle, just where driver parked. She parked midway between two timeplates that are quite far apart, near a pole with a missing sign and did all what was possible to find information about prescribed hours and comply.

Both CEO and Authorised Officer are obviously wrong when stating my car was parked by a timeplate. It wasn't. Timeplate was missing. They sent a photo of timeplate taken from a different pole and one with a different car underneath.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cbtphtKgIBanpcBWO8xPxVjFqoemWrxb/view

Do we members of the public really must cough-up the money and shut up, even when both CEO and Authorised Officer are insisting in presenting as evidence a photo with a timeplate far apart and even a different car near it?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cbtphtKgIBanpcBWO8xPxVjFqoemWrxb/view

Considering the above, I find really hard to conclude that the CEO did anything wrong and was not mendacious, but the Officer who hasn't read my representation and/or not looked at the pics properly, and is insisting on presenting a different car as evidence, did not commit procedural impropriety?

All in all, I find this unfair. We normally follow the rules, honestly comply and pay if we have to, but shell out on a photo of a different car makes us feeling duped as if we are being laughed at.

Thank you.

Thank you so much. I will post everything shortly.