Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi Mr Mustard,

I appreciate yourself and everybody else has busy days, I was by no means rushing you or anyone, I was simply wanting to take away the workload and write it myself for it to be checked. Stating that I was travelling, was not a way in making it urgent but an excuse to showing why I had written it so quickly - tone sometimes does not come across in writing. Furthermore, I had only received the notice to owner letter yesterday so I posted it here as soon as I could.

Hello,

Just received my Notice to Owner... do your recommend I put down exactly what I put in my initial representation?

Have you kept a copy and did you get a receipt/acknowledgement?

Yes, I've received the email of acknowledgement! fingers crossed.

My response was:

I am writing to challenge the alleged PCN based on the grounds that the contravention did not occur due to the lack of clear signage differentiating the resident permit parking restrictions. At 19:15 on 20th October 2023, I had
parked my vehicle on the basis that the resident permit restriction was only applicable from 8:30am to 6:30pm - this time plate was in very close proximity (as shown in attachment 3) to where I had parked my vehicle. Directly
opposite my vehicle, on the other side of the road, the same parking restrictions applied from 8:30am to 6:30pm (attachment 2). At an approximately equal distance from my vehicle as the 8:30am to 6:30pm time plate, there was another time plate with a parking restriction change from 8:30am to 8:30pm, however the changeover of this parking restriction was not clearly indicated; at the time I had parked the vehicle, there was an existing vehicle
which was parked, covering the lines separating the road's different parking restrictions, and this therefore was not visible to me at the time. The proximity of the two different time plates is shown in attachment 1.
Given that two different parking bays (one restriction from 8:30am to 6:30pm and the other from 8:30am to 8:30pm) are side by side, two signs side by side, with arrows pointing in the direction of the respective bays should have been, but were not shown. Furthermore, the signs/time plates were not sited in line with the transverse lines separating individual spaces to emphasise that a particular sign does not apply and in the instance of this case, where a vehicle had covered the floor marking, there was no way in knowing that a different
parking restriction applied - this opposes guidance and laws outlined in the Traffic Code.
On the ground of there being a lack of clear signage separating two different parking restrictions with no combined sign at the changeover point as stipulated in the Traffic Code, the PCN contravention did not occur.

The 28 days is wrongly expressed. The adjudicator agreed with me in case 2230423809 last week. Should be 28 days from date of alleged contravention. For free representation email mrmustard@zoho.com

Thanks for your reply! It says on the PCN '28 days beginning with the date on which this penalty charge notice was served' - isn't that the same as what you state of 28 days from the date of alleged contravention? I don't quite understand what the difference in wording is.

Hello,

Thanks for your response.

Contravention code: 12

GSV location:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/4NJ55eBrRzMjWB3N6













[ Guests cannot view attachments ]