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 - Glitch

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
1
Private parking tickets / Re: Excel Parking Iceland Waltham Cross - Parked beyond to bay markings
« on: January 06, 2025, 01:07:51 pm »
Success! Many thanks for your help.

Dear xxx See Above
Re: Parking Charge Notice EPS24473191 (Vehicle: MP19BOV)

Site: Iceland Waltham Cross Customer Car Park
Issue date: 28/11/2024

We refer to correspondence received from you concerning the above numbered Charge Notice.
We have reviewed this case and considered the points raised in your correspondence and can confirm that the Notice has been cancelled with immediate effect and our records in respect of this matter are now closed.

Thank you for your co-operation in this matter.

Yours sincerely,
Appeals Administration Team
Central Processing Office

2
Private parking tickets / Re: Excel Parking Iceland Waltham Cross - Parked beyond to bay markings
« on: December 16, 2024, 02:50:11 pm »
The van is registered to the company.

Should the appeal be in the name of the company? Or a named person in the company?

3
Private parking tickets / Re: Excel Parking Iceland Waltham Cross - Parked beyond to bay markings
« on: December 15, 2024, 03:58:25 pm »
Yes that comprehensive reply is very helpful.

I'm not intimidated by the small claims process. I've been through it once as a claimant.

The RK is happy to take it all the way.


4
Private parking tickets / Re: Excel Parking Iceland Waltham Cross - Parked beyond to bay markings
« on: December 15, 2024, 09:46:45 am »
So how do these normally pan out?

When it goes down the small claims route does it require an appearance in front of a judge?
Do Excel turn up to defend it?
 
Is it only at court do the other factors (unloading, signage, bay marking, no payment, etc) come into play?

5
Private parking tickets / Re: Excel Parking Iceland Waltham Cross - Parked beyond to bay markings
« on: December 14, 2024, 04:09:47 pm »
No ticket on the screen.

6
Private parking tickets / Re: Excel Parking Iceland Waltham Cross - Parked beyond to bay markings
« on: December 14, 2024, 04:03:26 pm »

Ah, I'm checking with the driver. I may have made a wrong assumption. He only gave me the NTK.

7
Private parking tickets / Re: Excel Parking Iceland Waltham Cross - Parked beyond to bay markings
« on: December 14, 2024, 02:36:30 pm »

No correspondence with Excel.

8
Private parking tickets / Excel Parking Iceland Waltham Cross - Parked beyond to bay markings
« on: December 14, 2024, 02:24:06 pm »
I have raised this on behalf of a friend.
Annoyingly the discount period had expired.

The driver of the van was delivering goods to a nearby cafe.
He chatted to the parking attendant and was given permission to stop there for a few minutes.
The driver came back to a ticket which strangely says 86) parked beyond to bay markings
He did not buy a ticket as he had permission to stop there for a few minutes.

The bays are not clearly marked. The paint is very faded.
Luckily GSV goes right into the car park HERE











9
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Whipps Cross Road Bus Lane Fine
« on: September 09, 2024, 10:23:02 pm »

Drove along Whipps Cross Road a few days ago and lo and behold after numerous years of no maintenance they have finally repainted the road markings.

Better late than never!

10
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Whipps Cross Road Bus Lane Fine
« on: August 21, 2024, 11:07:35 am »
Post #16 in the thread I quoted above makes reference to Chapter 5 Road markings diagram 1010. 1m gap between dashes.

This is just making the point that a dashed line has 1m gaps and the gap in the bus lane marking is 2m long.
It surely cannot be deemed 'substantially compliant' if it is a greater gap than a dashed line.

Hopefully I've wriggled off the hook!

11
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Whipps Cross Road Bus Lane Fine
« on: August 21, 2024, 10:51:01 am »
Quote from: Hippocrates on August 21, 2024, 09:50:35 am
@Glitch: I cited you from another thread.  ;)

:-[

Don't know where the bit in blue above came from. It doesn't apply to this bus lane.

I put a fair amount into this one Whipps Cross Bus Lane. Nothing about left turn markings though.

Doesn't matter for Council but it will for Tribunal. I'll keep searching to see if I've messed up in another thread.

I think the key points are that they only monitor the final 33m or so of the 186m bus lane (google map measurements)

Observed behaviour warrants an end of bus lane sign (but they cant seem to put on on the bridge). Adjudicators might not see a trend but we certainly have seen nearly everyone clipping the end.

When is a continuous solid line no longer continuous? I'd say 2m is more than enough. Lack of maintenance of road markings. Not repainted for many years - gap is growing as seen on GSV. 

Camera angle does not provide context. No signs visible. Are they deliberately trying to imply the bus lane continues down the road when it is right on the end?

12
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Whipps Cross Road Bus Lane Fine
« on: August 20, 2024, 11:02:10 pm »
Quote
3. Notably, there is no clear end of bus lane sign visible. I refer to the Traffic Signs Manual Chapter Three@9.3.9.  The end of a with flow bus lane will usually be obvious through the termination of the diagram 1049A marking. If considered necessary due to observed driver behaviour, an upright sign to diagram 964 (S9 4 11, see Figure 9-5) may be sited as shown in Figure 9-1.

The lane should normally be stopped short of the Stop line at traffic signal controlled junctions.  I refer to para. 9.3.13.  Where a nearside bus lane passes a junction with a major left turning flow into the side road, the line to diagram 1049A should be replaced with a broken line to diagram 1010 (see Figure 9-1). The broken line should commence 30 m in advance of the junction, and have the same width as the line to diagram 1049A. It should be accompanied by the arrow to diagram 1050 indicating a left turn (see Figure 9-6). At other junctions, the diagram 1049A marking should be terminated approximately 10 m before the junction (or at the junction if the minor road is one way towards the major road). In each case the bus lane recommences beyond the junction in combination with a marking to diagram 1010 (see Figure 9-1). It is important to ensure that the marking to diagram 1049A is terminated correctly, so that drivers turning left can move across to do so safely without needing to cross the continuous line.

Given the camera only focusses on the final 33 metres, it is arguable that  the observed behaviour will constitute  a large majority of motorists clipping the end.

I'm not getting the relevance of the bit in blue, unless there is something subtle I've missed. This only applies to the markings where there is a side road. There are no turnings before the traffic lights on this bus lane. The lane stops before the traffic lights.

Because they only focus on the final 33m of the 186m bus lane, the observed behaviour is almost always clipping the last 10 metres or so.

re: 2. I did measure the gap which is approximately 2 metres.

13
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Redbridge - George Lane 31J Stopping in a box junction when prohibited
« on: July 10, 2024, 12:22:12 pm »

I'm not going to make a fuss whilst I have Ms Pearce onside  ;D

Just had the Redbridge 'Parking Technician' on the phone asking me to send bank statement for them to make payment.
Didn't realise during the call that it was the same person that signed their witness statement for the Tribunal.

Not even a hint of apology on the call or subsequent email. Best not to let rip at the incompetent little toe rag.  :-X

14
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Redbridge - George Lane 31J Stopping in a box junction when prohibited
« on: July 10, 2024, 09:29:44 am »
Quote from: Hippocrates on July 10, 2024, 08:36:43 am
I don't know about the attendance issue.

Seems to be due to the personal attendance being optional - I could have phoned in.


15
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Redbridge - George Lane 31J Stopping in a box junction when prohibited
« on: July 10, 2024, 07:06:42 am »
Extract from the costs award:

The threshold of what is "wholly unreasonable," as opposed to "unreasonable," is a high one.

The Enforcement Authority had been cognizant of the Appeal issue from the outset; that issue is one which the Tribunal had been caused to consider in multiple Appeals, the determinations of the Tribunal in such Appeal had been made known to the Enforcement Authority.

I find that the Enforcement Authority's behaviour in its silence throughout the process with regard to the pertinent issue raised by the Tribunal to be negligent in its approach to pursuing the alleged contravention at the very least, or inappropriate in continuing with the case by resisting the Appeal at worst, and thereby amounts to wholly unreasonable behaviour on the part of the Enforcement Authority warranting this award.

I therefore move on to consider quantum: In this respect I have regard to the amount claimed in the Application statement document; attendance at the Tribunal personally is entirely an Appellant's preference, I cannot award costs/expenses for the same.

I do accept the preparatory work claimed at the litigant in person hourly rate.

2 hours at £19 per hour = £38.00

Accordingly, I order that costs be awarded to the Appellant in the sum of £38 payable by the
Enforcement Authority forthwith.

Enough for some 🍻 at the nearest 'Spoons 😁

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8