Skip to content

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
Southwark have rejected my representations and are in danger of being removed from my xmas card list.

Their reasons are below. What do you reckon? Accept defeat or keep going?

We sent you a PCN because our CCTV camera evidence shows your vehicle going where motor vehicles are not allowed.
The sign, on each side of the carriageway, is that prescribed by Diagram 619 at Item 12 in Part 2 of Schedule 3 to the
Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, as indicating ‘Motor vehicles prohibited’. The sign is round, white and
has a red border. Below are the words '' except for loading 7am -10am, buses and taxis. The restriction is in place at all
times.
In addition, to the restriction signs, which are displayed on both sides of the carriageway, there are advanced warning signs
in place advising motorists approaching the junction giving the driver sufficient time and room to change direction. The onus
remains firmly on the motorist to observe the relevant signage and to seek alternative driving route to ensure compliance
with the restrictions in place.
With regards to your comments that the PCN is invalid due to the wording and website conveying the wrong information.
Southwark Council is satisfied that the wording on the PCN is compliant and correctly conveys the 28 day period required by
law.
The wording on the PCN is correct in reference to the provisions of Section 4 (8)(a) of the London Local Authorities and
Transport for London Act 2003. This paragraph is concerned with the wording which must be included on a PCN; the
relevant period is inferred in article (8)(a)( i) that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days
beginning with the date of the notice.
Paragraph 5(2)(a) under Schedule 1 is not concerned with the wording on the PCN, it is concerned with the actions of the
Enforcement Authority when enforcing the PCN. This section refers to the relevant period for issuing of the Charge
Certificate. The act of issuing a charge certificate is distinctly different to the wording which must be included on the PCN.
92
Preston Way, The Avenue, Elmstead Avenue, Logan Road etc...all have a junction with Preston Road. Take your pick.

The answer is Uxendon Crescent!

IMO, the PCN fails to state the location correctly and therefore fails the obligation of:
(c)the grounds on which the civil enforcement officer issuing the notice believes that a penalty charge is payable,

OP, why have you posted a photo showing how well your car fits within this bay when you're arguing the contrary?

Anyway, where's the evidence of contravention?

All there is are worn markings purported indicating the termination of your bay and the start of a loading bay.

There are vague road markings indicating 'Loading Only', but on their own they're meaningless unless it's a 24/7 loading bay for which the road marking alone would meet the 'signing' test.

But it's not 24/7, it's a part-time bay* therefore IMO there should be a photo of the applicable traffic sign in their evidence.

But it's not there.

*- check out GSV and see how often there's what appears to be the same van parked!
93
I parked here on Friday night just gone (further down, definitely in a loading bay). I did notice on my way past that the loading until 6:30pm sign that I was parked under when I got this ticket has also been removed now (post #33). Not that it is of much relevance to me now, but why on earth are they removing the signs?
I'm working away all this week, so I'll use my evenings try to figure out what to do next to take it forward to tribunal. Cheers.

https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/westminster-parking-ticket/msg129130/#msg129130
94
As previously discussed; do not use the term 'registered keeper' as that is NOT the wording used by POFA.

POFA has its own interpretation of the word 'keeper' and, in this case, the Claimant cannot meet that interpretation based on the facts of the case.

I would not argue the point relating to the updating of the DVLA record in the defence - simply state that the defendant ceased to be 'the keeper' under POFA criteria on the day the vehicle was traded in against the new vehicle.

Keep it simple and avoid providing a defence to arguments not put forward on the Claim Form.
95
Private parking tickets / Re: Who ownes the pavement / forcourt
« Last post by InterCity125 on Today at 08:44:54 am »
By way of a clue - it might be worth providing us with the location of said shop perhaps with a link to GSV?
96
You cannot. Nothing personal, this is the legal procedure.
97
Thank you. Would it be an issue to send it early, before they register the debt,?
98
Dear team

I'm again here seeking valuable guidance. Apologies in advance for the long draft of representation.

Brent CEO issued PCN with contravention code 25 where the parked vehicle within on-street bay overhung on to the loading bay. Due to rush, it's overlooked that parked car overhung onto the loading bay.

My views:
A. Contravention 24 is correct and not 25. Legally, pcn is incorrect and must be cancelled.
B. Insufficient length (after cycle bay was introduced) of the on-street parking bay which will always result overhung
C. Technically, Brent council didnt provide reasonable parking space in bay to avoid overhung i.e they created situation where car will overhung and PCN will be issued

Please suggest what options do we have to contest this PCN.

Also, can we seek process followed by Brent team to define length of on-street parking bays?
I presume, London councils use this approach to mint monies??

 Key links:

Copy of PCN:
https://ibb.co/fVQCnqgx

Google location:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/pRFDmADHGXNgy4Yu9

Draft representations:
https://ibb.co/tMgBzyn6

Reconstruction of alleged contravention & evidences:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/13Mn2m4fK11vSB44mH9w8Npq3It42-cIO/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105350804164818082664&rtpof=true&sd=true

https://ibb.co/gM95c2pk
https://ibb.co/0j3GLD7X
https://ibb.co/GvL7P2ZB
https://ibb.co/rGcxVX1S
https://ibb.co/LdbwLgW7
https://ibb.co/YxSNFF8

Kind regards
99
Private parking tickets / Who ownes the pavement / forcourt
« Last post by LotusOne on Yesterday at 11:26:09 pm »
Is the paved pavement outside a shop their private property or is it owned by the Council?

I have received a PCN for parking on the pavement in front of a shop for less than four minutes.  There were no signs visible at the time indicating that this was private property that I could see and the shop was closed at the time.
100
Private parking tickets / Re: Private parking fine for a car I had already sold
« Last post by nycmsg on Yesterday at 08:56:39 pm »
Hi,
I don’t have the Notice to Keeper, it was from a couple of years ago and has been lost, unfortunately, but I do have a Letter of claim here https://ibb.co/96BzzCp
Regarding the amends you have suggested, tincombe, would those go in the section where I am detailing my encounter of the events?

Thanks
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]