PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

HOUNSLOW COUNCIL - PCN FOR DOUBLE YELLOW LINE PARKING - WRONG ROAD ON PCN
makara
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 19:27
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,905
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,904



Hi, again


This forum last helped me successfully get my money back from private clamping (clamped in 2010 - case won in 2012).


Today (Sunday) there were no empty residential bays to park in on our road - so we did today what everyone else living on that part of our road usually does, which is to temporarily park on a corner of our road (which has Double Yellow Lines).


The enforcement hours for parking in Resident Bays is Monday to Friday 9:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. - Saturday 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. - and no restriction on Sundays (I do realise we parked on a DYL, which is different to bays).


I was surprised to find see a Hounslow CEO had issued a parking ticket (see links to photos of PCN below) - as I thought they didn't operate on Sundays (or at least not away from the Town Centre).


Three points about the PCN -


1) The reason stated for the PCN is "Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours" - is this not incorrect? We have a Resident Parking Permit displayed - and we parked on a DYL, as opposed to in a "restricted bay".



2) They have misspelt our road name as xxxWOOD Avenue (it is actually xxxWORTH Avenue) - does this incorrect location invalidate the PCN?



3) I remember this forum helping me get two PCNs issued by Hounslow Council thrown out a few years back, by referencing the below PATAS case - although Hounslow Council did try to make me give up, I kept throwing back their arguments - and they eventually seemed to give up on those PCNs -



PATAS case 2100010686 - Hounslow Council are STILL stating the wording "unless this Penalty Charge Notice is challenged".


Links to photos of both sides of the PCN -


http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv221/m...zpsh3ghrbxf.jpg


http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv221/m...zpss6bwckym.jpg



P.S. - not sure if the CEO took photos, as when I entered the PCN number on the website, it gave this message -


"Photos related to this penalty charge notice are not available for viewing online. Please allow up to 24 hours for PCN photos to become available online from the time of issue."



EDIT to the above struck-through parts - I can now see 14 photos of our car parked on the DYL on their website

- does this mean I should throw in the towel?


Or do Points 2) and 3) listed above by me still make it worth disputing?



Many thanks in advance.

This post has been edited by makara: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 19:38
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 19:27
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Incandescent
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 20:04
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,912
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



You parked on double-yellow lines that mean No Waiting (aka parking), 24x7. The only exemptions are (1) boarding/alighting passengers, (2) loading/unloading, and (3) BB holders for a defined time period, (3 hours I think). So for the contravention you are bang-to-rights, but the PCN may contain fatal errors of content, so that's why we need to see it. The PCN was served to your car, so the error in the street name doesnt count for a great deal, but see what the others say.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
makara
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 20:06
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,905
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,904



QUOTE (Incandescent @ Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 21:04) *
You parked on double-yellow lines that mean No Waiting (aka parking), 24x7. The only exemptions are (1) boarding/alighting passengers, (2) loading/unloading, and (3) BB holders for a defined time period, (3 hours I think). So for the contravention you are bang-to-rights, but the PCN may contain fatal errors of content, so that's why we need to see it. The PCN was served to your car, so the error in the street name doesnt count for a great deal, but see what the others say.



I posted the links to the PCN (back and front) in the original post - do they open?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 20:10
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Post it on something other than Photobucket - it's rubbish.

Wrong location would possibly be fatal. But let's see the PCN.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
makara
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 21:54
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,905
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,904



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 21:10) *
Post it on something other than Photobucket - it's rubbish.

Wrong location would possibly be fatal. But let's see the PCN.



Thanks - is this better?






Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 21:59
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Given that the location is a key issue why have you half blanked it?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:01
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



I would go with "I was not parked on ????wood Avenue, as such the PCN has been issued in error and must be cancelled."

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:02
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,263
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 21:59) *
Given that the location is a key issue why have you half blanked it?

+1


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
makara
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:16
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,905
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,904



QUOTE (Neil B @ Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 23:02) *
QUOTE (stamfordman @ Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 21:59) *
Given that the location is a key issue why have you half blanked it?

+1



It's because I live in that road, as mentioned in the original post - and I was under the impression that such clues to personal details should not be posted?


However in case I am incorrect on that, then my road is called ELMSWORTH


- whereas the PCN states ELMWOOD

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 23:01) *
I would go with "I was not parked on ????wood Avenue, as such the PCN has been issued in error and must be cancelled."


Thanks, Dancing Dad - do you know if there has been a previous case where this has been ruled by PATAS?


Or is this a straight-forward case of the CEO making a fatal error?


P.S. - your alias looks very familiar, so I'm guessing you were one of the contributors who assisted on my Clamping case a few years back :-)


P.P.S. - I've just noticed in one of the photos the CEO took of my car, they captured the first part of my road's sign, i.e. "Elmsworth A" (without the avenue) - as unluckily the car was parked near the road sign.


However the road name on the PCN (and on the corresponding page on Hounslow Council's PCN website) is still incorrect - so where does that leave things?


I can upload the photo from the CEO if required - let me know.




This post has been edited by makara: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:23
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:26
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,735
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (makara @ Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:16) *
It's because I live in that road, as mentioned in the original post - and I was under the impression that such clues to personal details should not be posted?


How would anyone know that unless you told us? Oh, hang on a minute...


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:32
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Road name isn't a personal detail (unless its your private road I guess...)

As DD says, simple challenge based on wrong location on PCN. They cannot change the details on the PCN.

Do it online.

Do not park on DYLs again... You look like you've been lucky here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
makara
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:39
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,905
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,904



Thanks, Stamfordman - I've submitted the challenge online, as per Dancing Dad's wording -


"I was not parked on Elmwood Avenue - as such the PCN has been issued in error, and must be cancelled"


BTW - should I upload any supplementary evidence?? I am guessing "No"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John U.K.
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:41
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,308
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,515



If some muppet rejects you've already told us that the Council's own "evidence" show the vehicle parked elsewhere!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
makara
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:43
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,905
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,904



QUOTE (John U.K. @ Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 23:41) *
If some muppet rejects you've already told us that the Council's own "evidence" show the vehicle parked elsewhere!



John U.K. - excellent point! Thank you!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:49
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



As far as I am concerned, the PCN alleges that you were parked on DYLs in ????wood avenue when their own evidence shows that you were not.
Fairly certain there are some wrong location cases in the files to assist sticky at the top of the forum pages.

Consider this.
The PCN is served on the vehicle, the driver knows where the vehicle was parked but maybe does not find the PCN or does not respond.
So a Notice to Owner appears. The Owner may not have been the driver but checks with the driver or was the driver.... matters not, they check the location... WTF, I've never parked there, never even been there!
And the authority cannot prove they were as their own evidence shows a different location.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:53
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



Four miles between the two, cant see a loss, eventually




This post has been edited by PASTMYBEST: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:54


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
makara
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 22:56
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,905
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,904



Dancing Dad - brilliant considerations


- as I was "in" the situation, I am looking at it subjectively - but the scenarios you quote are objectively very possible in the wider world of parking - thank you.

QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 23:53) *
Four miles between the two, cant see a loss, eventually


Good point - just checked that on Google Maps - didn't realise there was an Elmwood Avenue in these parts - and fortunately that it is in another part of the Borough!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 23:05
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



Similar case

2160229036

The appellant attended the appeal.
The appellant denies her vehicle was parked in Bourne Street. Now that the Authority has produced a copy of the photographs taken by the civil enforcement officer it is clear that the street the vehicle was parked on is the street where the appellant lives, Ormonde Gate. The appellant accepts her vehicle was parked on a single yellow line on that street and she agrees that she is liable to pay the penalty at the discounted rate but states that the penalty was paid on the 16 February 2016. The appellant showed me the online confirmation of payment through her bank on her mobile phone but she has not been able to produce a statement as that takes time. The appellant agreed to find the online reference she would have been given upon payment of the penalty and pass the information to the Authority.
The notes recorded by the civil enforcement officer all alleged the vehicle was parked in Bourne Street. In fact the street name is visible in the background in one of the photographs. Since the vehicle was not parked in Bourne Street but in Ormonde Gate, the alleged contravention did not occur albeit that the vehicle was parked in contravention in Ormonde Gate.
In addition the au has failed to produce a copy of the Penalty Charge Notice in this case. This is a procedural impropriety.
The Appellant informs me that she requested photographs at the outset but the au claimed there were none and only produced the photographs at the appeal stage. Clearly if the photographs had been produced earlier on in the process this case would probably never have reached the appeal stage.
Accordingly, I allow the appeal. I direct that any payment made by the appellant in respect of this Penalty Charge Notice is refunded forthwith.


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 23:10
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



I hope that when you used the simple words you included a comment that the CEO photos will prove the point.
No matter if you didn't, if they reject there are more bites of the apple.
But always put in evidence of an assertion where you can, strengthens cases in later stages and authority is more likely to consider.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
makara
post Mon, 22 Jan 2018 - 00:46
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,905
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,904



Pastmybest - thanks for the proven case.


DancingDad - I didn't mention the photo (just in case it gave some sort of leverage to the other side) - but as per your advice, I will point it out if challenged.


Thanks, Guys
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 08:56
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here