PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Code 27 - Are dropped Kerb signs required?, Newham Council
Jetl3on
post Mon, 5 Dec 2011 - 13:52
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 5 Dec 2011
Member No.: 51,568



Hallo,

Got my Code 27 in Newham on 4/12/11 and I was parked halfway across a lowered section of the pavement, which also had a yellow line. Are signs required and in what situations or do I just accept guilt and pay the thing? Yellow lines mean you can park but lowered kerb means you cant? I have not put up pictures, as I am not disputing I committed the offence, just wondered about the signage and other potential regulationary requirements I am not aware of.

Thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Mon, 5 Dec 2011 - 13:52
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
clark_kent
post Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 09:34
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,964
Joined: 27 Aug 2007
From: Brighton
Member No.: 13,358



QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 00:01) *
That is not a rejection letter. That's a Notice to Owner.

Did you never get a rejection letter? If not then repeat your previous appeal again, in response to the NTO (see the wording re how to formally appeal) and add the procedural impropriety that the Council did not consider your faxed informal appeal(s) as you never got a response even though you have a fax receipt (do you?).



There is no time limit to consider informal appeals and nothing to stop the LA sending out a NTO whilst they are doing so, the PCN actually states that you may get a NTO even if you have made an informal challenge so how can it possibly be procedural impropriety??
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jetl3on
post Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 09:55
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 5 Dec 2011
Member No.: 51,568



QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 00:01) *
That is not a rejection letter. That's a Notice to Owner.

Did you never get a rejection letter? If not then repeat your previous appeal again, in response to the NTO (see the wording re how to formally appeal) and add the procedural impropriety that the Council did not consider your faxed informal appeal(s) as you never got a response even though you have a fax receipt (do you?).


I did attempt to get one, but unfortunately, due to the companys printing policy, you can only print a summary sheet with the last 100 transmissions, but it does not confirm delivery, just gives the sender and recipient fax number, so I have no tangible proof.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 09:59
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Jetl3on @ Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 09:55) *
QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 00:01) *
That is not a rejection letter. That's a Notice to Owner.

Did you never get a rejection letter? If not then repeat your previous appeal again, in response to the NTO (see the wording re how to formally appeal) and add the procedural impropriety that the Council did not consider your faxed informal appeal(s) as you never got a response even though you have a fax receipt (do you?).


I did attempt to get one, but unfortunately, due to the companys printing policy, you can only print a summary sheet with the last 100 transmissions, but it does not confirm delivery, just gives the sender and recipient fax number, so I have no tangible proof.



???

What are we talking about? Yes you made an informal challenge and yes you got a rejection. Why are we discussing whether or not you can prove you sent something that has already been responded to?

You now have the NtO and are in for the full amount - so it's a no brainer whether or not to fight on.
Enceladus and HCA I think have given you a case to fight.

You now have to make representations against the NtO, using the info they gave you.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 10:27
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Just picking holes in the rejection so far.

The underlined

"Please note that this parking contravention is enforced at all times"

- plays into your hands. It bears out what others have told you is the basis for your case.

and -

"It specifically states in the London Local Authorities and TFL Act 2003 that there is no requirement to place any traffic signs in connection with this prohibition."

Erm >>

1/. Although no signs are required- I cannot find where LLA 2003 says that - and certainly not "specifically" as they describe. Unless I've missed it - they appear to be making that up.

2/. That isn't the applicable legislation anymore anyway; It's TMA 2004 - and that doesn't say it either afaics.

3/. But, as the point has been made to you, they have placed a traffic sign, a misleading one, the SY line.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jetl3on
post Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 13:00
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 5 Dec 2011
Member No.: 51,568



QUOTE (Neil B @ Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 09:59) *
???

What are we talking about? Yes you made an informal challenge and yes you got a rejection. Why are we discussing whether or not you can prove you sent something that has already been responded to?

You now have the NtO and are in for the full amount - so it's a no brainer whether or not to fight on.
Enceladus and HCA I think have given you a case to fight.

You now have to make representations against the NtO, using the info they gave you.


I thought it best to show some recognition to others who take the time to respond, but yes good point.

Thanks

QUOTE (Neil B @ Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 10:27) *
Just picking holes in the rejection so far.

The underlined

"Please note that this parking contravention is enforced at all times"

- plays into your hands. It bears out what others have told you is the basis for your case.

and -

"It specifically states in the London Local Authorities and TFL Act 2003 that there is no requirement to place any traffic signs in connection with this prohibition."

Erm >>

1/. Although no signs are required- I cannot find where LLA 2003 says that - and certainly not "specifically" as they describe. Unless I've missed it - they appear to be making that up.

2/. That isn't the applicable legislation anymore anyway; It's TMA 2004 - and that doesn't say it either afaics.

3/. But, as the point has been made to you, they have placed a traffic sign, a misleading one, the SY line.


My rookie senses tell me their going through the motions, so time for Stage II, I will draft a letter based on my original reps and include these additional pointers.

Thank you
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jetl3on
post Fri, 23 Mar 2012 - 13:43
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 5 Dec 2011
Member No.: 51,568



QUOTE (Neil B @ Thu, 22 Mar 2012 - 10:27) *
Just picking holes in the rejection so far.

The underlined

"Please note that this parking contravention is enforced at all times"

- plays into your hands. It bears out what others have told you is the basis for your case.

and -

"It specifically states in the London Local Authorities and TFL Act 2003 that there is no requirement to place any traffic signs in connection with this prohibition."

Erm >>

1/. Although no signs are required- I cannot find where LLA 2003 says that - and certainly not "specifically" as they describe. Unless I've missed it - they appear to be making that up.

2/. That isn't the applicable legislation anymore anyway; It's TMA 2004 - and that doesn't say it either afaics.

3/. But, as the point has been made to you, they have placed a traffic sign, a misleading one, the SY line.



So effectively repeat what I have already written with a few additions as mentioned above to strengthen the case? My reps was dominated by the info provided by HCA and Enceladus, which is very informative, so thank you all.

Pen to paper!!

Thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Observation1
post Wed, 28 Mar 2012 - 04:26
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 128
Joined: 20 Jan 2012
From: London
Member No.: 52,556



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 6 Dec 2011 - 19:24) *
No. You cannot have two separate restrictions in place at one location at the same time whether this is DYL within parking bays (which we've seen) or SYL across DK because a driver must know and has a legal right to expect clarity which in your case is either no YL or DYL.

I'd go with it.

HCA



Hmmm, Dropped Kerbs! Well it's all above right of free passage for road users vs. people on foot, wheelchairs and whatever. I could say my driveway has a SYL accross the front of it and my neighbour has a DYL but I'm entitled to free passage and access and that's why there's no Resident parking spaces painted in there. For footpath users there are many dropped kerbs for them to be able to move easily and not be challenged because someone wanted to park there. I've not heard of many succesful appeals against '27' offences.

If one takes the SYL example then you could effectively stop some people being able to cross a road. The clarity comes in the form of common sense and I can assure anyone that I'd none be too pleased if someone blocked my ability to move freely. I think the FedEx man found blocking my drive for 30 minutes (deliveries do not ever take that long and I was being ultra tolerant!) met a none too happy moi after having to call his H/O to get him into gear!
M
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jetl3on
post Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 08:04
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 5 Dec 2011
Member No.: 51,568



Morning all,

Just as I was begining to think they accepted my reps, got back from Hols to find a Rejection Letter from Newham Council, to be expected I guess. With 28 days to pay and a PATAS form.

APologies for the poor images, despite showing as portrait on my screen, they upload as landscape for some reason, I will try to fix it and reload.

As far as defence goes, apart from what is already discussed, can anyone contribute anymore before I send my PATAS form?

Many Thanks







This post has been edited by Jetl3on: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 08:14
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 08:16
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



The second and third paras. on page 2 of their letter are priceless. They betray a total lack of understanding of the issue of signing and the council's duty to make restrictions clear. A DK is effectively a passive restriction because no signing is required. But if the council choose to place a sign then they are obligated to ensure that that sign conveys the restriction, and this doesn't.

Just register your appeal (that's the purpose of the form and the 28-day period applies to this) for the moment and then we can look at topping and tailing your final submission which won't be required until July/Aug.

HCA
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jetl3on
post Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 13:18
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 5 Dec 2011
Member No.: 51,568



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 09:16) *
The second and third paras. on page 2 of their letter are priceless. They betray a total lack of understanding of the issue of signing and the council's duty to make restrictions clear. A DK is effectively a passive restriction because no signing is required. But if the council choose to place a sign then they are obligated to ensure that that sign conveys the restriction, and this doesn't.

Just register your appeal (that's the purpose of the form and the 28-day period applies to this) for the moment and then we can look at topping and tailing your final submission which won't be required until July/Aug.

HCA


Thank you for the response,

With regards the PATAS form, I must include the details of my appeal, shall I just keep it simple and repeat what I have already put in my reps?

Thanks

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 13:28
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Jetl3on @ Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 14:18) *
With regards the PATAS form, I must include the details of my appeal, shall I just keep it simple and repeat what I have already put in my reps?

Thanks


No, that's exactly what you don't do. Read what HCA said again.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 13:39
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



You're not required to submit any evidence and the only info you provide are your and the PCN details, the type of hearing you want, the grounds of appeal and any additional info you feel you must submit - but that's not a requirement.

HCA
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jetl3on
post Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 13:49
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 5 Dec 2011
Member No.: 51,568



Ok, so just complete mandatory fields and nothing else, got it.

cheers

This post has been edited by Jetl3on: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 13:50
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 14:33
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Jetl3on @ Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 14:49) *
Ok, so just complete mandatory fields and nothing else, got it.

cheers

Point is, you get your hearing date then you have plenty of time to formulate and submit a good appeal. It takes the pressure off you as well as getting the earliest date possible. ok?


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jetl3on
post Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 15:26
Post #55


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 5 Dec 2011
Member No.: 51,568



QUOTE (Neil B @ Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 15:33) *
QUOTE (Jetl3on @ Tue, 12 Jun 2012 - 14:49) *
Ok, so just complete mandatory fields and nothing else, got it.

cheers

Point is, you get your hearing date then you have plenty of time to formulate and submit a good appeal. It takes the pressure off you as well as getting the earliest date possible. ok?


Makes sense, I will send that off today, thanks again.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jetl3on
post Wed, 13 Jun 2012 - 14:23
Post #56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 5 Dec 2011
Member No.: 51,568



Quick question HCA/Neil

Would you say this is a Procedural Impropriety or Contravention did not occur?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 13 Jun 2012 - 15:18
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



'Did not occur' but don't worry about it too much; The detail later is more important


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Wed, 13 Jun 2012 - 16:52
Post #58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



It's not critical. IMO, go for both:

Did not occur - the SYL issue;
PI - the period of appeal to the adj has been mis-stated in the NOR (it's not 28 days, it's 28 days or such longer period as the adj may allow. PATAS's own instructions to authorities state that as a matter of course they will allow 35 days).

But as per NeilB, detail is for later.

HCA
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bankhall
post Thu, 14 Jun 2012 - 19:32
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Member No.: 17,926



parking adjacent to a DK.why do people keep repeating this when the ticket sayd next to a dropped footway
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jetl3on
post Mon, 2 Jul 2012 - 13:13
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 5 Dec 2011
Member No.: 51,568



Hallo Gents,

My Appeal date is this Saturday 7th July, and I received a 30 page document of evidence submitted by Tower Hamlets, much of it was copies of previous communication.
Rather daunting I must admit, would you mind taking a peek and help with my appeal please?

I can load it onto photobucket for example, whatever is easier for you.

thanks

Jetleon
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 01:51
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