PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

875 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 21:40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


What??????

OP, don’t split hairs, it is a letter from them.

There is no legal process which requires them to transfer liability, it is THEIR choice. You signed up to this in your contract.

I don’t understand cp’s draft, and neither will the OP so how they could be expected to ‘amend/adapt’ baffles me.

I’ve no idea why you think the nuclear option is the route now.

We’re still fact finding.

IMO, do not write to Hertz in those terms, simply ask them why they did not pay the penalties at the discounted rate.

Counter-punching can wait until later.

But I’ve got the feeling you’re spoiling for a fight right now, so if you are good luck.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1409203 · Replies: 11 · Views: 120

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 21:26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Can we deal with the PCN first please.

Post the PCN, council photos and GSV.

Phones’ times can be set manually, so this is hardly conclusive.

Anyway, DD’s reference to the 10-minute ‘grace’ period would appear to apply, so let’s deal with this as we would any other PCN.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1409201 · Replies: 4 · Views: 88

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 10:12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Before we disappeaed into the realms of procedural technicalities you were asked earlier what you were doing, for example were you engaged in delivering etc. as part of your business?

The answer appears to be in your reps:
Please see attached the necessary paperwork of the mail order returns receipt from the local business as proof goods were handed over to the store.

I think an adjudicator would start with you not even unloading and therefore the nuances of the sign would not apply.

The best I can think of in this respect is:

On I parked in *** in order to ****. I believed that this was classified as delivering and that my vehicle qualified as a goods vehicle. In any event, the PCN does not refer to loading but alleges that my vehicle was of a proscribed class without explaining what and why. Your response to my challenge argued that in fact the contravention related to my vehicle not being a ‘goods’ vehicle. You then set out the legal test which the authority applied to determine whether a vehicle is a ‘goods’ vehicle.

This test has no basis in law or logic and is therefore a procedural impropriety.

You stated that a ‘goods’ vehicle must be constructed or adapted for the purpose. You further stated that ‘The followng vehicles are NOT goods vehicles...
Cars
....’

In as much as the CEO conducted any examination of my vehicle, this was purely external.

In as much as a vehicle may be adapted, this could apply equally to internal adaptation as external.

The authority must realise that their position is untenable here because an external examination could not reveal whether a vehicle had been adapted internally. In additon, because the stated contravention was ambiguous ( see below) I was unaware when receiving and challenging the PCN as to the exact meaning of the alleged contravention and therefore was unable to make a comprehensive submission at that time.

Can’t see this making them cancel but they might re-offer the discount.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1409061 · Replies: 39 · Views: 1,391

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 08:58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Understood.

As with your subscript (working backwards), in these cases there is some merit in jumping ahead to the end of the process if only to emphasise the importance of getting an OOT abdolutely correct otherwise what then awaits is....££££££££££££.

So OP, you get two bites at this: the first is free, the second anything but.

And stage one is on the papers, you do not get a chance to put your case personally.

So the OOT has to be spot on, to which end we need the facts.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1409052 · Replies: 11 · Views: 350

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 08:07


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, at present we have their reply which refers to a Controlled Parking Zone, photos of your car in an unmarked area of street, a PCN alleging parked in a parking place and regulations which other than in limited and prescribed circumstances require parking places to be marked.

And a CPZ ain’t one of them!
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1409048 · Replies: 27 · Views: 634

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 08:00


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Not putting a new member off, but trying to get them to focus on the essentials right from the start. The OP has not come to this totally unaware, their first sentence even referred to completing a SD.

Statements of truth in submissions should not be taken lightly and therefore in order to avoid the OP possibly making this mistake we need to tease out the truth ASP.

Posters tease in different ways!
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1409046 · Replies: 11 · Views: 350

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 07:50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


And the ‘copies of both fines’ please, you must post these.

You have no recourse through regulations because it was a hired vehicle and therefore a demand for payment was sent to the hire company as the registered keeper.

It is their choice under traffic regs to decide whether to pay or not. You have no say in this as the matter lies between the company and the enforcement authority.

But under civil law they were obliged to mitigate your losses. According to you they did not. You may therefore go back to your credit card supplier and get a chargeback for £120 i.e. 2*(£90-£30) (£30 being the discount penalty).

But this would not be your first resort. Post the ‘fines’ and let’s take it step by step.

Pl do not post about your circumstances or the vehicle or the contravention because we’re past this, this is a matter of contract law and legal principles.

OP, their letter is dated June. With respect, if you cannot post more promptly then I cannot see this going anywhere and you’d be advised just to put it behind you.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1409044 · Replies: 11 · Views: 120

hcandersen
Posted on: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 22:15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


???

TMOs do not create PPAs or CPZs or RPZs, they create restrictions and permissions.

If as part of a plan the authority have decided to create a CPZ, for example, then they do not need to include this in an order’s citation, they just have to place the traffic signs required by the order and TSRGD.

Traffic signs are not orders.

Geraldine and Waldeck cannot be part of the same PPA and rely on the traffic sign at the entrance to Geraldine because this is not an entrance into the area, just into one of the streets in the area. At best it’s a repeater, but this is not a gateway sign at the area’s entrance.

If the sign in the OP’s photo is a gateway sign then what precedes it cannot be the same PPA.

The authority’s response is tosh for the reasons given, particularly as they have used capitals. A parking place in a CPZ MUST be marked, end of.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1409010 · Replies: 27 · Views: 634

hcandersen
Posted on: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 21:57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


This was after their first post, before they’d heard of cp8759!
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1409003 · Replies: 18 · Views: 486

hcandersen
Posted on: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 18:30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


In summary, I respectfully request that the Court Officer’s decision be set aside, my Application be allowed, and I be awarded my costs for the following reasons:

• The payment made on [date] was made under duress and did not constitute an acceptance that the fine was legitimate or that the monies paid were in fact owed. Further the Claimant’s agent has acknowledged that a refund is due – illustrating that none of the parties consider this case closed due to the payment.
• The conduct of the Claimant and their agent in this matter has fallen well below that expected of a local authority. Indeed it is my submission that their conduct during and in the lead up to these proceedings justifies the Court employing their discretion in awarding me my costs of initiating this appeal.
• I did everything within my power to file my Application at the TEC in a timely manner and was delayed due to failures on the part of the Claimant and/or their agent.



Costs? And what costs do you think the DJ could award in the sense of your submission, I’m baffled.
Who cares what you think of the claimant’s and their agent’s conduct, this is not a talent contest.
You did not do ‘everything within your power’ to file your application in a timely manner, how could you, you didn’t know about it!!! And an OOT is OOT whether by 1 day or 1 month.

My flak jacket on.... I think you’re getting carried away with your rhetoric.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408941 · Replies: 85 · Views: 3,973

hcandersen
Posted on: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 15:59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


He’s obfuscating, you cannot sort the wheat from the chaff, I’m covering all bases.

IMO, you focus on the reasons your SD should be allowed. By all means add other related matters, but don’t make life difficult for the DJ. Remember, you’ve been dealing with this for some time, but the DJ’s coming at this cold.

I respectfully request that the court officer’s decision should be set aside and my SD allowed for the following reasons:
* bullet point which grabs the attention
* ditto

Then explain them succinctly.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408895 · Replies: 85 · Views: 3,973

hcandersen
Posted on: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 11:28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


‘ I thought or presumed it was allowed because cars turning into and out of the road could create a dangerous situation if parked normally. ‘

Not a defence I’m afraid.

You passed the sign and it was no more than 6 feet from your car.

Given that there is a blanket ban on pavement parking in London, if you park you must check that it is permitted. Given the proximity of the sign to your car, IMO no adjudcator would accept that the fault lies with the authority, you just weren’t diligent enough.

It happens.

Discount is attractive.



  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408805 · Replies: 6 · Views: 107

hcandersen
Posted on: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 11:14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


+1

OP, this is as much to do with court procedure as anything else.

You must engage with the process as per Rookie.

No more questions, just tell us whether you’ve acknowledged service.

As regards the claim, it is no more difficult than these questions to the claimant:

Did you receive a PCN?
Did you make representations/did you possess the defendant’s corrct contact details/ did you contact the defendant?

You would not be held liable for the claimant’s inaction.

To succeed the claimant would need to show that they contacted you at the earliest opportunity
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408798 · Replies: 23 · Views: 1,149

hcandersen
Posted on: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 10:51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


duplicate
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408788 · Replies: 23 · Views: 1,149

hcandersen
Posted on: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 10:39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Not quite where your red mark was in your first post!

And you’re on the crossover.

Can’t see a defence here, but by all means put legitimate expectation to the authority and see how they respond.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408782 · Replies: 18 · Views: 576

hcandersen
Posted on: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 10:11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


And on what grounds would you submit your OOT?

Did not receive PCN?

But the authority would state that they sent this to the address held by DVLA.

Are you saying they didn't or that they did and it was delivered but you did not actually get it in your hands?

But you were still registered at that address.

Are you saying that whoever was residing at the house did not forward your mail - you moved in Nov and it’s now Aug, are you asking the court to believe you cut yourself off from your mail for 9 months? IMO, if not receiving your mail was due to an act of omission or commission on your part then you have an uphill struggle. But if due to the same on the part of another party?
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408769 · Replies: 11 · Views: 350

hcandersen
Posted on: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 08:22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


?
You wrote: ‘A wrote a polite email to the council advising that I had paid for parking albeit for the upper deck, instead of the lower part.’

So how did their reply not address your argument, according to you you didn’t make one! So how can you make (lengthy) reps on the grounds of PI that they didn’t fully consider your initial challenge - which we still haven’t seen?

I suggest your reps need refining ( and sorry cp, also shorthening smile.gif ) before you fire off. And please read and try to understand the point being made.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408737 · Replies: 18 · Views: 486

hcandersen
Posted on: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 - 21:56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, and the date of the NTO is?

Pl post this most important of docs now, all pages and leave in all data except your personal info.

For all I know you’re outside the period for making reps.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408698 · Replies: 10 · Views: 264

hcandersen
Posted on: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 - 13:52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


My understanding is that you would send your N244 to TEC.

In which case both of your routes are through them.

Escalating your disagreement with TEC to an officer is an extra-procedural step. Did they say this was an option or is it just your choice?

If everyone could continue to dispute without going the N244 route then this could be procedural chaos.

Can we return to the dates: Notice of rejection of SD is dated 1Aug, posted 2nd and received 6th, second working day following.

N244 to be submitted no later than ‘within 14 days of service’ which brings us to 20th. Not much time to pursue an alternative route and still make 20th.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408521 · Replies: 85 · Views: 3,973

hcandersen
Posted on: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 - 13:09


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, sorry but it’s nonsense!

A traffic order is not involved, this is a statutory prohibition (s86 TMA refers).

Your grounds are that:

The contravention did not occur.

1. I refer to your letter dated 22 June which states that the ‘Penalty is enforced under s(14)(4) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. I also refer you to s3 of Part 1 of Schedule 7 to the Traffic Management Act which sets out the only offences which give rise to a parking contravention under that Act.

2. The LLA 2003 is not listed and therefore no offence under that Act (even presuming one was committed) would permit the authority to demand a penalty under the TMA. Consequently the PCN is invalid and must be cancelled.

3. If the authority do not cancel then they must state legal grounds for their decision(merely disagreeing being insufficient).

4. I would also draw your attention to the location of my car relative to the crossover and vehicular entrance to the property. It is clear that the width of the dropped footway considerably exceeds the width of the entrance and therefore the whole of the width of the dropped footway is not needed for the purpose of allowng access across the footway. If only that part of the footway which is necessary to permit a vehicle to enter the premises is considered then my vehicle was not parked in contravention or at most the incursion was trivial. The PCN must therefore be cancelled.

Procedural Impropriety
I refer you to the date of the PCN, 21 June, and the date of your written response, 22 June. Despite your assertion that you have ‘fully considered’ my challenge, this could not be the case as I would estimate that no more than a few minutes or at most a couple of hours could have been spent on this matter ....


Just some ideas.
I have not looked back over the detail of the widths and we haven’t seen your challenge or know how it was sent - this goes to the PI. But it’s something to knock around.




  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408506 · Replies: 36 · Views: 1,154

hcandersen
Posted on: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 - 22:38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Why is this in the forum?

A person is claiming against another person in the county court.

Surely this has nowt to do with the scope of this forum unless the person liable for LEZ penalty posts here.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408370 · Replies: 23 · Views: 1,149

hcandersen
Posted on: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 - 10:48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Pay the discount.

I say this because you are not the registered keeper of the car in question and therefore the next demand would go to them, not you. And somewhere in your paperwork you’ll see that any penalties or fines which they are required to pay while the vehicle is being used by you are chargeable to you, possibly with an admin. fee on top.

In some cases it is procedurally possible for them to transfer liability to you, via the authority, but I doubt whether the necessary conditions apply in your case. I also doubt whether they could be bothered anyway, too much hassle. Much better for them to pay £130 and charge to you.

So, if you don’t want to be charged £130+ by the company, then I’d pay the discount now.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408131 · Replies: 11 · Views: 229

hcandersen
Posted on: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 - 09:31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, to be honest the driver’s account is a tad difficult to believe!

..the driver read the parking note/board for the section for general public (i.e. non Permit Holders).

There are 2 of these. One is placed at the end of the bay by the junction and trying to read this while turning into the road is hardly likely, and not a little dangerous The next one carries an arrow and is next to a sign with another arrow. So which sign did they consult? If the first, then they then passed two others before they parked but didn’t notice either, despite them being closer and the car travelling slower.

IMO, your best line at this stage is sorry guv, honest mistake, please exercise discretion.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1408117 · Replies: 7 · Views: 119

hcandersen
Posted on: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 - 10:43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


It’s not a PI, it’s the statutory grounds of ‘penalty exceeded......’

And it applies whichever counting system is used.

The OP has proof that they submitted their challenge on 7th.

Even on the worst analysis one day’s discount remains. The authority are obliged to extend this offer to the person submitting the challenge.

Their evidence is that they did not.

Appeal allowed, march out.







  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1407898 · Replies: 22 · Views: 593

hcandersen
Posted on: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 - 10:29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,905
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


So turn it to your advantage...

Although it might appear - and would be easier for me to argue - that the scooter might have been parked with its front wheel against the end of the bay and that it has been rotated about this wheel so that what was within is without, this is not the case. I remember parking in the bay so that relative to the kerb the scooter was in the same position as in the photos and therefore the whole scooter has been moved some 6 feet backwards. This must have taken some effort (but it practically possible) because the front wheel was immobilised. Whoever did it was certainly committed to the task, it’s only a shame this commitment didn’t last long enough to put it back.

I’ve suggested a lighthearted approach because this all comes down to plausibility and credibility and IMO you lose nothing by being and being seen to be perfectly open about the matter.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1407892 · Replies: 19 · Views: 341

875 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

New Posts  New Replies
No New Posts  No New Replies
Hot topic  Hot Topic (New)
No new  Hot Topic (No New)
Poll  Poll (New)
No new votes  Poll (No New)
Closed  Locked Topic
Moved  Moved Topic
 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Sunday, 19th August 2018 - 01:54
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.