PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Car Towed Away by Bristol City Council., Advice needed
SpartanSaver
post Thu, 25 Apr 2019 - 15:54
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 25 Apr 2019
Member No.: 103,571



I work in Bristol's water front once every 6 to 8 weeks. I am contracted by a venue in the water front and the GM of the venue had given me permission to use the car park around the back.

I worked there on Saturday night and when I returned my car was gone (towed away) Apparently 6 weeks ago Bristol City Council had changed the rules of parking on this site : all vehicles need to have parking permits displayed. Unfortunately no one made me aware of this and anyone driving and parking there would fail to see the signs as 1) they are facing the opposite direction from the incoming flow of traffic 2) they are not at driver's eye level 3) they are hard to read (very small print and unlit) 4) they weren't even close to the spot where I parked. Also my car was not obstructing anyone or anything.

I paid £126 on my credit card to get the car released the next day.

My question is, how much of a case do I have here as I have photographic evidence of the signs poor location and visibility ? Has anyone been in a similar situation ? As the signs are virtually undetectable as you park it is unrealistic for a driver to agree to the terms and conditions if he/she hasn't seen them (hence no contract could have been made) ?

Are there any good templates that have been used by members of this forum which helped them in their appeal ?

Any advice would be really appreciated.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Thu, 25 Apr 2019 - 15:54
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
SpartanSaver
post Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 20:55
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 25 Apr 2019
Member No.: 103,571



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 07:08) *
OP---where exactly did you park--can you provide a GSV position?
Any other documentation at all? Did they not provide the PCN or was it attached to the vehicle?
The Port issues should be followed up but there might be a simpler course of action--as in-- did they actually serve a PCN?
Mick


Hi Mick

No, I have not received a PCN. Nothing on the windscreen or through the post. I have illustrated the exact parking spot on the following photos. Have a look and tell me what you think :

https://www.mediafire.com/view/24ws43b32vvv...0592_n.jpg/file

https://www.mediafire.com/view/871b716k24d3...0928_n.jpg/file

https://www.mediafire.com/view/vgj01gbsr4q6...6528_n.jpg/file

https://www.mediafire.com/view/jqovaddc3fso...2432_n.jpg/file

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 07:42) *
Would be useful if we knew which car park please ?


Its in Millennium Square. The car park is located right behind V Shed and Revolucion De Cuba.

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 10:04) *
OP, this is unusual for us and we're outside the normal parking and towing accounts.

With respect to other posters, a council is a multi-headed beast and we do not have sufficient information to know what regulation or bye-law was contravened and upon what powers the council, not the enforcement authority but the council, rely for removal.

It's just as likely to be the Local Authorities (Goods and Services) Act as anything to do with parking regs.

You must find out, to act otherwise would be premature.



Thanks - that is a good way of describing the council.

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 17:25) *
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 10:04) *
OP, this is unusual for us and we're outside the normal parking and towing accounts.

With respect to other posters, a council is a multi-headed beast and we do not have sufficient information to know what regulation or bye-law was contravened and upon what powers the council, not the enforcement authority but the council, rely for removal.

It's just as likely to be the Local Authorities (Goods and Services) Act as anything to do with parking regs.

You must find out, to act otherwise would be premature.

Regardless of the powers and regulations involved, the first step is to contact the authority with a basic challenge around signage. Any response is bound to reveal which statutory framework they rely on (though they purport it's something to do with POFA, POFA doesn't appear to have expanded the council's towing powers in relation to illegally parked vehicles). Ultimately if they don't have a statutory power to tow, the removal of the vehicle would be not only unlawful but also a criminal offence on the part of the council, the council officials involved, and the towing contractor.

Deep down I think they may well be winging it, the fact that there isn't even a PCN number is deeply suspicious. I suspect the correct course of action would have been for the council to pursue criminal proceedings under the port bylaws, but of course that approach doesn't make them any money as any fine imposed by the courts is payable to HMCTS rather than the council (and criminal prosecutions are expensive for councils to pursue).

Here's a draft representation:

--------------

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to contest the penalty charge and towing fees levied in relation to my vehicle bearing VRM (insert number plate here); I enclose the receipt showing I had to pay £126 to secure release of the vehicle.

I should explain that I work in Bristol's water front once every 6 to 8 weeks, I am contracted by a venue in the water front and the General Manager of the venue had given me permission to use the car park around the back.

I worked there on the night of Saturday 21 April and when I returned my car was gone (towed away). I have since learnt that 6 weeks prior to this Bristol City Council had changed the rules of parking on this site: I now understand all vehicles need to have parking permits displayed. Unfortunately no one made me aware of this and anyone driving and parking there would fail to see the signs as 1) they are facing the opposite direction from the incoming flow of traffic 2) they are not at driver's eye level 3) they are hard to read (very small print and unlit) 4) they weren't even close to the spot where I parked. I would add that my car was not obstructing anyone or anything so the decision to tow seems a bit over the top.

As your records will show, I paid £126 on my credit card to get the car released the next day.

Given the above, I hope you will agree to refund the charges in full, for this purpose I confirm any refund should be paid to sort code 00-00-00, account number 00000000.

However should you reject these representations, please could you provide photographic evidence of the contravention. Please could you also confirm what statutory powers, if any, entitled Bristol City Council to:

1) Issue a penalty charge notice for £21.
2) Tow the vehicle away and demand a fee for its release.

I note in particular that nothing in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 provides the council with any additional powers to impose penalty charge notices, let alone any powers to tow vehicles away. I further note that there are no towing powers provided in the port bylaws I have been able to find. I would appreciate any clarification you are able to provide in this regard.


You are a star - this is exactly what I need. I'll be using this to draft my response - Thank You so much. Really appreciated.

I agree, the lack of PCN has got me thinking there is something that isn't quite right with this one. Is there a time limit in which a council can issue you with a PCN before the infraction becomes non enforceable ? (speeding tickets have 14 days )There wasn't even residue of something stuck on the windscreen so unlikely that someone removed it if one was issued.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SpartanSaver
post Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 21:24
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 25 Apr 2019
Member No.: 103,571



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 21:39) *
Don't challenge, enquire.

We don't know what powers were used, so don't go off half-cock. Just find out.


Thanks - I'm working the email in the nicest way so it is an enquiry.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 22:20
Post #23


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9,710
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



Lots of private property and Dock signs in that area:-

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4494966,-2....3312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4494966,-2....3312!8i6656
No way to get to the spot the OP parked without going through the gate onto private property.

Mick

This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 22:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 29 Apr 2019 - 22:20
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Post a final draft here before sending it. hcandersen and I obviously have a difference of opinion on whether it should be a challenge or an enquiry, so you'll have to decide which approach you want to take.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SpartanSaver
post Tue, 14 May 2019 - 07:36
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 25 Apr 2019
Member No.: 103,571



Hi guys,

Apologies - I saw the last couple of posts after I sent my appeal. This is what I wrote :

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to appeal the penalty charge and towing fees levied in relation to my vehicle bearing the license plate number : XXXXXX. I enclose the receipt showing I had to pay £126 to secure release of the vehicle.

I should explain that I work in Bristol's water front once every 6 to 8 weeks, I am contracted by XXXXXXXX in the water front and the General Manager of the venue had given me permission to use the car park around the back.

I worked there on the night of Saturday 21st of April and when I returned my car was gone (towed away). I have since learnt that 6 weeks prior to this Bristol City Council had changed the rules of parking on this site: I now understand all vehicles need to have parking permits displayed. Unfortunately no one made me aware of this and anyone driving and parking there would fail to see the signs as 1) they are facing the opposite direction from the incoming flow of traffic 2) they are not at driver's eye level 3) they are hard to read (very small print and unlit) 4) they weren't even close to the spot where I parked. I would add that my car was not obstructing anyone or anything so the decision to tow it seems disproportionate.

As your records will show, I paid £126 on my credit card to get the car released the next day from Hinton in Whitchurch. I also had to pay £26.50 to get home with a taxi as I live in a rural community.

Given the above information as well as the attached photographic evidence that proves the signs are not prominent enough to make a motorist aware of the recent changes in the way that the car park is managed, I hope you will agree to refund the charges in full, for this purpose I confirm any refund should be paid to the following account :

xxxx

However should you reject these representations, please could you provide photographic evidence of the contravention. Please could you also confirm what statutory powers, if any, entitled Bristol City Council to:

1) Issue a penalty charge notice
2) Tow the vehicle away and demand a fee for its release.

I note in particular that nothing in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 provides the council with any additional powers to impose penalty charge notices, let alone any powers to tow vehicles away. I further note that there are no towing powers provided in the port bylaws. I would appreciate any clarification you are able to provide with regards to this.

Many thanks for your time and I look forward to your response.

Kind Regards,


This was their reply ..........


Dear Mr Complainer

Thank you for your email dated 29th April appealing against the removal of your vehicle on 21st April from South Building Service Yard. I must firstly inform you that this area is private and is under the control of the Bristol Harbour Authority and is governed by the City Docks Bye laws. No business premises have rights to park in this area and are therefore not able to grant permission.

After careful consideration we are completely satisfied that the removal of your vehicle was necessary and done so legally. This investigation has included close examination of all the photographs taken at the time of recovery, your photographs and a recent visit to the location in question. We have also considered the points you raised but feel the some of the content is incorrect.

Section 56 of the Harbour Docks and Piers Act 1847, gives the Harbour Master the power to remove any obstruction to the harbour, dock, or pier, or the approaches to the same, but also provides that the expense of removing such an obstruction shall be repaid by the owner (either alone or taken together with section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972) gives Bristol City Council lawful authority to remove vehicles from the Docks Estate and charge for their release. We are therefore not governed by the PCN procedure and before commencing this action instructed legal counsel in London to ensure we were permitted to do so.

We are also satisfied that all signs;

Are correctly displayed
Have been erected for more than 6 months
Clearly show that permits are required
Clearly warn of the Tow Away scheme and subsequent charges
Clearly visible as you enter the service yard


Parking on the Docks estate remains extremely limited and is intended to allow Harbour users access to their businesses and vessels. For this reason, for many years it has been necessary to restrict parking to permit holders only. These permits are issued with the Harbour Master discretion on the understanding that they must be displayed correctly and used only to enable loading and unloading for a maximum. The sites spaces are not intended for extended periods of vehicle parking and are constantly being reviewed by the Harbour Master.

These measures have been necessary as for many years vehicles have illegally parked on the Docks estate to access the city making it unmanageable for the Harbour Authority. For this reason in 2018 the Harbour Master instructed for all vehicles to be removed should they;

Not have a valid permit displayed
Be parked otherwise in accordance with the permit conditions
Have no insurance
Have no MOT

Please also be aware that any decision made to refund charges results in it being met by the Harbour Authority, we therefore need to be certain that this is appropriate and fair. We are also aware that free parking has never been offered to Businesses at South Building Service Yard other than by way of an official permit.

If you remain unsatisfied with this decision we suggest that you contact an Independent Parking Adjudicator (found online). We will be happy to engage with any of these companies and provide any evidence they require to assist with their enquiry.


They haven't provided any evidence , which I will be asking for in my reply. I do beleive I have a (slim) case against the poor signage in the specific area where I parked. Is there anything else you think I should mention in my reply ?

Perhaps you can recommend a good Independent Parking Adjudicator Any help or advice will be really appreciated.

This post has been edited by SpartanSaver: Tue, 14 May 2019 - 07:38
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Tue, 14 May 2019 - 08:11
Post #26


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9,710
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



They appear able to tow under this Article:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9...tion/55/enacted

Since it is an extension of the RTRA 1984 I presume that access to an adjudicator is possible.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 14 May 2019 - 10:34
Post #27


Member


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



I don't think they know what they're saying.

I'd get back to them for clarification:

Is the location under the control of the Harbour Authority or the council? The reply is confusing in that on the one hand it refers to the Harbour Master 'instructed for (sic) all vehicles to be removed should they;

Not have a valid permit displayed
Be parked otherwise in accordance with the permit conditions
Have no insurance
Have no MOT'


but fails to identify the role of the council in this matter e.g. does the Harbour Master have powers to instruct the council in this matter and require them to remove vehicles, or are the council acting as agent of or contractor to the Harbour Authority, or are the council subject to a duty, contractual or legal, to remove vehicles and charge for their release etc.

The council's response is unclear on this matter in that on the one hand the documents relate to the removal of vehicles 'from specified docks estate land' accompanied by the crest of Bristol City Council and on the other to the land being within the jurisdiction of the Harbour Master.

Please clarify.


As a separate strand, I suggest you phone/email the Harbour Authority and ask what their role is in his matter.

But let's get off signs please, the law needs to be established first.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Thu, 16 May 2019 - 07:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 15 May 2019 - 21:20
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



hcandersen from a quick search it looks like Bristol City Council is the Harbour Authority, though I agree the matter should be clarified.

Mick the PoFA doesn't give them any powers at all and it's not strictly relevant. All PoFA says is that it's an offence to tow unless there is some statutory power, the council claim the statutory power is derived from this: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/1...1/27/section/56

The harbour master may remove any wreck or other obstruction to the harbour, dock, or pier, or the approaches to the same, and also any floating timber which impedes the navigation thereof, and the expence of removing any such wreck, obstruction, or floating timber shall be repaid by the owner of the same; and the harbour master may detain such wreck or floating timber for securing the expences, and on nonpayment of such expences, on demand, may sell such wreck or floating timber, and out of the proceeds of such sale pay such expences, rendering the overplus, if any, to the owner on demand.

Obviously your car is not a wreck or timber, so the council would rely on the car being an obstruction. This would require a very wide, purposive interpretation of the word obstruction, but it is not inconceivable that a court might accept this, though you might as well put them to proof.

The issues that bother me are more that:

1) Section 56 above allows the harbour master to recover the costs of removing the obstruction, as there are not statutory towing fees set in law, it follows that it is for the council to prove what these expenses are. Expenses in this context are the actual out-of-pocket costs, i.e. the marginal cost of the towing. So they can charge petrol and, if the towing operator had to be paid overtime, maybe an hour's wages.

2) The figure of £105 seems plucked out of thin air, you might as well put the council to proof that it cost them £105 to remove the vehicle: they cannot make any profit because, unlike the Traffic Management Act, this statute does not allow the council to retain any surplus at all and on the contrary requires that if the "obstruction" is sold, anything over and above the expenses of removal and sale must be paid to the owner on demand.

3) Regardless, the council is implicitly admitting it has no powers to impose a £21 PCN, penalties of whatever description are only permitted where Parliament has explicitly legislated to allow this, so on the fact of it the £21 PCN fee is completely unlawful.

As you are not within the scope of the Traffic Management Act 2004, the appropriate recourse is through the courts. The first step is to send a pre-action letter but ultimately if they don't cough up, you'll need to sue the council in the small claims court to get your money back. The upside is that as this appears to be a simple civil claim rather than a tribunal procedure, the statute of limitations is 6 years rather than 28 days so no rush.

I can draft a pre-action letter for you if you want. Also work out what the distance from where you parked to the pound is, ultimately I think they're likely entitled to the reasonable towing costs. Get a quote from a local towing company for what it would cost for a non-emergency tow over that distance, they should quote something like £1 a mile with a minimum of £30.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 05:55
Post #29


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9,710
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



@cp8759
Read the PFA Art 55 again--it gives them the power to tow and also the tow documents were headed "Protection of Freedoms Act 2012".

They can tow for a variety of reasons--- "removal of vehicles illegally, obstructively or dangerously parked, or abandoned or broken down".

As hca, the Council appear to be making it up as they go along especially if they quote Port Byelaws but have tow documents referring to another Act.

The Council need to be asked two simple questions IMO " what recourse do I have in appealing my vehicle being towed and the subsequent release fees?" and "how can I access impartial adjudication for this case?"

Mick

This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Thu, 16 May 2019 - 05:55
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 17 May 2019 - 00:36
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Sorry Mick but the POFA doesn't give any towing powers to anyone at all. It gives the SoS a power to amend The Removal and Disposal of Vehicles Regulations 1986 and the only amendment made in 2012 was The Removal and Disposal of Vehicles (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2012 which extended the powers of the police to tow vehicles from land other than a road, see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/2277/contents/made

The council quote PoFA because, absent a statutory power, it would be a criminal offence to tow a vehicle. The council are arguing that because they have a statutory power under the Harbour Docks and Piers Act 1847, they have lawful authority to tow within the meaning of PoFA section 54, and they are therefore not guilty of a crime. This is likely their stance because the most common challenge they are likely to get is that, under PoFA, towing is illegal.

On reflection, I don't think the council's argument stands up to scrutiny. If a car is parked in such a manner as to be an obstruction, the fact that it does or doesn't have a permit on display doesn't alter that one iota. If you car is causing an obstruction, you don't stop causing an obstruction just cos you pop a permit on the dash. In light of that, I think their reliance on section 56 of the Harbours, Docks and Piers Clauses Act 1847 is misconceived and wide open to challenge. An arguable case can be pleaded that the entire fee should be refunded as the towing was in fact unlawful.

The council seems to be suggesting that the proper recourse is via POPLA, that is clearly inappropriate as the council claims to be enforcing under a statutory power rather than under contract. The appropriate recourse is thus via the County Court, a private parking adjudicator is simply going to be unable to grasp the issues.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Fri, 17 May 2019 - 00:39


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Fri, 17 May 2019 - 08:15
Post #31


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9,710
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



@cp8759
We'll have to disagree on the POFA especially the heading "Extension of powers to remove vehicles from land". However it seems only a constable may do it:-

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/2277/note/made

Let's not dwell on this, we need to give the OP some ammunition to go back to the Council.

You have raised the prospect of County Court, which is an option, but I would still like to put the Council on the spot and have it detail the appropriate recourse procedures.

Mick

This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Fri, 17 May 2019 - 16:34
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 17:19
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Fri, 17 May 2019 - 09:15) *
@cp8759
We'll have to disagree on the POFA especially the heading "Extension of powers to remove vehicles from land". However it seems only a constable may do it:-

I don't think we do disagree, my point was that PoFA itself doesn't create any new towing powers, it's the new regulations made under PoFA that do that and we seem to agree those powers only apply to the police. I am sure the council's reference to PoFA is designed to preempt the "PoFA outlawed towing from private property" representations more than anything else.

QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Fri, 17 May 2019 - 09:15) *
You have raised the prospect of County Court, which is an option, but I would still like to put the Council on the spot and have it detail the appropriate recourse procedures.


That's what you put in a pre-action letter under the heading "Alternative dispute resolution" smile.gif


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SpartanSaver
post Mon, 20 May 2019 - 22:12
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 25 Apr 2019
Member No.: 103,571



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 15 May 2019 - 22:20) *
hcandersen from a quick search it looks like Bristol City Council is the Harbour Authority, though I agree the matter should be clarified.

Mick the PoFA doesn't give them any powers at all and it's not strictly relevant. All PoFA says is that it's an offence to tow unless there is some statutory power, the council claim the statutory power is derived from this: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/1...1/27/section/56

The harbour master may remove any wreck or other obstruction to the harbour, dock, or pier, or the approaches to the same, and also any floating timber which impedes the navigation thereof, and the expence of removing any such wreck, obstruction, or floating timber shall be repaid by the owner of the same; and the harbour master may detain such wreck or floating timber for securing the expences, and on nonpayment of such expences, on demand, may sell such wreck or floating timber, and out of the proceeds of such sale pay such expences, rendering the overplus, if any, to the owner on demand.

Obviously your car is not a wreck or timber, so the council would rely on the car being an obstruction. This would require a very wide, purposive interpretation of the word obstruction, but it is not inconceivable that a court might accept this, though you might as well put them to proof.

The issues that bother me are more that:

1) Section 56 above allows the harbour master to recover the costs of removing the obstruction, as there are not statutory towing fees set in law, it follows that it is for the council to prove what these expenses are. Expenses in this context are the actual out-of-pocket costs, i.e. the marginal cost of the towing. So they can charge petrol and, if the towing operator had to be paid overtime, maybe an hour's wages.

2) The figure of £105 seems plucked out of thin air, you might as well put the council to proof that it cost them £105 to remove the vehicle: they cannot make any profit because, unlike the Traffic Management Act, this statute does not allow the council to retain any surplus at all and on the contrary requires that if the "obstruction" is sold, anything over and above the expenses of removal and sale must be paid to the owner on demand.

3) Regardless, the council is implicitly admitting it has no powers to impose a £21 PCN, penalties of whatever description are only permitted where Parliament has explicitly legislated to allow this, so on the fact of it the £21 PCN fee is completely unlawful.

As you are not within the scope of the Traffic Management Act 2004, the appropriate recourse is through the courts. The first step is to send a pre-action letter but ultimately if they don't cough up, you'll need to sue the council in the small claims court to get your money back. The upside is that as this appears to be a simple civil claim rather than a tribunal procedure, the statute of limitations is 6 years rather than 28 days so no rush.

I can draft a pre-action letter for you if you want. Also work out what the distance from where you parked to the pound is, ultimately I think they're likely entitled to the reasonable towing costs. Get a quote from a local towing company for what it would cost for a non-emergency tow over that distance, they should quote something like £1 a mile with a minimum of £30.



This is really helpful. Thank you CP8759 - If you are able to draft and if you have the time to draft a pre-action letter that would be amazing. Thank you
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 21 May 2019 - 10:01
Post #34


Member


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



Their approach is b******s:

Picking up on the reference cp found:

Obviously your car is not a wreck or timber, so the council would rely on the car being an obstruction. This would require a very wide, purposive interpretation of the word obstruction, but it is not inconceivable that a court might accept this, though you might as well put them to proof.

When the location has permit parking!!!

They're making it up as they go along.

I'm convinced this should be in the PPC section as IMO this is a purely private parking matter. It is no different to a local council as Housing Authority removing vehicles from areas other than public roads on a housing estate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 21 May 2019 - 16:11
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 21 May 2019 - 11:01) *
I'm convinced this should be in the PPC section as IMO this is a purely private parking matter. It is no different to a local council as Housing Authority removing vehicles from areas other than public roads on a housing estate.

I disagree, they clearly claim to be exercising a statutory power, this is not a contractual matter.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 21 May 2019 - 17:02
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



We can't work off a transcript. Post up their reply in full, redacting personal details only, and I'll put something together.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SpartanSaver
post Sun, 9 Jun 2019 - 15:28
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 25 Apr 2019
Member No.: 103,571



Apologies for the late reply CP8759. I've been away and now I'm just getting around to doing all my admin bits. I thought I had posted this before, but here it goes again just incase. This was their full reply :


Dear Mr X

Thank you for your email dated 29th April appealing against the removal of your vehicle on 21st April from South Building Service Yard. I must firstly inform you that this area is private and is under the control of the Bristol Harbour Authority and is governed by the City Docks Bye laws. No business premises have rights to park in this area and are therefore not able to grant permission.

After careful consideration we are completely satisfied that the removal of your vehicle was necessary and done so legally. This investigation has included close examination of all the photographs taken at the time of recovery, your photographs and a recent visit to the location in question. We have also considered the points you raised but feel the some of the content is incorrect.

Section 56 of the Harbour Docks and Piers Act 1847, gives the Harbour Master the power to remove any obstruction to the harbour, dock, or pier, or the approaches to the same, but also provides that the expense of removing such an obstruction shall be repaid by the owner (either alone or taken together with section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972) gives Bristol City Council lawful authority to remove vehicles from the Docks Estate and charge for their release. We are therefore not governed by the PCN procedure and before commencing this action instructed legal counsel in London to ensure we were permitted to do so.

We are also satisfied that all signs;

Are correctly displayed
Have been erected for more than 6 months
Clearly show that permits are required
Clearly warn of the Tow Away scheme and subsequent charges
Clearly visible as you enter the service yard


Parking on the Docks estate remains extremely limited and is intended to allow Harbour users access to their businesses and vessels. For this reason, for many years it has been necessary to restrict parking to permit holders only. These permits are issued with the Harbour Master discretion on the understanding that they must be displayed correctly and used only to enable loading and unloading for a maximum. The sites spaces are not intended for extended periods of vehicle parking and are constantly being reviewed by the Harbour Master.

These measures have been necessary as for many years vehicles have illegally parked on the Docks estate to access the city making it unmanageable for the Harbour Authority. For this reason in 2018 the Harbour Master instructed for all vehicles to be removed should they;

Not have a valid permit displayed
Be parked otherwise in accordance with the permit conditions
Have no insurance
Have no MOT

Please also be aware that any decision made to refund charges results in it being met by the Harbour Authority, we therefore need to be certain that this is appropriate and fair. We are also aware that free parking has never been offered to Businesses at South Building Service Yard other than by way of an official permit.

If you remain unsatisfied with this decision we suggest that you contact an Independent Parking Adjudicator (found online). We will be happy to engage with any of these companies and provide any evidence they require to assist with their enquiry.



If you are able to draft a response with some basic things to challenge (please don't spend too much time on it though ) that will be really appreciated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sun, 9 Jun 2019 - 16:38
Post #38


Member


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



Clearly not a statutory power under the TMA but a contractual arrangement, even if an internal SLA or similar, and not something which falls under the Enforcement Authority's powers but possibly the Council's powers. The BHA might be an arm's length part of the council for all I or we know.

Do not mistake the Council's powers with the EA's: the latter fall wholly within the former but not vice versa, they are not synonymical.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sun, 9 Jun 2019 - 16:54
Post #39


Member


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



Seems strange to me that they exercise a statutory power, but say if you are not happy we have done this. go find an adjudicator. Who ?


--------------------
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
cp8759
post Mon, 10 Jun 2019 - 11:57
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 9 Jun 2019 - 17:38) *
Clearly not a statutory power under the TMA but a contractual arrangement...

How is "Section 56 of the Harbour Docks and Piers Act 1847" a contractual arrangement? They obviously purport to be acting under a statutory power.

QUOTE (SpartanSaver @ Sun, 9 Jun 2019 - 16:28) *
If you are able to draft a response with some basic things to challenge (please don't spend too much time on it though ) that will be really appreciated.

I'm more than happy to draft a pre-action letter for you, but as I've said we don't work off transcripts. Post up a copy of the actual letter, redacting your name and address only, make sure to include all sides of all pages. If you have a look on other threads in this part of the forum, you'll see this is standard practice.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
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 - 20:15
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