PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN Code 99 Nightingale Lane, Resident's parking bay or not
BernieF
post Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 17:57
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 May 2010
Member No.: 37,697



Hi all,
I received the following Notice to Owner for my car being parked in a lay-by on Nightingale Lane.
The lay-by is clearly marked as a residents' parking bay - see the GSV pics below.
We have a valid residents' permit.
There are zigzags but on the edge of the lay-by closest to the carriageway - NB they are in the lay-by not on the carriageway.
The car is parked between the edge of the pavement and the zigzags.
Is it a parking bay or do the zigzags apply?

Finally, the PCN says the contravention happened in a different postcode to where the photo was taken. Is this important? The postcodes are in fact adjacent

Grateful for any advice and best route for appeal -

Page 1 of PCN


Page 2 of PCN


GSV of same parking space


GSV Close up of parking sign (pole can be seen in photos on PCN).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 17:57
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 08:44
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,314
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



I think the zig has lost its zag so IMO the road marking in the bay is defective.

I think (others please confirm) that Diagram 1001.4 applies.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/14/made

The remarks in column 4 indicate (my bold):-

4. Where the traffic authority is satisfied that the layout or character of the road means it is not practical to lay 8 marks, the number of marks can be reduced to not less than 2

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BernieF
post Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 08:57
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 May 2010
Member No.: 37,697



@DancingDad
Thanks for your response.
The Multiple PCNs are where tickets have been issued on multiple days when the car has not moved - the council photos actually show the previous days' tickets on the windscreen. Interestingly the officer issuing the ticket has included a picture of the resident's parking restriction sign in some of the photos which suggests there is a real lack of clarity.

This has happened on 3 separate occasions. The person who parked there assumed they were to do with not having a residents' permit as they were in discussions with the council about that - paid for 12 month's permit in October, followed up with phone calls and emails and eventually permit issued in January and the council agreed to revoke tickets issued regarding the permit.

I will wait to hear if there is anything in the TMO before challenging the NTO.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 09:25
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,706
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



Be careful about waiting. Missing the deadline while waiting for the TMO is no a legitimate reason for being late.

You could at the authority 'quote, harangue and paragraph and with speeches charm the ear' and it would still go over their heads.

They have a mindset.

You challenge their thinking just as much by getting them to consult the TMO.

What you assert can only be countered by them producing a copy of the TMO showing that the location is not a designated parking place. Let them do the work.

You have until 7 Feb. to submit reps, but the 28th day is not a target, it's a limit.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 09:33
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,936
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 08:44) *
I think the zig has lost its zag so IMO the road marking in the bay is defective.

I think (others please confirm) that Diagram 1001.4 applies.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/14/made

The remarks in column 4 indicate (my bold):-

4. Where the traffic authority is satisfied that the layout or character of the road means it is not practical to lay 8 marks, the number of marks can be reduced to not less than 2

Mick


Right diagram.
Two lines at different angles to each other so IMO minimum applies.
But agree that as the first is more or less parallel to the true line of the carriageway it is arguable that it is not a Zig (or zag) and just a spurious white line.
The whole set up is a right pig's ear.
I'm not convinced that we can convince an adjudicator that it is wrong but there is mileage in the confusion.


@Bernie.
The multiples.
Get them together and check both contraventions and dates.
List them all out along with cited contravention, date and whether or not vehicle was moved between first and last of each group.
This situation seems to have been ongoing for some time and that the council seems to have put on hold pending the permit situation lends credence to the challenge on confusion.
It would suggest that they are as confused as the driver was.
And if even one of the PCNs is for not displaying permit, that would really seal the argument.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 25 Jan 2019 - 00:14
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,782
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



BernieF I've made progress on the TMO side, see here:

Order: http://bit.ly/2MvRsyN
Map: http://bit.ly/2ROleot

The crossing in question doesn't feature on the map at all, so on the face of it we have a conflict between the crossing zig-zags, which are a section 36 sign, and a TMO which says there's an authorised parking space at the same location. I have queried this with the council and will post when I get any further information.

However in the first instance, show us the PCNs, front side of all of them + the rear of at least 1.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BernieF
post Fri, 25 Jan 2019 - 07:48
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 May 2010
Member No.: 37,697



Hi cp8759,

Thanks for the information about the TMO. I assumed there was no order for the crossing as I could find no reference to it in the Gazette nor to changes to the original parking bay.

I won't post all of the PCNs as I have already submitted an appeal.
Here is a summary of the PCNs including two for code 12 which I hope will be cancelled as the relevant permit had been paid for, approved but not received (now received with expiry in November 2019).
I have grouped them into what I believe are consecutive tickets and have used both of adjudicator Teper's arguments in my appeal. The Y/N at the end indicates which PCNs included a picture of the resident's parking sign in the photographic evidence.

Issued Date Issued Time Amount Contravention Street Pic of sign?
29/11/2018 10:08:52 £110.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) N
02/12/2018 09:25:54 £110.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) N
03/12/2018 12:25:35 £110.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) N
04/12/2018 08:25:42 £110.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) N

09/12/2018 14:29:45 £110.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) N

11/12/2018 13:35:14 £110.00 12 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1)
12/12/2018 13:57:36 £110.00 12 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1)

14/12/2018 12:44:07 £110.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) Y
15/12/2018 10:24:48 £110.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) N
17/12/2018 13:06:43 £110.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) Y

02/01/2019 09:12:44 £110.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) N

07/01/2019 12:29:59 £55.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) N
09/01/2019 08:14:43 £55.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) N
10/01/2019 09:13:10 £55.00 99 NIGHTINGALE LANE, SW12 (H1) N

Thanks again for your help and hard work.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 25 Jan 2019 - 17:00
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,782
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (BernieF @ Fri, 25 Jan 2019 - 07:48) *
I won't post all of the PCNs as I have already submitted an appeal.

An appeal or a representation? In any event, neither prevents you from showing us the paperwork. Show us the front of a code 99 PCN, and a code 12 PCN, + the rear

A zebra crossing doesn't need a TMO as it's a section 36 sign, however there shouldn't be a designated parking place at the same location.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 10:39
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,782
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



TMO: http://bit.ly/2SrZnmY
TMO map: http://bit.ly/2RTApHX
Plans for zebra crossing: http://bit.ly/2DuZyUn

The council have confirmed as follows:

I can confirm that the Traffic Management Order provided to you previously is the most up to date order relating to the parking places on this part of Nightingale Lane. With regard to the raised zebra crossing I can advise that this was constructed in late 2012/early 2013 as part of a scheme to improve traffic management and road safety in Nightingale Lane and a number of adjacent side roads. I have attached a copy of the drawing showing the revised layout.

It therefore appears they have installed the zig-zags inside a designated parking space (because the TMO was never amended)


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BernieF
post Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 23:09
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 May 2010
Member No.: 37,697



cp8579 many many thanks.

I'll update when I hear from the council.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BernieF
post Mon, 11 Mar 2019 - 22:40
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 May 2010
Member No.: 37,697



Notices of rejection received from council. Here is one - they are all for PCNs code 99 - parking on Zig Zags.


I will be appealing.
Grateful for advice in the light of zig zags not being along the main carriageway, the lay-by is a designated parking bay and anything else that might help.
I will also ask them to consider mitigation re the consecutive PCNs - yes the car has moved but there are 4 separate occasions where multiple PCNs were put on the car. You can even see multiple tickets in the photos they took.
Finally, they say the lines of the zigzags are not faded on the photos I provided. This is not surprising as they are then from Google and clearly state they were taken in September 2014! Their photos show faded lines which would not stand out in the dark damp winter night.
Council photos:
Faded lines:




Multiple tickets and faded lines:


How many tickets?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 11 Mar 2019 - 22:53
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,782
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



What did you send to them? Do not appeal without our help or you'll likely lose.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BernieF
post Tue, 12 Mar 2019 - 23:29
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 May 2010
Member No.: 37,697



Hope you can read this - here is the representation I sent.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 18:16
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,782
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



So please confirm, do you have 12 Notices of Rejection for the 12 PCNs issued for code 99?

Have you heard anything back for the code 12 PCNs? If not, can you see the status online?

Also the one thing you need to explain, because the adjudicator will ask this, once the first PCN (or set of PCNs) was found on the car, why was the car parked there again?


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BernieF
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 21:01
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 May 2010
Member No.: 37,697



Hi,
12 for code 99.
2 for code 12.
Both code 12s cancelled.
It was assumed that the PCNs were all for parking without a permit.
It was only when I became involved that it was spotted that 12 of the notices were for parking on a zigzag. The notices arrived at home between the 8th and 19th of January. I work away from home and only returned home to read the PCNs on Friday 11th January. There are no further contraventions after this date.

The car continued to be parked there because it is a designated residents parking bay and my daughter honestly thought she was entitled to park there and the PCNs were for not having a residents permit.

The car is often left parked without moving for days on end and the journey to work and back does not pass the car hence she was oblivious to the PCNs until she wanted to use the car.

The car was also parked in the dark with a lot of mud and leaves accumulated at the ends of the bays where she parked.

She was in an ongoing dialogue about the resident's permit with the council via phone (often unanswered or cut off) and email. The documents originally supplied (certificate of insurance and proof of address) were in order before Christmas however the insurance is renewed over the Christmas period hence in January when she contacted them she had to provide a new certificate of insurance. It was therefore a natural assumption that the PCNs were for parking without a residents permit.

Thanks for taking an interest.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 21:08
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,782
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (BernieF @ Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 21:01) *
The car continued to be parked there because it is a designated residents parking bay and my daughter honestly thought she was entitled to park there and the PCNs were for not having a residents permit.

So she didn't bother reading the PCNs at all then, this is far from ideal. On what basis did she think she was entitled to park there? Did she just think that because she was "entitled" to a permit, she could park there regardless of whether she actually had a permit or not?

So do you have 12 notices of rejection for the code 99 PCNs?


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BernieF
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 21:29
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 May 2010
Member No.: 37,697



To be fair the tickets were a soggy mess when she eventually retrieved them and no she did not read them. An assumption was made because of the ongoing dialogue.

She thought she was entitled because she had paid for a permit, had been granted a temporary one in November while the paper one was being sorted out. The temporary one was granted on the basis of documentation already provided.

The delays at the Council in issuing the permit meant she was without a physical permit but phone conversations with the council reassured her a permit would be issued, the erroneous tickets would be cancelled and she could carry on parking there.

So far we have 8 rejections. for the 99s.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 21:32
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,782
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (BernieF @ Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 21:29) *
...but phone conversations with the council reassured her a permit would be issued, the erroneous tickets would be cancelled and she could carry on parking there.

Is there any written confirmation of this?

Cos at the moment it's going to look to the tribunal like she chose to park there in defiance of the restrictions. We really want to avoid giving that impression.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BernieF
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 20:31
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 21 May 2010
Member No.: 37,697



I'm checking emails and phone records. I will update as soon as I have these.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 21:39
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,897
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



Surely to be legal the zig-zags have to be on the main carriageway ? In any case, how can you have zig-zags in a designated parking bay as per a TMO ! It does seem as if the council have cocked up royally here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 15 Mar 2019 - 13:18
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,782
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Incandescent @ Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 21:39) *
In any case, how can you have zig-zags in a designated parking bay as per a TMO ! It does seem as if the council have cocked up royally here.

Yes I totally agree, when it comes to drafting the actual appeal wording we must focus on the fact that the car was pared in a designated parking space. The council should have updated the TMO to de-designate that part of the bay, but it looks like they got lazy.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
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: Sunday, 21st April 2019 - 03:08
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.