PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN & NtO Received in Council Car Park
Interact
post Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 15:57
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 23 Jan 2019
Member No.: 102,065



I inadvertently parked in a disabled bay in a council car park in central Milton Keynes as I could not see the signage indicating it was a disabled bay.

I challenged the PCN on the grounds that the signage was insufficent as the painted word "Disabled" has been eroded and made illegible. This was rejected by the council who pointed to a small sign mounted on a pole nearby. I don't believe this signage is sufficient either as its not behind the bay and its at a height that I did not notice is (either when I parked, or even after I returned to my car and saw the ticket).

Do I have grounds to appeal the Notice to Owner on the basis that the signage is insufficent (because the painted word wasn't easily spotted and the signed placed too high to be noticed)?

Here's links to images of the informal appeal rejection letter and Notice to Owner

https://imgur.com/XLmCQyV
https://imgur.com/xcttoTT
https://imgur.com/8bejo2d

Thanks in advance.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 15:57
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 16:07
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,125
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



Lets start at the beginning.

Post both sides of the PCN and all the council photos

post a google street view link to the area

Post your challenge

Leave in all dates times and location

The council use an 0845 telephone number this incurs a service charge of 7p per minute. This can win on its own but lets get all the ducks in a row
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Interact
post Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 16:20
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 23 Jan 2019
Member No.: 102,065



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 16:07) *
Lets start at the beginning.

Post both sides of the PCN and all the council photos

post a google street view link to the area

Post your challenge

Leave in all dates times and location

The council use an 0845 telephone number this incurs a service charge of 7p per minute. This can win on its own but lets get all the ducks in a row


Thanks.

PCN images are below and council photos are included in the above links
https://imgur.com/zdDSBAF
https://imgur.com/t0r2hcB

Link to streetview

My challenge email to the council was worded as follows:
"Dear Sir/Madam,

I received a PCN (MK4014593A) yesterday at Silbury Boulevard and I would like to challenge the charge.

I inadvertently parked in what was a disabled bay as there was insufficient marking to show it was a disabled space. As you can see from the attached photos, there was no signage behind the parking bay, and the painting on the road in front is so worn the writing is ineligible and so the bay is not clearly marked as being a disabled space.

When I parked the car, I was not able to see that it was a disabled bay and as such I believe this PCN was unfairly applied.

I look forward to hearing back from you"


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 20:14
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,476
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



I would challenge on the contravention, but to give you the best chances we need to see the pictures, in the first instance email them and ask for all the CEO's pictures to be forwarded to you. Then put them on here (redact the number plate if you want) and we can see what we're dealing with.

Incidentally, there's also an argument to be made that their policy on informal representations amounts to an unlawful fettering of discretion, see http://bit.ly/2DecmiU. It basically suggests that if the PCN is correctly issued, they will not consider mitigation (and noting that mitigation is not the same as extenuating circumstances).


--------------------
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
Interact
post Wed, 30 Jan 2019 - 15:04
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 23 Jan 2019
Member No.: 102,065



Is there a time limit that they have to provide me with the CEO's pictures? I've requested these by email (the only contact details given, other than a postal address) close to a week ago and not received any response.

Just conscious that I have to submit my appeal within 28 days...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 30 Jan 2019 - 16:33
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,476
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



There is no time limit as such although if they don't disclose photos you can claim they've behaved unfairly.


--------------------
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
Interact
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 13:04
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 23 Jan 2019
Member No.: 102,065



I've just received the photos taken by the CEO:

https://imgur.com/5Llo2PR
https://imgur.com/HwxOdeO
https://imgur.com/LKvBgGS
https://imgur.com/u3YRzZd
https://imgur.com/76qjrDQ
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
zwekk
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 13:44
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 82
Joined: 10 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,869



This sign, on the 2014 street view, appears to have been removed and the CEO photos shows this.

This post has been edited by zwekk: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 13:45
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 14:02
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,277
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



council car park in central Milton Keynes

So you sent us on a wild goose chase right from the start!

The contravention code applies to and the location is on....a road.

Once we've established where this took place, only then can we apply the required legal tests. To do this we need to refer to the Traffic Signs etc. Regs (these apply only on a road).

And what do the regs suggest? Without knowing where you were and looking on GSV, I cannot be certain. You must post a link - Silbury is too long to do this by trial and error at every parking area.

What to look for? Is there a traffic sign in your parking bay? Clearly not. Should there be? It depends. If this is a sequence of bays all subject to the same restriction and each one marked wholly or in part with the word disabled, then IMO each bay does not require its own sign. But if by virtue of the other bays not being marked yours could be considered to be a stand-alone bay, then it requires its own traffic sign. The photos suggest that there might be some wording to the left of your bay, but I want to see them all in their glory, or otherwise.

And let's be honest..even if the bay was not marked disabled, you knew it was a parking bay. So you parked and did not look for any traffic signs. You didn't see any because you didn't look...yes?

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 14:04
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:06
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,476
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:02) *
Without knowing where you were and looking on GSV, I cannot be certain. You must post a link - Silbury is too long to do this by trial and error at every parking area.

+1, without a link to Google Street View we can't even say if it was a car park or not (you say it is, the NtO says it isn't).


--------------------
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
Interact
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:23
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 23 Jan 2019
Member No.: 102,065



QUOTE (zwekk @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 13:44) *
This sign, on the 2014 street view, appears to have been removed and the CEO photos shows this.



The sign show in your photo isn't there today (or on the day of the parking ticket)

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 14:02) *
council car park in central Milton Keynes

So you sent us on a wild goose chase right from the start!

The contravention code applies to and the location is on....a road.


OK.. soo Milton Keynes is a somewhat odd place. The parking ticket was given in a car park attached to the main central shopping centre. Apologies is this is classed as a road, but it is set up like a car-park.

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 14:02) *
council car park in central Milton Keynes



And what do the regs suggest? Without knowing where you were and looking on GSV, I cannot be certain. You must post a link - Silbury is too long to do this by trial and error at every parking area.


Link to streetview

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 14:02) *
council car park in central Milton Keynes



What to look for? Is there a traffic sign in your parking bay? Clearly not. Should there be? It depends. If this is a sequence of bays all subject to the same restriction and each one marked wholly or in part with the word disabled, then IMO each bay does not require its own sign. But if by virtue of the other bays not being marked yours could be considered to be a stand-alone bay, then it requires its own traffic sign. The photos suggest that there might be some wording to the left of your bay, but I want to see them all in their glory, or otherwise.

And let's be honest..even if the bay was not marked disabled, you knew it was a parking bay. So you parked and did not look for any traffic signs. You didn't see any because you didn't look...yes?


I've posted all of the CEO's photos and also mine at the top of the thread. There was only that one small sign to the left of the space.

Yes I knew it was a parking bay (there are thousands of them all in a long line), and hence I went and paid for the parking ticket and displayed that in good faith, thinking it was a regular space like the ones to the right of it. I genuinely did not know it was disabled until I saw and read the PCN.



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:06) *
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:02) *
Without knowing where you were and looking on GSV, I cannot be certain. You must post a link - Silbury is too long to do this by trial and error at every parking area.

+1, without a link to Google Street View we can't even say if it was a car park or not (you say it is, the NtO says it isn't).




Here's the link again https://www.google.com/maps/@52.0425321,-0....6384!8i8192

The middle maroon car on the right side is in the bay I parked in.

This post has been edited by Interact: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:41
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,476
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Well there's a sign here https://www.google.com/maps/@52.0425827,-0....6384!8i8192 which is visible in the CEO photos.


--------------------
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
Interact
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 16:00
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 23 Jan 2019
Member No.: 102,065



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:41) *
Well there's a sign here https://www.google.com/maps/@52.0425827,-0....6384!8i8192 which is visible in the CEO photos.



Correct. That's the only sign and in my view is not very well placed or easy to see. Its also not clear exactly which bays it refers too. Its also positoned above head height and I think very easy miss.

As you'll see from the streetview history there was a much clearer sign right by the bays (that was possibly removed during some construction work and not replaced).

Perhaps I am in the wrong here, but my view is that the signage is insufficent.



This post has been edited by Interact: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 16:03
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Interact
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 16:33
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 23 Jan 2019
Member No.: 102,065



As you can see from this photo, the signage around the bays used to be much clearer. The signs at the right show very clearly which bays are disabled and which ones aren't. But that sign was removed and not replaced, and I believe makes the signage unclear and misleading.

https://imgur.com/Cr6lFJX

Is that a reasonable assumption to make and will it be grounds for appeal?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 16:43
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,476
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



If that's all you have to go on it's not great chances to be honest.


--------------------
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
hcandersen
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 18:47
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,277
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



You paid?

I see PMB in post #2 said 'let's start at the beginning', but without success!

Let us try again.

I parked in what I knew from prior knowledge of the layout of parking along Silbury was a parking place. I left the car and went to the nearest P&D m/c - pl don't tell me this was next to the disabled sign but hopefully in the opposite direction or even opposite. I purchased and displayed a ticket for a x-hour stay.

On my return, I found the PCN indicating that I was parked in a bay reserved for disabled badge holders. Only when my attention was drawn to this did I see the remnants of the word disabled marked outside my bay. I also noticed a traffic sign beyond the adjacent bay which referred to disabled badge holders only.

Enclosed pl find a GSV snapshot of the location dated **** and an earlier snapshot from ****.
I also refer to the CEO's photos.

The older GSV shot shows that the council have tried to indicate the separate bays by the use of white lines but the more recent shows that they have been allowed to deteriorate such as to be hardly visible. Indeed, it would not be unreasonable to consider that this degradation is part of a deliberate policy to allow the markings to wear away naturally as clearly no effort has been made to maintain them to a standard which could be considered to be substantially compliant.
In my case, the authority claim that it is not necessary for them to place a traffic sign in my bay because the sign two bays away has effect, however, it is for the authority to prove this point: the default position is that a traffic sign should be placed in the bay to indicate the restriction or alternatively that the word 'Disabled' is clearly marked on each of several bays and that a traffic sign may be placed within or at the end of these adjacent bays.
Neither case applies here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
zwekk
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 00:46
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 82
Joined: 10 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,869



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 16:43) *
If that's all you have to go on it's not great chances to be honest.


Is the missing sign one which is there for the "kindness of the council's heart" or is it required to show the end of the disable parking bays and the start of ordinary bays? Of is the effect of the removed sign that all bays become disabled parking bays, and not just the first bay?

Is this one of the situations where it becomes 50-50% with the adjudicator. One decides the council should be required to keep their signs in good order, the next decides that the remaining sign is sufficient and rejects the appeal?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 07:42
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,277
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



...see my post.

This point must be put to the council in reps because the legal position is clear and the OP needs the council's reasoning before they get to adjudication. If they just pooh-pooh the point, then this is more grist to the OP's mill.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Interact
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 09:10
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 23 Jan 2019
Member No.: 102,065



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 18:47) *
You paid?

I see PMB in post #2 said 'let's start at the beginning', but without success!

Let us try again.

I parked in what I knew from prior knowledge of the layout of parking along Silbury was a parking place. I left the car and went to the nearest P&D m/c - pl don't tell me this was next to the disabled sign but hopefully in the opposite direction or even opposite. I purchased and displayed a ticket for a x-hour stay.

On my return, I found the PCN indicating that I was parked in a bay reserved for disabled badge holders. Only when my attention was drawn to this did I see the remnants of the word disabled marked outside my bay. I also noticed a traffic sign beyond the adjacent bay which referred to disabled badge holders only.

Enclosed pl find a GSV snapshot of the location dated **** and an earlier snapshot from ****.
I also refer to the CEO's photos.

The older GSV shot shows that the council have tried to indicate the separate bays by the use of white lines but the more recent shows that they have been allowed to deteriorate such as to be hardly visible. Indeed, it would not be unreasonable to consider that this degradation is part of a deliberate policy to allow the markings to wear away naturally as clearly no effort has been made to maintain them to a standard which could be considered to be substantially compliant.
In my case, the authority claim that it is not necessary for them to place a traffic sign in my bay because the sign two bays away has effect, however, it is for the authority to prove this point: the default position is that a traffic sign should be placed in the bay to indicate the restriction or alternatively that the word 'Disabled' is clearly marked on each of several bays and that a traffic sign may be placed within or at the end of these adjacent bays.
Neither case applies here.


To clarify I paid for the P&D ticket, not the PCN.

And yes the parking machine was in the opposite direction, and right next the machine is a sign which is the one I saw which just says "7am - 6pm, pay by phone.... etc. No mention of disabled bays".

Thanks for the wording - would I use the same wording if this is rejected and goes to an independent adjudicator?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 11:15
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,476
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



If it's rejected post the rejection on here and we'll advise further.


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

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

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 21st February 2019 - 14:55
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.