Newham Car towed away invalid permit |
Newham Car towed away invalid permit |
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 10:01
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 63 Joined: 1 May 2018 Member No.: 97,787 |
Posting for a friend,
She parked his car in the morning and came back to road after work and initally though the car was stolen, then checked online to realise it was in Newham car pound. Please see attached images related to pcn, anyone see an issue why her permit was invalid other than the fact that that it seems that there have been a mistake and rubbed out previously. https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/4308/lVvCiF.jpg https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img921/7756/Q6S1CU.jpg https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img921/8523/uOPQvf.jpg https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/8589/WW7nDu.jpg https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/5815/B13OAD.jpg |
|
|
Advertisement |
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 10:01
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 10:06
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
The permit clearly looks to have been used before on 31 Dec 2019. But they shouldn't be towing for a low level contravention (code 19).
I see there was also a resident permit but not for that zone? This post has been edited by stamfordman: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 10:09 |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 10:52
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 63 Joined: 1 May 2018 Member No.: 97,787 |
Yes she is a resident in the borough but parked in a different zone.
Is there something that can be done about the towing part, she paid £200 to release the car. Very steep. Are there any grounds to appeal and claim the £200 back, |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 10:58
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,914 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Sorry to have to ask, but is your friend being totally frank with you ? You say: -
QUOTE anyone see an issue why her permit was invalid other than the fact that that it seems that there have been a mistake and rubbed out previously. It beggars belief that a complete day entry for the 31st Dec 2019 is a "mistake", and has all the hallmarks of a permit being used twice. Of course your friend can appeal to London Tribunals on the basis of disproportionate action in towing the car, but I suspect he/she will lose. |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 11:21
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 63 Joined: 1 May 2018 Member No.: 97,787 |
Im seeing this image for the first time, to be honest we haven't even discussed the validity of the permit, shes still in shock about having her car towed.
Anyhow I will advise her to appeal on those grounds. thanks all. |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 12:35
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
You have nothing to lose by appealing against the contravention and the tow other than costs may be awarded against you for a frivolous appeal.
The permit has obviously been used before, so any challenge to the PCN would be of a technical nature, Maybe but we will need all of the documents and all of the photos to access The tow, I think you would receive short shift from the adjudicator purely on the basis that you tried it on you got caught perhaps not only in a little scam but a criminal matter of theft by deception ( or whatever its legal name is) but I see an adjudicator deciding they can lawfully tow so they did -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 12:42
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
TBH I would not argue the contravention if the permit has been tinkered with.
But I would argue the tow based on this one:- Newham removal not justified if a lower penalty is given 2180122884 The Appellant accepts that he made a mistake in failing to complete the residents permit as he was new to the area and new to the system. However he objects to the fact that his car was removed which penalty he cannot afford and which he consider to be excessive in the circumstances. Bearing in mind that this PCN has been issued for a code 19 contravention which is recognised to be a less serious contravention attracting a lower penalty, I fail to see the traffic management purpose in removing the vehicle in these circumstances and in the absence of any aggravating features. I find the removal of the vehicle to be contradictory to the purpose of providing a lower differential penalty, and excessive and unnecessary in this context. I therefore allow this appeal in relation to the removal charges. Mick |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 12:59
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,053 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
Your friend is not at the stage of an appeal, just making reps to the authority.
And these must tease out exactly what was wrong which is unclear at the moment: There was a visitor's permit displayed which looks as if it has been used before. This was for all zones. Also on display was a resident's permit for zone WF. The traffic sign indicates this is zone E. The PCN is for the lower level penalty and was issued one week ago. We do not know when the car was towed. The OP has posted: She parked his car in the morning and came back to road after work What a puzzle. Why a visitor's permit? Was it provided to the motorist, if not, how did they obtain - they're a resident of zone WF so would not have access to an all-zones visitor's permit. On the face of it, neither the visitor's nor res permit supports the contravention because neither was valid at any time - I disregard the time gap between 31 Dec and 19 Feb as creating the 'previously valid' condition. But perhaps the res permit provides time-limited permission in another zone? Was the car parked for 8-9 or whatever hours after the PCN was issued - the time in contravention is a factor to be taken into account when deciding whether and when to tow? For starters. |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 13:56
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 972 Joined: 25 Jul 2010 Member No.: 39,245 |
Seems strange to me that you get a lower penalty for displaying an invalid permit than not displaying one at all. What is the logic behind that, either you have a valid permit to park there or do not?
Next we'll get people appealing a "parked without a permit" because they did show a permit albeit an invalid one. |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 14:06
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,053 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
But it is as it is.
Blame the Mayor of London, it was his predecessor's initiative which has not been reversed - political suicide now IMO. |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 14:19
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
As a reminder this is a Newham priority 4 (lowest) removal. It's important that the words they use - less serious contravention - are referenced as they need to justify the tow.
Removal Policy Priority One: i) Parked in contravention in a position/location which is prohibited and is causing danger, & serious health and safety implications for other road users or pedestrians. ii) Illegally parked in a formal disabled bay (30 minutes waiting time or 15 minutes if persistent evader *) Priority Two: i) Persistent evader (parked in prohibited place) ii) Parked in an operational Bus Lane or at a Bus Stop iii) Vehicle with foreign registration plate (parked in prohibited place) iv) Parked obstructing a dropped footway (on a resident’s request) v) Parked on a footway (parked in a prohibited place) vi) Parked on school Keep Clear Markings* vii) Parked in a Doctors Bay Priority Three: i) Parked committing a serious parking contravention (please refer to Appendix B above) Priority Four: i) All other contraventions |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 15:37
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 63 Joined: 1 May 2018 Member No.: 97,787 |
could someone clarify, is there a danger she could pay extra in costs at the tribunalx
Is her next step to appeal to newham directly? |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 15:47
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 972 Joined: 25 Jul 2010 Member No.: 39,245 |
Given that it is obviously an invalid permit, I think it would be a matter of appealing only the tow and not the PCN itself, which presumably was paid at discount rate, so she would be £40 short at the end of the day instead of several hundred.
|
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 15:52
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,053 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
If you would post the docs issued at the pound, all would be revealed!
This post has been edited by hcandersen: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 17:12 |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 16:05
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
What on earth was going on with permit. In that state you might just as well have put a sign saying 'please tow me to the pound' on the dash, given this is Newham.
|
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 16:33
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,264 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
What on earth was going on with permit. I am yet to see an innocent case where VPs are concerned. I've seen a few 'get away with it' due to Newham's poor presentation of evidence at tribunal but not actually innocent. -------------------- |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 19:04
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 683 Joined: 19 Jul 2017 Member No.: 93,086 |
Slightly off topic - but why does one need to enter the time when the permit is valid for the day until midnight?
So adds no value but another thing to accidently get wrong! |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 20:35
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
What on earth was going on with permit. I am yet to see an innocent case where VPs are concerned. I've seen at least one. Please see attached images related to pcn, anyone see an issue why her permit was invalid other than the fact that that it seems that there have been a mistake and rubbed out previously. Is your friend having a laugh? The permit has obviousness been re-used and whether that was accidental or deliberate makes no difference. I'd be careful because if your friend appeals, the council could seek costs on the basis that your friend basically tried to get away with re-using the permit and is now taking the proverbial by filing a frivolous appeal. Of course, the re-use of the permit might be totally innocent, and it might have been completed in error but not used on the previously indicated date, but that's unlikely to convince anyone even if true. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 21:36
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,053 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
But the -still unanswered - questions remain:
How did the motorist obtain this permit which was not for their zone? Which of the 2 permits on display gives rise to the 'invalid' permit? |
|
|
Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 21:49
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
The VP is all zone so it must be that one but agreed we need the full story.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 11:03 |