CEO placing parking restriction sign in place before giving ticket, Any advice very welcome! |
CEO placing parking restriction sign in place before giving ticket, Any advice very welcome! |
Wed, 21 Feb 2018 - 16:29
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 21 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,685 |
Hi all,
My car was parked in a resident's parking bay as normal, when it was given a ticket and towed due to a yellow triangular "Suspended Bay" sign that was apparently there when I parked. I didn't see the sign when I parked, and the photographic evidence provided by the CEO issuing the ticket include timestamped photos (@11.26am) showing the triangular sign with the information facing away from the road (and the car), and then 1 minute later @ 11.27am (via the timestamp) more photos with the sign facing towards the car. It seems clear to me that at the very least the CEO started taking photos before realising the sign wasn't visible, before turning the sign around for the remainder of the photos. I have contested this with the council, who have rejected my appeal saying that "the position of the suspension sign was correctly placed". I am questioning firstly whether the sign was even there, but also even if it was there as photographed do I still have a case to contest this at the tribunals? The Process Officer at the council who rejected my appeal says the signs were adequate but surely the CEO's actions at the time to move the sign in order to gather evidence trumps this? Two two possible scenarios are: 1. The sign wasn't there, it was put up and photos taken, then moved and more photos taken. 2. The sign was there and I didn't notice it, photos were taken, sign moved, more photos taken. I have found a passage in the govt's Traffic Signs Manual that states that "On-street parking and loading signs are normally erected parallel to the kerb, facing the carriageway." which this one wasn't, though I'm not sure if this is enough to contest? Thanks for any help! Two of the photos taken by the CEO are attached, I can upload more if needed. |
|
|
Advertisement |
Wed, 21 Feb 2018 - 16:29
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Wed, 21 Feb 2018 - 16:36
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 475 Joined: 26 Feb 2008 Member No.: 17,593 |
Wrong forum. Ask a mod to move this to "Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices"
|
|
|
Wed, 21 Feb 2018 - 16:36
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,905 Joined: 11 Jul 2010 Member No.: 38,904 |
Possible to upload the Ticket and / or Notice of Rejection?
|
|
|
Wed, 21 Feb 2018 - 16:40
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
This needs moving to the council tickets forum
Use the "Report" button Was this the informal appeal of the windscreen ticket or the formal appeal of the Notice to Owner ? Some councils automatically reject all informal appeals because the motorist will normally pay the discount The council's own photographs show that the CEO moved the sign The council might not want to explain this to an adjudicator The only weakness with your case that I can see is that "something" was clearly attached to the lamp-post but you didn't check what it said |
|
|
Wed, 21 Feb 2018 - 16:53
Post
#5
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 21 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,685 |
|
|
|
Wed, 21 Feb 2018 - 17:20
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
So they admit that the CEO turned the sign leaving the issue whether you should have seen it and inspected it
|
|
|
Wed, 21 Feb 2018 - 17:23
Post
#7
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 21 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,685 |
So they admit that the CEO turned the sign leaving the issue whether you should have seen it and inspected it Yeah, they admit that the CEO did it, but say it doesn't matter because the sign was there. My argument is if the sign was sufficient, the CEO shouldn't have needed to turn the sign around. Along with the fact that if the CEO actively moved the sign between photos, he also could have easily moved it before the photos (e.g. if it had slid down the lamp post or fallen off out of view, it was just a thin plastic sign) |
|
|
Wed, 21 Feb 2018 - 20:00
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Have you hit report yet?
This must be moved. |
|
|
Wed, 21 Feb 2018 - 22:48
Post
#9
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 21 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,685 |
|
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 18:04
Post
#10
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 21 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,685 |
This needs moving to the council tickets forum Use the "Report" button Was this the informal appeal of the windscreen ticket or the formal appeal of the Notice to Owner ? Some councils automatically reject all informal appeals because the motorist will normally pay the discount The council's own photographs show that the CEO moved the sign The council might not want to explain this to an adjudicator The only weakness with your case that I can see is that "something" was clearly attached to the lamp-post but you didn't check what it said It was the council "PCN objections" appeal - not sure if that's the informal one or formal.. Their rejection was a "formal rejection" |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 18:42
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
Timings on the photos very suspect if the contravention was 11.27 and the signs photo 14.42.
Mick |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 22:33
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Timings on the photos very suspect if the contravention was 11.27 and the signs photo 14.42. Yes, although there is one in post #1 with the earlier time on. But this looks like a stitch up - the council seems to have dug its own grave on this one. OP - what council is this? It's a no brainer to take it to adjudication. Any more paperwork? This post has been edited by stamfordman: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 22:34 |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 23:02
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
Register the appeal with LT...that is a formal NOR.
Grounds of Contravention did not Occur due to inadequate signage. Details can be filled in but do not miss deadline to register the appeal. And give us the date of the NOR please and words of your challenge to the council? There is clear evidence that the Suspension sign was moved. There is clear evidence that it was facing the wrong way (at least) and as such would not be readily visible and easily dismissed as a poster someone had stuck up....come to the local rave or suchlike. From the facts that it was moved, there can only be a suspicion that it may not have even been at a suitable level when you parked. Timings on the photos very suspect if the contravention was 11.27 and the signs photo 14.42. Mick Photos will be from removal truck. We haven't seen paperwork but I suspect will coincide with those photos. Earlier ones must be in council evidence pack or adjudicator likely to draw own conclusions on adequacy of sign, especially when the questions are asked |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 23:13
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,860 Joined: 12 May 2012 Member No.: 54,871 |
Timings on the photos very suspect if the contravention was 11.27 and the signs photo 14.42. Yes, although there is one in post #1 with the earlier time on. But this looks like a stitch up - the council seems to have dug its own grave on this one. OP - what council is this? It's a no brainer to take it to adjudication. Any more paperwork? Looks like Camden, from nearby signs. So that'll be NSL doing the enforcement with their (alleged) Targets of 9 PCNs per CEO, per shift |
|
|
Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 13:08
Post
#15
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 21 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,685 |
Register the appeal with LT...that is a formal NOR. Grounds of Contravention did not Occur due to inadequate signage. Details can be filled in but do not miss deadline to register the appeal. And give us the date of the NOR please and words of your challenge to the council? There is clear evidence that the Suspension sign was moved. There is clear evidence that it was facing the wrong way (at least) and as such would not be readily visible and easily dismissed as a poster someone had stuck up....come to the local rave or suchlike. From the facts that it was moved, there can only be a suspicion that it may not have even been at a suitable level when you parked. Timings on the photos very suspect if the contravention was 11.27 and the signs photo 14.42. Mick Photos will be from removal truck. We haven't seen paperwork but I suspect will coincide with those photos. Earlier ones must be in council evidence pack or adjudicator likely to draw own conclusions on adequacy of sign, especially when the questions are asked Yep photos taken when vehicle was removed @ c.14:40, but original photos when ticket issued @ 11:26. Thanks a lot, I will put through the appeal tomorrow, the 28 day deadline takes me up to next Monday. Timings on the photos very suspect if the contravention was 11.27 and the signs photo 14.42. Yes, although there is one in post #1 with the earlier time on. But this looks like a stitch up - the council seems to have dug its own grave on this one. OP - what council is this? It's a no brainer to take it to adjudication. Any more paperwork? Looks like Camden, from nearby signs. So that'll be NSL doing the enforcement with their (alleged) Targets of 9 PCNs per CEO, per shift Yep Camden, do you have a source for the 9 PCNs per shift alleged target by any chance? |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 11:27 |