PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Suspended bay - PCN 21 - Haringey
JoeyBloggs
post Mon, 18 Dec 2017 - 22:36
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,392



Hi All,

Firstly, I just want to say thanks to everyone for helping me out in the past.

Secondly, I’ve got a ticket and I don’t know if it’s worth fighting or not.

I park at a station every day. After work, I came back to my car with metal fencing around it trapped in and I’m thinking ‘wtf?’.

I then noticed on one of the lampposts there was a ‘Parking suspended’ notice…but I honestly didn’t see that all week since I park there every day.

There was no ticket on the windscreen, so I thought I got away with it. I managed to move the fencing, drive out, park up somewhere else, walk back, and put the fencing back.

But now I’ve received a NTO from Haringey of contravention code 21 – ‘parked wholly or partly in a suspended bay or space’ with a fine of £130 as ‘the PCN has not been paid’.

There are 2 points to this:
1. If I had a PCN, I would have probably paid the reduced fine.
2. If I saw signs clearly displayed and on every lamppost, I would have never parked there.

For point 1, I guess the ticket was either blown off or some passer-by got rid of it. Should I explain to Haringey I didn’t even receive a PCN to pay the reduced fine? Would they be that nice to let me pay the initial charge?

For point 2, I’ve done some research here.
It seems the signs in the ‘evidence online’ photos is just a laminated yellow sheet which is SINGLE sided and doesn’t conform to the approved/registered DFT sign. The single-sided sign that Haringey used was stuck to a lamppost that is on the outside edge of the pavement – so you wouldn’t see it if you parked up and walked on the pavement. The DFT sign is meant to be double-sided and huge, with a notice of suspension on the back, so you would notice it if you were walking on the pavement.

In the photo evidence, there are loads of other cars parked in the same place, with CEOs lurking to slap tickets, so I’m not alone who didn’t notice the rubbish signs.

Attached Image


This is the lamppost it was stuck to (near to the edge):
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5985543,-...3312!8i6656

This is the DFT sign for Haringey:
http://assets.dft.gov.uk/trafficauths/case-2964.pdf

However, I’m not sure if I should ask for the reduced PCN (if they will allow it?) or if the incorrect sign technicality is enough to appeal to Haringey or PATAS and to just fight them stating that I honestly didn’t see signs clearly displayed and would have never parked there.

Or do I try to make an informal appeal to the initial PCN, then an informal appeal, then PATAS?

What are your thoughts?

Thank you for your time and help,

JB

This post has been edited by JoeyBloggs: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 - 22:39
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 16)
Advertisement
post Mon, 18 Dec 2017 - 22:36
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Mon, 18 Dec 2017 - 23:52
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Post the NTO. What's the time and date of the contravention? Presume friday 3 Nov. I see the fireworks were on both 3 and 4 Nov. It's plausible that the signs went up on Friday morning as the suspension didn't kick in until 15:00. Also you can just about the read the notice below where the TMO looks to start on 2 Nov?

This post has been edited by stamfordman: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 - 00:03
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Tue, 19 Dec 2017 - 07:46
Post #3


Member


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



OP---I would suggest you have been given the wrong contravention because you have a temporary traffic order which appears to prohibit waiting. Any chance of a better photo of the white notice?

These are the regs:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/16A

Mick

This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 - 07:54
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jo Carn
post Tue, 19 Dec 2017 - 10:04
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 659
Joined: 22 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,162



Have a look at the evidence they have on the website. Do they have proof that the PCN was served (left on the vehicle). If not, I don't think they can't jump straight to issuing a Notice to Owner.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JoeyBloggs
post Wed, 20 Dec 2017 - 00:38
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,392



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Tue, 19 Dec 2017 - 00:52) *
Post the NTO. What's the time and date of the contravention? Presume friday 3 Nov. I see the fireworks were on both 3 and 4 Nov. It's plausible that the signs went up on Friday morning as the suspension didn't kick in until 15:00. Also you can just about the read the notice below where the TMO looks to start on 2 Nov?

At 15:24 on 03/11/17 - I've only noticed now it says 2nd Nov on the TMO.
However, on Haringey's own Parking Policy, on page 15, it states:
"We advise motorists of forthcoming suspensions by way of putting up suspension signs seven days in advance of when they will come into force."
http://www.haringey.gov.uk/sites/haringeyg...enforcement.pdf
Should I ask Haringey for proof of this or would that argument not hold weight?
I've attached the NTO at the bottom of this post.

QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Tue, 19 Dec 2017 - 08:46) *
OP---I would suggest you have been given the wrong contravention because you have a temporary traffic order which appears to prohibit waiting. Any chance of a better photo of the white notice?

These are the regs:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/16A

Mick

Sorry I've got no clearer pictures - that's from the evidence online from Haringey.
Are you saying they should have given me contravention code of 02 and because they've given code 21, it's invalid?

QUOTE (Jo Carn @ Tue, 19 Dec 2017 - 11:04) *
Have a look at the evidence they have on the website. Do they have proof that the PCN was served (left on the vehicle). If not, I don't think they can't jump straight to issuing a Notice to Owner.

I've looked at the website and yes there is a picture of PCN on the vehicle, but it wasn't there when I got back to the car...hence I can assume some passer-by took it off or it got blown away...but I don't know if Haringey would believe me though.

Thank you all for your replies and help.







Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Wed, 20 Dec 2017 - 07:57
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,055
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



Before we can look at the correctness of the signs and the contravention we need to locate your car..so we need the CEO's photos of your car. These would also show service of the PCN.

And I'm confused by your account and the GSV you've shown - which might be out of date, but if it is this is even more reason to see their photos.

You posted:
I park at a station every day. After work, I came back to my car .....

I infer from this that you were away for a few hours. But the parking place is restricted to 2 hours P&D, or are you a permit holder?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JoeyBloggs
post Wed, 20 Dec 2017 - 23:00
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,392



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 20 Dec 2017 - 08:57) *
Before we can look at the correctness of the signs and the contravention we need to locate your car..so we need the CEO's photos of your car. These would also show service of the PCN.

And I'm confused by your account and the GSV you've shown - which might be out of date, but if it is this is even more reason to see their photos.

You posted:
I park at a station every day. After work, I came back to my car .....

I infer from this that you were away for a few hours. But the parking place is restricted to 2 hours P&D, or are you a permit holder?

Hi hcandersen - how are you doing?

Sorry, what does GSV mean?

As for my quote, I parked at the station. Then went to work. Then came back. But no PCN was on the car at that time.

Correct - yes I'm a permit holder.

I've attached photos below (on another note, someone reversed into my car and broke my front-number plate holder, and now it's in the dash, hence black box in that area):





You can just about see the rear end of my car in the picture of post #1 of the sign:



I guess the best way is to first tell Haringey I didn't have a PCN at that time when I got back to my car...and then later possibly fight on the grounds of procedural impropriety.

Thank you for your help,
JB

This post has been edited by JoeyBloggs: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 - 23:03
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jo Carn
post Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 14:05
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 659
Joined: 22 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,162



Half way along the resident's bays there is a sign that indicates Resident Permit Holders only.
The photos are not clear enough for me to tell so can you check the photo with the suspension sign. Does that show that the aforementioned sign was covered?
In other words, did they put up a suspension sign near the machine (that you don't use) and leave the permit sign (which you do use) uncovered?
If so, you have a very strong case.

Sorry, one more thing. The sign says "the south side of Buckingham Gate". What is the south side? Isn't that the other side of the road?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Chaseman
post Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 15:27
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,577
Joined: 16 Aug 2010
From: People's Republic of Lambeth
Member No.: 39,819



If you compare the sign as erected to the authorised version as per the DfT, they are completely different. I don't mean the odd word differs, they are just chalk and cheese. I think an adj would have difficulty alleging substantial compliance by the LA on this one. Amongst other things, the DfT authority specifies that the year should be omitted, which clearly it ain't on the erected sign.

If you also look closely at the authorised version, you will see that some lazy numpty at Haringey didn't bother to design a bespoke sign, they just copied the RBKC one. Which means that all temp suspension signs in Haringey should technically say on them "Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea". I think there is enough here to go to adjudication on, because sure as eggs are eggs, Haringey won't let you off.


--------------------
Chaseman
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JoeyBloggs
post Wed, 27 Dec 2017 - 23:21
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,392



Thanks for your help Jo Carn and Chaseman.

QUOTE (Jo Carn @ Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 15:05) *
Half way along the resident's bays there is a sign that indicates Resident Permit Holders only.
The photos are not clear enough for me to tell so can you check the photo with the suspension sign. Does that show that the aforementioned sign was covered?
In other words, did they put up a suspension sign near the machine (that you don't use) and leave the permit sign (which you do use) uncovered?
If so, you have a very strong case.

Sorry, one more thing. The sign says "the south side of Buckingham Gate". What is the south side? Isn't that the other side of the road?

Only when When I came back to my car, it was surrounded by fences, which then made me look around at the signs. I think the "Residential Parking" permit sign was uncovered, but on that same pole at the bottom, there was a laminated sheet saying it was suspended.

I wish I took photos, but I didn't, as I didn't have a PCN on my windscreen, so I thought I got away with it.

This is the pole where I was parked closest to but Haringey didn't take a picture of this pole as evidence themselves:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5986616,-...3312!8i6656

They put the suspension sign on a pole that doesn't even have parking signs in the first place - does that hold weight?:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5985543,-...3312!8i6656

As for 'South side', I can only assume the south side of the road which, going by Google Maps, is my side.

QUOTE (Chaseman @ Thu, 21 Dec 2017 - 16:27) *
If you compare the sign as erected to the authorised version as per the DfT, they are completely different. I don't mean the odd word differs, they are just chalk and cheese. I think an adj would have difficulty alleging substantial compliance by the LA on this one. Amongst other things, the DfT authority specifies that the year should be omitted, which clearly it ain't on the erected sign.

If you also look closely at the authorised version, you will see that some lazy numpty at Haringey didn't bother to design a bespoke sign, they just copied the RBKC one. Which means that all temp suspension signs in Haringey should technically say on them "Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea". I think there is enough here to go to adjudication on, because sure as eggs are eggs, Haringey won't let you off.

Yes - this is one thing I wasn't sure on, if the sign design made a difference.
The DfT sign is blatantly obvious when parking is suspended - double sided and huge, you can't miss it when walking on the pavement too.

I'm not sure how to appeal this - should I tell Haringey my PCN was not there when I got back to my car and ask to appeal informally first?

I would have appealed if I had the chance to. I would have paid the fine too if they used the proper signs. But then again, I would have seen the proper sign and not parked there, and wouldn't have got the fine...chicken and egg!

Thanks again for your help,
JB
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 08:47
Post #11


Member


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



OP--- appeal the NTO on the basis that you have been given the wrong contravention and therefore the PCN is invalid.

It should have been Code 02 "Parked or loading / unloading in a restricted street where waiting and loading / unloading restrictions are in force"

A Code 02 is in keeping with the temporary order which states waiting and loading are prohibited. Second, if they wished to impose a parking suspension then, as per Chaseman, they should have used their DfT approved sign.

Explain that the PCN was not attached to your vehicle, so you have been the victim of illegal activity, if your goal is to have the discount re-offered.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jo Carn
post Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 09:34
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 659
Joined: 22 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,162



Amongst other things you have been advised to put in your letter, ask for all images and evidence pertinent to this case saying this will determine whether you will take it to tribunal. If they don't send photos of the permit holder sign being covered up or of a suspension sign on the pole then they cannot present that evidence for the tribunal and would be a reason for the appeal to be found in your favour.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JoeyBloggs
post Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 23:59
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,392



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 09:47) *
OP--- appeal the NTO on the basis that you have been given the wrong contravention and therefore the PCN is invalid.

It should have been Code 02 "Parked or loading / unloading in a restricted street where waiting and loading / unloading restrictions are in force"

A Code 02 is in keeping with the temporary order which states waiting and loading are prohibited. Second, if they wished to impose a parking suspension then, as per Chaseman, they should have used their DfT approved sign.

Explain that the PCN was not attached to your vehicle, so you have been the victim of illegal activity, if your goal is to have the discount re-offered.

Mick



QUOTE (Jo Carn @ Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 10:34) *
Amongst other things you have been advised to put in your letter, ask for all images and evidence pertinent to this case saying this will determine whether you will take it to tribunal. If they don't send photos of the permit holder sign being covered up or of a suspension sign on the pole then they cannot present that evidence for the tribunal and would be a reason for the appeal to be found in your favour.

Thanks for your help.

I have compiled the below...does it sound ok?

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

Dear Sir/Madam,
I’m writing in reference to the Notice to Owner of PCN XXX
There are a few points I’d like to raise.

1. A PCN ticket was not present when I returned to the car and I have been a victim of illegal activity. I had not been given the chance to either pay the reduced fee or appeal informally. I was surprised to receive a ‘Notice to Owner’ straight away, and it did not give me either option of the above.

2. I was simply not aware that Haringey was trying to suspend parking in the area as there was inadequate signage. The signs used by Haringey do not conform to the authorised DfT specification as listed under:
http://assets.dft.gov.uk/trafficauths/case-2964.pdf
The DfT sign approved is double-sided and of a considerable size, with a notice of suspension on the back. Therefore, one would notice it if they were walking on the pavement.

3. According to Haringey’s Parking Policy, on page 15, it states:
"We advise motorists of forthcoming suspensions by way of putting up suspension signs seven days in advance of when they will come into force."
http://www.haringey.gov.uk/sites/haringeyg...enforcement.pdf
However I have not seen any signs in advance leading up to the date of suspension.

4. I believe the Contravention Code 21 is incorrect in this instance. The Traffic Management Order in place at the time appears to prohibit waiting:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/16A

5. I’d like to request all images and evidence pertinent to this case, as it will determine whether I will take this to tribunal.

There have been multiple procedural improprieties on Haringey’s part and I essentially would not have parked there in the first instance if I was appropriately made aware of any restrictions to be in place.

Thank you for your time,

JB

-------------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Fri, 29 Dec 2017 - 10:24
Post #14


Member


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



OP-----Para 4 -- beef it up, no need to be nice.

4. The contravention given is incorrect because the terms of the TTRO proscribe waiting and loading. Therefore only a Code 02 contravention is applicable. Neither can a Code 21 be imposed without a traffic sign which complies with the requirements of Section 64 of the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984. Therefore the PCN is invalid.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JoeyBloggs
post Sun, 31 Dec 2017 - 18:54
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,392



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Fri, 29 Dec 2017 - 11:24) *
OP-----Para 4 -- beef it up, no need to be nice.

4. The contravention given is incorrect because the terms of the TTRO proscribe waiting and loading. Therefore only a Code 02 contravention is applicable. Neither can a Code 21 be imposed without a traffic sign which complies with the requirements of Section 64 of the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984. Therefore the PCN is invalid.

Mick

Thanks Mick - now added.
I've also included the actual text from links and the DfT approved sign in Appendices - not sure if it's needed but thought wouldn't hurt:
https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21APRX8...288&o=OneUp

Cheers,
JB

This post has been edited by JoeyBloggs: Sun, 31 Dec 2017 - 18:55
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JoeyBloggs
post Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 23:54
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 19 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,392



Hi All,

Just to say...I'VE WON!

Haringey accepted the representations and dropped the fine...the letter came through just recently.

Thank you everyone...really appreciate all your help :-)

It's funny, since this issue came up, I've noticed other 'suspended signs' outside of Haringey...and all others seen are of the correct double sided large designs.

Cheers again,

JB
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 10:41
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



That was well done. Can you post the letter to round it off.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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 - 13:19
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