Market Place Romford - Car Park closed signage |
Market Place Romford - Car Park closed signage |
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 - 23:36
Post
#1
|
||
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
Hello and thanks in advance for any help or advice that can be provided.
I've done some searching for previous issues with this car park and found it has cropped up previously under thread: http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t100152.html But that thread dates back to 2015 and from looking at the picture attachments on that thread, the car park sign has been updated since then. I wonder if they changed it as a result of previous challenges to PCN's issued there based on questionable signage? Here is a picture of the current sign that you pass on entering the Market Square which doubles as a car park: I am not from the area and found it confusing in the limited time I had to process it whilst driving past with cars behind me. I'm also disabled with a blue badge and was staying at the Travelodge Romford Quadrant which fronts Market Place. I parked there for a few minutes on a Wednesday evening in May 2018 not even realising the car park was closed (I only realised on finding the PCN on my car). I displayed my blue badge on the dash whilst unloading my suitcase from the car into the Travelodge. I was alone and since I walk on 2 crutches this isn't an easy task hence needing to park close to the hotel entrance. I came out a few minutes later and found the PCN on my car stating contravention code 93 (Parked in a car park when closed). I challenged it within the 14 days (50% period) after issue, explaining the above, but was unsuccessful. I have only just received the NTO after it going missing in the post the first time. So I am now at the point of formally appealing it. I'm just not sure how to approach the appeal; should I do it based on the signage at the entrance still been inadequate (or is it?) or go down the route of being disabled and needing to unload my case into the hotel as I can't walk very far? I believe this car park is a bit of a hot spot in terms of catching people out. Any view/opinion would be appreciated. Thanks. |
|
|
||
Advertisement |
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 - 23:36
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 26 Feb 2019 - 13:16
Post
#41
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
I've amended the Grounds document but how do I post a copy of it on here for review? It's a word document so can't use imgbb
cheers |
|
|
Tue, 26 Feb 2019 - 13:24
Post
#42
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I've amended the Grounds document but how do I post a copy of it on here for review? It's a word document so can't use imgbb cheers Put it on google drive, one drive, dropbox or similar. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 26 Feb 2019 - 14:20
Post
#43
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
Here's the dropbox link to the Grounds for Appeal document I propose submitting.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7u45fjapmu858cp/I...DON%20TRIBUNALS Is there really no point referencing the legibility issue of the PCN? |
|
|
Tue, 26 Feb 2019 - 14:37
Post
#44
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Is there really no point referencing the legibility issue of the PCN? You could try but personally I don't think it'll help. See what others say. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 26 Feb 2019 - 15:28
Post
#45
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Is there really no point referencing the legibility issue of the PCN? You could try but personally I don't think it'll help. See what others say. If you made a simple I ould not read the information on the PCN an adjudicator might just look at it and say yes it is misprinted to that extent, but as you are making a more detailed appeal on other grounds its more likely they will examine it more closely and see that all the info could be made out, so I wouldn't bother -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Tue, 26 Feb 2019 - 23:18
Post
#46
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
My thinking was that if my appeal was borderline then including the legibility issue of the PCN might just tip things in my favour?
|
|
|
Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 10:22
Post
#47
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,055 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
The appeal is dreadful.
So, rowing back. When is your date and is it a personal hearing or on the papers? Have you seen the authority's evidence? You cannot just launch into a lecture on the law. I would start as follows: Grounds 1 Procedural impropriety This relates to the authority's NOR in which they misstate of my rights of appeal and ****. In this regard I respectfully refer the adjudcator to the NOR dated **** page(s) paragraphs **** which I have reproduced below with the relevant phrases highlighted: As the adj wll see, ************ I believe this constitutes a procedural impropriety in support of which I would cite the following: and only then would you refer to decisions. But frankly an adj doesn't need a lecture, they know what's a PI and what's not. As no two case are ever exactly the same, IMO you only offer the opinion of other adjudicators in support, you do not present as if to say... they think this is a PI so you should as well! And as regards the misalignment, we must see the council's evidence on this point before you decide how it is to be played. As I posted earlier: that when you raise it in your appeal and then see the authority's evidence you highlight to the adjudicator that they have not posted an exact copy which in itself can be a winning point. |
|
|
Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 15:35
Post
#48
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
Thanks hcandersen for your input.
Are you an (ex) adjudicator by any chance? I have until 6th March to file the appeal with London tribunals. I was delaying sending it until I'd garnered opinion on here. It won't be a personal hearing since I live ooop north. Evidence wise - I've seen the photos that were taken, that's all. So you advise requesting a copy of the PCN that the council hold before proceeding? |
|
|
Fri, 22 Mar 2019 - 16:16
Post
#49
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
The deadline to submit my evidence for this is 27th March which is fast approaching.
Do I need to be requesting a copy of the Council's evidence (namely the PCN) or should they automatically be sending it me? |
|
|
Fri, 22 Mar 2019 - 16:32
Post
#50
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,055 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
The adj's letter to you advising of registration of your appeal etc. will tell you by when the authority should supply a copy of their evidence. What does it say?
|
|
|
Fri, 22 Mar 2019 - 17:02
Post
#51
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
The Tribunal letter says "You should receive from the Enforcement Authority a copy of their evidence at least 3 days before
the date the case comes into the list" It says my case will come into the list for decision on 1st April - does that mean it will definitely be heard then or is this just an approximate date? My deadline for evidence is 27th March. Should I wait until I receive the copy of the PCN from the council before I mention the legibility issue, so as not to alert them? hcandersen - are you an ex adjudicator? |
|
|
Sat, 23 Mar 2019 - 18:50
Post
#52
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
1st April is an approximate date, it's the first date that a decision might be made, but it could be a few days later.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sat, 23 Mar 2019 - 22:15
Post
#53
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,055 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
hcandersen - are you an ex adjudicator?
No. I've been called a few things in my life, but never that! |
|
|
Sun, 24 Mar 2019 - 14:12
Post
#54
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
hcandersen - are you an ex adjudicator? No. I've been called a few things in my life, but never that! Haha ok. It's just I've seen your input on a number of posts on Pepipoo, including this one, and you seem to have very detailed knowledge of the system. I wondered if you were a current/ex adjudicator. An update with my case. Havering Council yesterday uploaded their evidence onto the London Tribunals website in advance of the hearing - 19 separate items in all!! As referred to on earlier posts, the PCN they attached to my windscreen was very hard to read due to misalignment of the print. hcandersen previously stated that he doubted they would submit an exact copy of this PCN as it might go against them. Sure enough one of the 19 evidence items is the PCN details(see below) which looks nothing like what was attached to my windscreen. Any thoughts? I need to submit my evidence today ideally. https://ibb.co/1z7dCW4 |
|
|
Sun, 24 Mar 2019 - 14:25
Post
#55
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,308 Joined: 9 May 2014 Member No.: 70,515 |
QUOTE An update with my case. Havering Council yesterday uploaded their evidence onto the London Tribunals website in advance of the hearing - 19 separate items in all!! Please can you upload the 2-3 pages headed Summary of Case or somesuch in which the Council outline to the adjudicator why they think you appeal should be dismissed and the PCN stand? |
|
|
Sun, 24 Mar 2019 - 15:35
Post
#56
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
|
|
|
Sun, 24 Mar 2019 - 18:07
Post
#57
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,055 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
I can only see a single page with each link.
|
|
|
Sun, 24 Mar 2019 - 19:27
Post
#58
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
There is only a single page for each of the summary and PCN details that the council have uploaded.
These being 2 of the 19 pieces of evidence they've uploaded. The other 17 are copies of my correspondence, NTO etc that have all been linked up previously on here. The appeal is dreadful. So, rowing back. When is your date and is it a personal hearing or on the papers? Have you seen the authority's evidence? You cannot just launch into a lecture on the law. I would start as follows: Grounds 1 Procedural impropriety This relates to the authority's NOR in which they misstate of my rights of appeal and ****. In this regard I respectfully refer the adjudcator to the NOR dated **** page(s) paragraphs **** which I have reproduced below with the relevant phrases highlighted: As the adj wll see, ************ I believe this constitutes a procedural impropriety in support of which I would cite the following: and only then would you refer to decisions. But frankly an adj doesn't need a lecture, they know what's a PI and what's not. As no two case are ever exactly the same, IMO you only offer the opinion of other adjudicators in support, you do not present as if to say... they think this is a PI so you should as well! And as regards the misalignment, we must see the council's evidence on this point before you decide how it is to be played. As I posted earlier: that when you raise it in your appeal and then see the authority's evidence you highlight to the adjudicator that they have not posted an exact copy which in itself can be a winning point. I take on board what you're saying regarding lecturing the adjudicator about the law so the above looks a good strategy, bearing in mind I now have their submitted evidence (all 19 items!)? |
|
|
Mon, 25 Mar 2019 - 01:05
Post
#59
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 46 Joined: 6 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,700 |
I would really appreciate some help with this asap as I'm running short of time to get my evidence in.
I could do with some guidance how to word the appeal. I'm looking at using the suggestions from hcandersen in post #47 and the Grounds of Appeal document suggested by cp8759 in post #37. I also don't know how to approach the issue of raising the PCN clarity. Do I just submit a picture of the original PCN as evidence and let the adjudicator see for himself how bad it is or do I have to compose a well worded paragraph in the Grounds of Appeal document referencing it? |
|
|
Mon, 25 Mar 2019 - 14:48
Post
#60
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,055 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
We must see their evidence as presented in their pack, not review copies of old docs.
And of course they must produce the order which creates the car park. The contravention is for not complying with the provision of an order - car park closed is detail. Therefore THEY must present an order which shows that on Wednesdays the location is a car park and not a road - the very point which I think MMV raised some time ago. So please, if docs are requested post them. So far you have: Possibly contravention did not occur, depending on the contents of the order; Procedural improprieties: A PCN which did not comply with the provisions of Schedule 1 to the General Regs in that its printing was so misaligned as to make it practically unreadable - this issue is not apparent in the NTO, which was produced on the authority's printer as opposed to a faulty CEO's HHC (the CEO was clearly aware of the misprinted PCN because they signed it). On this point I would draw the adj's attention to the council's evidence - Section **, which purports to be, as required, an exact copy of the PCN when in fact it misrepresents the condition of the PCN potentially to the point of duplicity; The NOR - several points arise here... But we must see all their evidence first. I know it's a pain, but not as much as forking out the full penalty. This post has been edited by hcandersen: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 - 21:39 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 12:39 |