Contravention Code 27 for parking on a dropped kerb, Can someone advise me the next steps to take? |
Contravention Code 27 for parking on a dropped kerb, Can someone advise me the next steps to take? |
Mon, 19 Nov 2018 - 17:22
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 19 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,007 |
Hi All,
I parked my car in an residential area near my university for two days. Upon my return, I receieved two parking tickets from the Runnymeade council, dated 8th Nov 11:45am and 9th Nov 08:34am for parking in a special enforcement area adjacent to a dropped kerb (27). I followed advice given on another pepipoo post, appealed both tickets Dear Sirs, I write to appeal against the issue of PCN RN22491170 and RN22506019. This PCN was issued for parking in Lynwood Avenue, Egham, for the contravention code 27. I always try and park courteously and with the safety and convenience of both other highway users and the local residents in mind. On 8th-9th November 2018 I parked my vehicle in Lynwood Avenue in Egham and received PCN stated above. The alleged contravention did not occur. Section 86 (1)(a) (ii) of the Traffic Management Act 2004 states: In a special enforcement area a vehicle must not be parked on the carriageway adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge where the footway, cycle track or verge has been lowered to meet the level of the carriageway for the purpose of assisting pedestrians crossing the carriageway In order for the contravention to have taken place, the vehicle must be parked with one or more wheels adjacent to a dropped kerb. No part of the front or rear wheel of the vehicle was parked adjacent to the dropped kerb. If, as demonstrated, no part of any wheel was overhanging the dropped kerb then the contravention cannot have taken place. (Photo evidence attached on last page) I refer to case 211026505A, decided by the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service on 05/07/2011, for a PCN given for the same contravention. I would also like to bring your attention to section 8.46 of the document Operational Guidance to Local Authorities: parking Policy and Enforcement (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/operational-guidance-to-local-authorities-parking-policy-and-enforcement), which states the following: “If two or more PCNs are issued within 24 hours for the same contravention, that is, to a vehicle that has not been moved, it is current practice to cancel the second PCN. It may be sensible to review both PCNs and cancel the one with the least robust evidence. For instance, if the digital photograph for one was taken in the daytime and the other at night, the one taken in the light may well be clearer. If one PCN is at the higher rate and the other at the lower rate, the lower rate PCN should normally be considered first for cancellation.” I refer PATAS case # 2110166557 (January 2011, in Haringey) (http://www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/statreg/case.aspx?caseref=2110166557) Where the same PCN was cancelled for the same convention. This is not the only case where multiple PCNs have been cancelled because only one, continuous contravention had occurred. I quote from the ruling for PATAS case 2140184092 (January 2014, in Southwark, i.e. more recent and in the very same borough) (http://www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/statreg/case.aspx?caseref=2140184092) : I trust this will be found to be sufficient to cancel both PCNs. However the council rejected both of my appeals today stating the below: Re: Traffic Management Act 2004 : PCN No : RN22506019 Date Issued : 09/11/2018 08:34:46 Location of Contravention : Lynwood Avenue I have received your letter concerning the above Penalty Charge Notice and after consideration of the circumstances I have found no grounds for the cancellation of the charge. The dropped kerb is a residential crossing and it is clear that a wheelchair user would have been unable to use the kerb to facilitate the footway due to the vehicle blocking the footway. We had received complaints from residents, and the Penalty Charge Notice was issued correctly. You can still take advantage of the discounted charge of £35 if you pay by 03/12/2018. HOW TO PAY · go online at www.runnymede.gov.uk<http://www.runnymede.gov.uk> – Pay for It · phone 01932 425030 select option 6 (24hr automated phone payment) have your credit/debit card (Master/Visa/Maestro/Delta/Switch) to hand We recommend making payment online or by telephone to ensure that payment reaches us in good time. Alternatively send payment by cheque or postal order to Runnymede Borough Council, Customer Services, Civic Centre, Station Road, Addlestone, Surrey KT15 2AH. Please allow 5 working days for delivery and processing and write the PCN number on the reverse of the cheque. Please note that no further communication will be considered at this stage in relation to this matter, should you wish to make further representations you should wait for the Notice to Owner. If no payment is received after the above date a “Notice to Owner” will be sent to the owner/keeper of the vehicle as registered with the DVLA. Please note that this Notice will not be sent to the driver. If you are the driver but not the owner, and you still wish to make formal representations, you are advised to contact the owner who can respond to the Notice accordingly. If this Council rejects the representations to the “Notice to Owner”, a notice of rejection will be sent with details of the appeal procedure. You cannot appeal to the Independent Adjudicator until the “Notice to Owner” has been issued and formal representations rejected. Please note that the discounted charge will no longer be available after 03/12/2018 and the charge will return to the original £70 if payment is not made in time. Could someone advise what I should do at this point? Appeal further or just pay the fine? Thank you! This post has been edited by Mr Holloway: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 02:51 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 19 Nov 2018 - 17:22
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Mon, 19 Nov 2018 - 18:05
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
The sloping part doesn't count but you're taking a bit of liberty parking right up to the dropped footway.
Have you got the council's pics? If there is no contravention clearly seen on their pics you can be fairly confident of winning an appeal. Did they not address the continuous contravention at all? |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 15:04
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Show us the council photos. As a guide for the future, I wouldn't include any links in your representations, even more so when the links don't work.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 15:09
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28 Joined: 11 Sep 2016 Member No.: 87,077 |
My local area!
A tad close, but I'd still say that Contravention did not occur IF their pics show the same.... That said, that is p-poor parking, At the very least, I'd have thought you'd try to get the backend near the kerb as well.... |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 15:45
Post
#5
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 19 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,007 |
Hi all, thanks for commenting. I must admit it was poor parking as it was late in the evening and there wasn't many places to park near the uni. There were cars parked in front and behind me.
The council has not commented on my point of continuous parking at all. also I cant access council's photos, it seems like theres something wrong with that part of the website. But I did not move the car at all. Here's what I see when I go on their website to view the photos: This post has been edited by Mr Holloway: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 15:46 |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 16:10
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
PM me the car reg and I'll check on a couple of other systems.
|
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 17:19
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
It's a rubbish system - you'll have to ask them to email you the pics. The only one on the second PCN is as below and you can see why they are not cancelling this.
|
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 18:34
Post
#8
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 19 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,007 |
Ok, I will contact them to send me the pictures.
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 15:13
Post
#9
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 19 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,007 |
Hi guys, I've got the pictures from the council. Please can someone advise if I should pay for both tickets or appeal? and if I appeal, how do I go about it?
Photos from ticket 1: |
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 15:17
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
The third photo shows, what could be determined to be de minimis, but adjudicators are human and the P poor parking might well lean them in the other direction. the second one should be cancelled though as that is a finding of law not fact
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 15:23
Post
#11
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 19 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,007 |
Photos from ticket two:
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 16:08
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Looks clearly in contravention to me. I would aim to pay first and get second cancelled.
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 17:04
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,055 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
As regards the contravention, IMO absolutely clear.
What works against the OP is that the actual prohibited area is short, more length of street being taken up by the sloping arms. But because the area is short, your incursion, which for a wider dropped footway could well be considered de minimis, is proportionately greater and IMO no adj would find that it was de minimis. Even less so because of the p-poor parking. Frankly you're lucky the old bill didn't tow you. OP, are you the registered keeper of the vehicle and are your DVLA keeper details up to date i.e. the V5C has your name and current address? If all up to date, I would pay the first at the discount and make reps against the second on the grounds of continuous contravention NOT anything else unless the NTO is flawed. I'm intrigued by late visit to uni which lasted 2 days. |
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 17:09
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
We need to see the back of the PCN.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 17:39
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,915 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
So why didn't you park at the Uni ?
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 13:56 |