PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

854 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

hcandersen
Posted on: Today, 09:08


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


But do it smartly. Remember, the adj's on your side at the moment so nothing too assertive...is the adj also aware that .......

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384301 · Replies: 57 · Views: 2,415

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 21:02


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, your grounds are clear:

©that the vehicle had been permitted to remain at rest in the place in question by a person who was in control of the vehicle without the consent of the owner;


  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384224 · Replies: 21 · Views: 294

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 20:01


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


You won.

Nothing to pay.

The TPT admin. staff have made a mistake, just phone them and point it out.

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384212 · Replies: 89 · Views: 3,122

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 17:34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


In which case, as you can support this with evidence (the payment receipt which was provided by them is dated 19th) you could be on to a winner.

I've never seen one of these before.

You are to be informed in writing that the authority may disregard any reps received by them after 15th June, being the end of the period of 28 days comencing on when you were informed of these right, which is when you or someone authorised by you collects the car.

But they haven't. They've informed you that you have until 14th June.

In short, they convey the mandatory info through two separate docs:

The sheet stating the release date;
The pre-printed form which states your appeal rights.

In combination, these give 14th June.

Strangely, you even signed and dated the sheet 19 May. Didn't you spot that they'd inserted 18th?

Anyway, IMO it's what they write in the form - it's their duty - and no blame could be laid at your feet.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384180 · Replies: 15 · Views: 248

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 17:16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


IMO, all the necessary evidence is here:

PCN accepting that the location is a free parking place;
OP's clear statement that they parked within, that they were parked within and the alleged contravention occurred within the operational times of the parking place on the day;
No evidence on which the authority may rely that parking took place any earlier than 11.07;
That the permitted parking period under the regs commenced at 11.07;
Clear regs which state that :-
No penalty charge is payable for the contravention where the vehicle has been left beyond the permitted parking period for a period not exceeding 10 minutes.
11.17 does not exceed 10 minutes;

Game over, march out...

But not until they've writhed a bit because it is not coincidence that 11.17 is the time of the alleged contravention, this arises not because of the misapplication of regs which they know, but from the application of regs which they don't. So they're likely to squirm at first.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384176 · Replies: 5 · Views: 80

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 17:03


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


NTOs don't offer discounts.

But you're getting warm.

Their letter dated 15 March offered the discount until 1 April, unless you live in Northern Ireland in which case 2 April because Mon. 19 March was a Bank Hol. (14 days beginning on the date of service of the 15/3 letter).


And on the subject of Bank Holidays:

NTO served 30 March. This is a terminological inexactitude. 30 March was a public holiday and no post entered the Royal Mail system on that day, neither was any delivered. So, IMO either way they're stuffed because they cannot claim that 'served' in the CC is a typo for issued, because that would be false anyway.

So, how best to play this given that this misinformation is not necessarily a PI in the normal course of events.

But the course of your events has not been normal.

So, if the NTO was actually issued 30 March, the CC is wrong and the NTO arrived on 5 April, after the discount offer had expired. The issue dates of both the NTO and CC were permitted.

One way is to play a straight bat:

Wait for the OfR. Complete the witness statement - tick the box I did not receive the NTO. Send to TEC as required and in time.
TEC cancel the OfR and direct cancellation of the CC and NTO.

Now two possibilities:
Pay the discount as soon as you receive TEC's letter. if you cannot do this online, then send a cheque first-class or pay by hand, or
Wait for a new NTO.

If you pay the discount and they still issue a NTO, then this is the best outcome, IMO. You make reps on basis that 'penalty exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case', the circumstances being that the authority were prevented from serving a NTO before 1 April by virtue of them extending the discount until this date in their letter dated 15 March, copy enclosed. Therefore based on their evidence, their first NTO was premature by 2 days and you were entitled to pay the discount within a period of 2 days following receipt of TEC's direction letter and order. You do not need to know nor do you want to know when this NTO was actually issued at this point, you are relying on their statement in the CC to support your reps.

If you don't pay the discount and just wait for the new NTO, your case rests on their CC c**k-up and premature issuing of the first, now cancelled, NTO.

They'll be on the backfoot trying to work out how to wriggle out of this dilemma without acknowleding a PI or providing you with false evidence in a statutory notice.

That you did not receive the first NTO is NOT a silver bullet, it happens. You need more as regards this procedural defence.

See what others think.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384172 · Replies: 26 · Views: 996

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 16:06


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, but get the story clear...

....and returned on Friday May 18th at around 4pm.

The next mornin
g, I called the police again to check for an update and they still said nothing had come up in their system. When I got off the phone.....

I found the details of my car on TRACE and immediately took a taxi to pick up my car from the Newham pound. I was told I had to pay a flat fee of £200 for the removal fee, £40 for the offence, and an additional £40 for each day the car was 'stored' in the pound, costing a total of £360.


That's 19th.

OP, over to you please.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384153 · Replies: 15 · Views: 248

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 13:38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Qu.
When can you reach a resolution without a resolution?

Ans.
When you're dealing with a dumb-a**e enforcement authority.



Anyway, case number pl, let's see the decision and whether it gives any hope for costs against them.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384103 · Replies: 17 · Views: 647

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 13:31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Suspension does not de-designate, it merely amends restrictions e.g. instead of any vehicle of any class, only Mr Smith's removal lorry or AN Other statutory undertaker's vehicles and plant etc.

If it wasn't still designated, then with what authority could anyone park there?
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384102 · Replies: 21 · Views: 294

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 13:09


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


The procedure is that you submit a claim to the adjudicator.

You accept that the threshold for obtaining a costs order is high, and rightly so, but in this case you believe that an order would be appropriate.

Not only did the adjudicator allow the appeal on the first and most basic of grounds, namely that the contravention did not occur, their decision made it clear that the authority did not and made no attempt to provide any evidence to support their claim despite continuing to resist the appeal whose arguments repeated those made in all earlier representation i.e. the vehicle did not exceed the permitted limits.

You would further add that although the adjudicator had no reason to consider any of the other issues, had they done so (and you respectfully request that they do) they would have seen that the authority were also in breach of the regulatory limit for serving their NOR. Therefore, not only was their case hopeless at the start, it was hopeless at the end and yet they continued to resist the appeal. Although this is no laughing matter given the trial and stress which the authority's actions have laid upon you, the well-known phrase of General Melchett in Blackadder Goes Forth springs to mind:

'If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.'

You respectfully ask that a costs order (see attached schedule for an itemised breakdown) is made against the authority, not only because it is merited on the facts of the case but perhaps, albeit unofficially, pour encourager les autres - given that shooting them would be frowned upon nowadays.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384097 · Replies: 89 · Views: 3,802

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 12:19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


What type of vehicle e.g. in-built refrigeration unit or similar?

Something made the officer believe that the vehicle's engine was running.

Is there an engine management unit which could be examined? Tachograph or any objective device?
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384084 · Replies: 7 · Views: 232

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 12:12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


WS - witness statement.

For parking PCNs, as TEC have advised.

A WS requires you to tick one box. No phoning required.

The WS's easy.

Your problem is submitting a winning OOT application to which the authority would be likely to object, as is their right. And if your OOT application is not accepted by TEC, then neither would be your WS.

And your argument for the OOT?

With the OOT, you have to explain the 'why', the WS deals with the 'what'.

So, NTO dated 5 Jan. You did not receive because the postman is incompetent or you were not resident at the address on the NTO.
Let's run with the latter for now.
So, why weren't you?

You'd moved - when - and did not make robust arrangements for forwarding of your mail combined with not updating your V5C.

For now.

Do not submit your OOT prematurely, you only get one bite at this with TEC.

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384080 · Replies: 199 · Views: 14,534

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 11:11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


We're still left with grounds for the WS and a winning argument vis a vis the OOT.

They now appear to be related.

WS - you did not receive the NTO. End of, move on.

The OOT. This is where it gets more difficult.

Rather than us trawl through this long thread, you need to deal with the issue of your V5C.

What address was on the V5C at the date of the PCN?
Were you living at that address?
If not, explain why the V5C was incorrect.
When did you update the V5C?

For starters.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384069 · Replies: 199 · Views: 14,534

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 10:56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


delete - irrelevant in context of OP's revelations!
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384062 · Replies: 199 · Views: 14,534

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 10:37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


The SD states clearly that the SD is enclosed.

You say it wasn't, they'll claim it was. IMO, it's a red herring anyway because procedural impropriety is not grounds of appeal.

So, download the form, complete, sign/get witnessed, send to TEC.

Then we can see whether you have grounds for making reps against the PCN...once you've got it.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384057 · Replies: 19 · Views: 214

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 10:23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, your questions take us too far forward, you must start with....the start.

PCN; challenge;their response; NTO; their photos - not more of yours, theirs.

And was the traffic sign on which they rely...is this within the same parking place? GSV and your photos show different road markings: the former shows the parking place ending at the dropped footway, theirs that the parking place continues well beyond- but whether this incorporates the traffic sign is anyone's guess.

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384053 · Replies: 4 · Views: 77

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 10:13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, please focus.

Did you receive a NOR which applied to the PCN in question (and no other, stay focused)?

If so, did you appeal to the adjudicator as instructed?

Forget phoning the council at this point, it might be immaterial. Pl just answer the questions.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384046 · Replies: 199 · Views: 14,534

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 10:06


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, have we seen the PCN? What's the date of the contravention? Have TfL extended any discount with the supply of the video?

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384041 · Replies: 25 · Views: 675

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 08:58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Car removed 15th
Car collected 19th.

Storage charges as at midnight 16th, 17th and 18th = 3*£40=£120 would be my take on this.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1384007 · Replies: 15 · Views: 248

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 07:34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


It's not a concession, it's a limiting condition imposed on the authority by law ....

And....

'It is a criminal offence for you or anyone else to misuse the badge, and doing so could lead to a £1,000 fine and confiscation of the badge..'

Plus it makes a tempting target for thieves.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1383978 · Replies: 9 · Views: 142

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 21 May 2018 - 21:04


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/638526/blue-badge-rights-responsibilities.pdf

Pages 7 and 8.

It may not be displayed on the off-chance that an entitled person might be the next user. The driver is not the holder.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1383915 · Replies: 9 · Views: 142

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 21 May 2018 - 20:30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


1st correspondence regarding this PCN was Charge Certificate, never received PCN etc.


And yet you've posted the PCN. Pl explain.

Anyway, assuming you came by this later then submit a SD. That they did not enclose one is not IMO a winning line at appeal, so just download it - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...y-charge-notice

Note the potential penalties for filing a false declaration.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1383900 · Replies: 19 · Views: 214

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 21 May 2018 - 20:16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


So exactly what do permit holders expect?

On the one hand they pay for a permit, the income from which pays for enforcement of their entitlement to park, which they must accept means exercising the ultimate right to remove unentitled vehicles. And on the other they complain when, through their own mistake, they are the unentitled vehicle.

Is it an 'invalid' permit with the holder just forgetful, or a holder who has moved or has no intention of renewing? And whose obligation is it to check?

Just make your points, but temper your temper.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1383893 · Replies: 15 · Views: 248

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 21 May 2018 - 20:01


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Good plan to keep the badge on display - it's protection against a venal council like Tower Hamlets.


Don't, it's potentially unlawful.

It's a blue badge, not a carte blanche.

If you are correct, you win. If you're not, then you probably won't.

You and your wife say there was no sign as at 15th. So put this to the authority in your reps.

And you must require them to state why, as they had the option to move the vehicle to another place on a road, they removed your car to the pound, and reference this to their parking enforcement policy which you should require them to provide.

Forget indignation. As much as anything else, reps are a means of testing their position. So, less of you shouldn't have done and more of why did you?
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1383888 · Replies: 9 · Views: 142

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 21 May 2018 - 17:09


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


The answer is still....it depends.

We've seen cases where the 'wrong' person was pursued by the authority in the first instance - a procedure which can take months - and then when the correct person hove into view they, legally, changed tack and pursued them. And the person liable is not the recipient of the PCN, other than by coincidence, it's the 'owner'.

The key date was not that of the contravention but when the person who is liable was first notified.

Anyway, you've thrown in another curve ball: you say you received a PCN, but now you don't know the contravention. Possible, perhaps? Probable? No.

Keep drip-feeding info at this rate and it could be 2 years, let alone one.

Or if you don't want our help...
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1383826 · Replies: 18 · Views: 318

854 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

New Posts  New Replies
No New Posts  No New Replies
Hot topic  Hot Topic (New)
No new  Hot Topic (No New)
Poll  Poll (New)
No new votes  Poll (No New)
Closed  Locked Topic
Moved  Moved Topic
 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Wednesday, 23rd May 2018 - 11:11
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.