I parked in on a quiet residential road in between 2 driveways, a dropped kerb either side. I was not blocking any acess to the driveway. My car is long so the bumper was slightly over the sloped part of the dropped kerb not the flat part. I have viewed there pictures which are very dark and unclear. I was given the ticket on the grounds of:
Parked in a special enforcement area adjacent to a foot way, cycle track or verge lowered to meet the level of the carriageway.
Could you please advise how I best appeal this.
Thank you
Start by posting the pcn photos and a GSV link
Lets see the PCN, CEo pictures and a streetview link please.
use a pic site such as Flickr for pics.
I have added relevant pictures, can people see these?
Thanks
Ok bare with me, this is proving difficult. I uploaded to Flickr but can’t seem to send back.
Ah our favourite code 27 borough, Hillingdon.
If you email me all the council pics I'll put them up. Did you take any yourself?
Email: marcb@csi.com
The pictures they have are very unclear, I do have one which is clearer showing how part of my bumper slightly overhangs the slopped part, I can post this if it’s useful?
Oh I see, this seems a problem in that borough then!!
I have posted one of them, the rest are only showing the parking ticket and the front of my car
My picture
Is that the council pic? It seems it is not a contravention as only on sloping bit. Hillingdon though deem the sloping bit as in contravention. But they is wrong.
However it is blocking part of the drive-in so there may be a struggle over this one.
On the basis of this photo, there could not have been a contravention at this end of the car and an adjudicator would be bound to find as such.
The front of the car is short of the crazy-paved part of the crossover and this in turn encroaches onto the sloped kerb as can be seen in GSV. Therefore no contravention and any obstruction/annoyance of resident is not a determinant factor.
OP, you need to focus on this end.
I would have doubts about the rear of your car, however. But this is for the authority to make, not you to defend, particularly in the absence of any hard evidence on your part in support.
The first very dark photo is theirs, the last clearer one is mine, so they don’t even seem to have clear pictures.thank you so much for the advice, I will write a letter explaining this and see how it goes.
Thanks again
File the challenge online if Hillingdon allows and keep screenshots/copies of everything.
It is good practice to post a draft here first.
Ok great, I will drag something this morning and post it.
Dear Sir or Madam,
PCN:
Vehicle Registration Number :
I received a penalty Charge notice on 6th January 2018 at 19:45 for contravention:27. Parked in a special enforcement area adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge lowered .
In accordance with the Traffic Management Act 2004, my challenge is that the contravention as stated above simply did not occur. The front of the car does not encroach onto the lowered kerb therefore did not cause any obstruction of the resident as a determinant factor.
For this reason, I look forward to receiving notification that the Penalty Charge Notice has been cancelled.
Yours faithfully
Above is a draft letter, can anyone give me feedback if this sounds sufficient
Thank you
I would change the middle part to the below and enclose your pic but wait for others.
In accordance with the Traffic Management Act 2004, my challenge is that the contravention as stated above did not occur. The front of the car does not encroach onto the fully lowered part of the kerb.
I enclose a picture showing that the front of my car was adjacent only to the sloping part of the kerb, which is not a contravention under code 27.
Thanks that is useful feedback
So I finally received a rejection of my first formal representation stating that the mitigation was not sufficient to justify cancellation of the PNC.
I assume I now need to do a formal complaint, can anyone advise me please?
Thank you
Post their reply please.
Please post up a copy of the rejection, redacted as usual.
Hi there, I am
Now going to make a formal appeal, if this is rejected can I then be liable to pay the higher fine ?
Thank you
Ok I am going to upload the photo of the letter
Thanks
Jeez sometimes i think they should be shot.
This adjudicator defines the law correctly
2160311942
This appeal was set down for a personal hearing at 10:00 am on 17 August 2016. Neither party attended.
The Authority says that the contravention occurred because the vehicle parked past the point where the kerb starts to slope. This is an incorrect understanding of the law.
Section 86 (1) of the Traffic Management Act 2004 provides that (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 one of the purposes stated in the section.
This means that the dropped kerb is the part of the kerb which meets the level of the carriageway and does not include the sloping kerbs on either side.
In misdirecting itself on the key and fundamental point of law when considering the Appellant's representations, there is a procedural impropriety on the part of the Authority.
I should say that by applying the correct test, I am satisfied that the Appellant's vehicle was just over the proper dropped kerb but it was so marginal that I find it to be de minimus.
I allow the appeal.
Yes, they are unlikely to reoffer the discount at formal appeal but may well do if they reject as they must know they are on shaky ground.
Have you posted all the pictures - council and yours - that show the front of car and kerb?
Cat22 you should definitely not pay, for the reasons explained by PMB at post 24, you are virtually guaranteed to win at adjudication. Stick to your guns, they're wrong.
IIRC where you have a residential driveway they cannot issue a PCN unless enforcement has been requested:- 2140506235
Has it, or am I mistaken?
Mick
Great thanks for the information from the adjudicator.
As far as I know the parking ticket states the officer observed the car, not than anyone reported it.
I posted the clearest photo from their site, it’s pretty hard to even see the kerb of location of my car in their photos. The one I posted of my own is the clearest.
Is there a specific template I need in order to make a formal appeal?
Do I just email it back to Hillingdon parking just as I did for informal appeal?
Thank you
You need to wait for the notice to owner (NTO) to make the formal appeal. Is the car registered to you at your address? Check the V5C log book now to see exactly what address the council will use to send the NTO. Although as you've had a letter already the address is probably fine. How did you make your initial challenge?
I made my first informal complaint by email direct to them. Oh I see, so I need to wait then start the formal one. Thank you
Ok that’s great, thank you for the help.
I will wait for the NTO.
So I have finally received my notice to owner. I need to submit formal appeal now. Would you suggest using similar words as the post detailing the adjudicator findings? I can draft something and add it here for feedback.
Thank you
Thanks, here is the NTO
This is a rough draft of what i want to email to them to represent my appeal, could someone please give me some feedback and should i include my photo?
thank you
My Address
Reference: PNC number, date
I am writing to formally challenge the above penalty charge notice
On 6th January 2018 my vehicle (reg number) was issued with a Penalty Charge Notice for the reason of contravention 27, parked in a special enforcement area adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge lowered to meet the level of the carriageway in (road name and area). The authority says that the contravention occurred because the vehicle parked at the point where the kerb starts to slope. This is an incorrect understanding of the law.
Section 86 (1) of the Traffic Management Act 2004 provides that (in a special enforcement area) a vehicle must not be parked on a carriageway or verge where the footway, cycle track or verge has been lowered to meet the carriageway for one of the purposes stated in the section.
my challenge is on the basis that the contravention did not occur because the dropped kerb is part of the kerb which meets the level of the carriageway and does no include the sloping kerbs on either side.
Please find enclosed evidence to this effect, in the form of [should I include my photos showing where my car is parked just over the sloping kerb as included in this post].
For this reason, I look forward to receiving notification that the Penalty Charge Notice has been cancelled within 28 days.
Yours faithfully,
For once I'm really confident we can get this cancelled at the formal reps stage. I've added a few things, also include a copy of this: http://i67.tinypic.com/4h87l3.jpg this https://www.scribd.com/document/375221729/Gmail-Complaint-Re-Misleading-Information-Published-on-Council-Website and this http://oi65.tinypic.com/2ql5tw6.jpg (I will send you a PM with the complaint reference).
-------------------------------------
I am writing to formally challenge the above penalty charge notice
On 6th January 2018 my vehicle (reg number) was issued with a Penalty Charge Notice for the reason of contravention 27, parked in a special enforcement area adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge lowered to meet the level of the carriageway in (road name and area). The authority says that the contravention occurred because the vehicle parked at the point where the kerb starts to slope. While each case turns on its own facts, previous adjudications can be persuasive and I submit that the decision of Adjudicator Anthony Chan in appeal 2160311942 (Right Contract Services LTD v London Borough of Hillingdon) is relevant in this case:
"The Authority says that the contravention occurred because the vehicle parked past the point where the kerb starts to slope. This is an incorrect understanding of the law.
Section 86 (1) of the Traffic Management Act 2004 provides that (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 one of the purposes stated in the section.
This means that the dropped kerb is the part of the kerb which meets the level of the carriageway and does not include the sloping kerbs on either side.
In misdirecting itself on the key and fundamental point of law when considering the Appellant's representations, there is a procedural impropriety on the part of the Authority."
The council has rejected my informal representations on the basis that the contravention occurs if the vehicle is parked adjacent to the sloping part of the kerb, and has included the enclosed advice sheet. I should point out that, at the time the PCN was issued, the same incorrect advice also appeared on the council's website at https://www.hillingdon.gov.uk/enforcementofdroppedkerbs and a formal complaint was raised with the council by a member of the public under reference XXXXXX (copy enclosed)
The enclosed letter was provided in response to that complaint, this confirms the advice previously provided by the council needed updating, and the reference to the sloped part of the kerb has now been removed from https://www.hillingdon.gov.uk/enforcementofdroppedkerbs
It therefore appears that whoever dealt with the informal representations might not have had the benefit of this new information.
Please find enclosed photographic evidence showing my car was parked adjacent to the sloped part of the kerb, but not the adjacent to the part of the kerb that meets the level of the carriageway.
In light of the above, I look forward to receiving your Notice of Acceptance within 56 days.
Thank you so much, I this information is really useful, I feel more confident that my appeal will win !!!
PM'ed Cat22 and apparently the council caved in in the end
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)