HELP- CONTRAVENTION 01 - double yellow lines inside a bay in london spitafields, parking fine for bay over double yellow lines |
HELP- CONTRAVENTION 01 - double yellow lines inside a bay in london spitafields, parking fine for bay over double yellow lines |
Sat, 1 Dec 2018 - 00:31
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 1 Joined: 30 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,220 |
Hiya
please help me with this PCN. I was parked in spitafields in london on a sunday afternoon in a bay that also had double yellow lines going across the bay. Both road markings were faint with no sign. This was on crispin road. The road parallel has the same road markings but with a sign to indicate parking is allowed from 2pm. Checking the zone for parking restrictions, the controlled zone allows for parking after 2pm when using the parking zone map for zone A6. My partner was the driver and as the PCN goes to my company before reaching me, I have just been sent a letter asking me to pay £190. I am going to notify them that I was not the driver and I did not receive the initial correspondents. Do you know of any law against misleading road markings for parking bay over ridding yellow lines? Thanks
Attached File(s)
crispin_rd.pdf ( 197.43K )
Number of downloads: 47
crispin_rd_pics.pdf ( 371.44K ) Number of downloads: 44 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sat, 1 Dec 2018 - 00:31
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sat, 1 Dec 2018 - 00:55
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
You have not been sent anything. Your company has and it is they who are liable. There are other documents in this chain, the PCN and the notice to owner, the first would be affixed to the vehicle the second sent to the RK. What we need to know is what happened to the NTO.
time is not your friend, the next document will be an order for recovery, this too will be sent to your company, and if ignored will lead to bailiffs. So find out where the NTO is sharpish -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sat, 1 Dec 2018 - 09:32
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 348 Joined: 30 Apr 2005 Member No.: 2,852 |
Looking at the old google street view images, the old parking bays were removed and replaced with double yellow lines. However, it looks like they were only over-painted with black thermoplastic or paint rather than permanently burnt off and it has worn off so the bay markings are showing through. In the May 16 GSV they are blacked, but start gradually reappearing in March 17/Feb 18 views.
Scroll through the years https://goo.gl/maps/Vr49ZCwuY1y |
|
|
Sat, 1 Dec 2018 - 09:52
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
Forget the contravention at the moment, it is too late to challenge and not being the driver would not win anyway.
I assume that the Charge Certificate is to the company that you work for ??? (and it is not your company) In which case you have no standing and no liability for the £190, it is the Registered Keeper who is held liable. There may be a contractual agreement (and possible dispute) with the company on payment parking penalties but that is nothing to do with the PCN enforcement. At the moment, the assumption is that:- A PCN was served on the vehicle, you (or your partner) should have found that and had the chance to pay or challenge. A Notice to Owner was sent to the company. That would have given company chance to pay or challenge. And should have notified you as part of any contractual obligation for you to pay. They cannot now expect you to pay the 50% higher amount if they did not deal with the NTO, receive it or notify you of it. Then a Charge Certificate is sent if not paid or challenged. Which is what we see. The critical question is was a NTO received by the company ? If it was and not dealt with, the CC amount is due with no lawful means of challenging. If the NTO was not received, there is an opportunity, via the next Notice, an Order for Recovery to gets things cancelled back to NTO stage. So is whoever is responsible within the company for mail, half soaked enough to ignore a Notice to Owner or good enough that it can be certain they would have dealt with it had it arrived ? |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 05:19 |