PCN Parking Motorcycle on Pavement, PCN Parking Motorcycle on Pavement |
PCN Parking Motorcycle on Pavement, PCN Parking Motorcycle on Pavement |
Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 17:44
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 16 Jan 2019 Member No.: 101,946 |
I received a PCN stating:
QUOTE Parked or loading/unloading in a restricted street where waiting and loading/unloading restrictions are in force Contravention Code: 02 Observed 12:37 to 12:41 I appealed and got a reply: QUOTE This penalty charge notice was issued as the area in which your vehicle was parked is clearly marked with yellow lines. Yellow lines indicate there are waiting restrictions and a vehicle should not be left unattended on these areas during the restricted time. Where there is a single yellow line there will be signs to indicate what the restrictions are however double yellow lines do not require any signage as they are enforceable 24 hours. Please note that the enforcement area of double yellow lines is from the centre of the carriageway to the boundary of the adjacent property; this includes the pavement, verges and access areas. But of course, there is no indication of property boundaries. Or is there? From a purely pragmatic perspective, my vehicle was causing no issues, I was parked in a way that didnt obstruct any operation of the pavement or road and no wheels were on the road. Also there was a rubbish bin and bench at the same spot...so clearly items on the pavement arent causing an issue....also the bin and bench didnt get PCNs either! I've parked at that point a dozen times and also on many other pavements (being careful not to cause an obstruction) and never had an issue before....would I have been fine if there weren't any double yellow lines? Just pay the fine and chalk it up as a learning experience? This post has been edited by tootomthumb: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 17:46 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 17:44
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 18:10
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
Looks bang to rights on the contravention.
What were you doing whilst parked there? -------------------- |
|
|
Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 18:10
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,912 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
You are bang-to-rights on the contravention, but post up the PCN anyway as it may contain fatal errors of content that render it void.
|
|
|
Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 18:20
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,860 Joined: 12 May 2012 Member No.: 54,871 |
Please post up the PCN, your appeal and their reply in full but with Reg. No., PCN No. and your personal details obscured/redacted.
A Google Street View reference/link to the location would also be helpful. You are bang to rights on the contravention itself, so we're looking for a technical defence, such as the wording of the PCN itself or in their reply. The property boundary will be the frontage of the shops, and obstruction (or not) is irrelevant. Outside London, had no yellow lines been present, and providing you weren't in a CPZ, you would have been OK. This post has been edited by DastardlyDick: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 20:30 |
|
|
Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 22:50
Post
#5
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 16 Jan 2019 Member No.: 101,946 |
Thanks to all of you for taking the time to consider my situation. I was visiting a number of shops on the high street, probably took around 20-25 minutes in total.
Google Map: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.1944239,0.2...3312!8i6656 I've attached the PCN, my email appeal and also the rejection letter. Clearly, I didn't know the law in regards to double yellow (extending into the pavement) so at least I will come away from this a little wiser. Also regardless of the outcome....what a fantastic site and community! |
|
|
Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 22:58
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,912 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Sorry we couldn't be of more help. The income from parking PCNs is now a major cash earner for most councils, certainly those of large cities where parking space is so small in relation to demand. So now you know the basic rules on yellow lines.
A learning opportunity in Life's Rich Pageant !! |
|
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 10:30
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 972 Joined: 25 Jul 2010 Member No.: 39,245 |
Motorcyclists, like all other motorists, need to familiarise themselves with the laws, and when it comes to parking it usually comes down to reading the policy of the council on their website as they differ.
Looking up Tonbridge in Kent you can park only for free in dedicated motorcycle bays. There is one in this car park https://www.google.co.uk/maps/uv?hl=en&...dB5Z7m7xdR8j_cg |
|
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 10:58
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,049 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
OP, the motorcycle theory test includes road signs, including those related to parking whose meaning and extent is set out clearly i.e. includes verges and pavement.
How did the system leave you exposed with indufficient knowledge? |
|
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 14:15
Post
#9
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 16 Jan 2019 Member No.: 101,946 |
OP, the motorcycle theory test includes road signs, including those related to parking whose meaning and extent is set out clearly i.e. includes verges and pavement. How did the system leave you exposed with indufficient knowledge? I wouldn't be able to tell you if it did or didn't, it was some time ago. I suppose I was using logic and the fact I've done it for years without issue. Assuming parking on the pavement doesn't involve riding on it, doesn't block pedestrians and certainly doesn't block the road traffic, I just couldn't see how or why the double yellow would apply to the pavement - it never crossed my mind that it could. I wouldn't have attempted parking on a verge because I still see that as part of the road, whereas vehicles are specifically prohibited from riding on pavements so I assumed they were not part of that road restriction. Clearly, from a legal perspective I was wrong, but can anyone enlighten me as to the logic behind it? Also if I had instead parked on the pavement next to the loading/unloading zone which isn't part of the double yellow would I have been OK? Or does the 5-minute loading and unloading limit apply to the pavement as well? This post has been edited by tootomthumb: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 16:16 |
|
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 16:36
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,049 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
Clearly, from a legal perspective I was wrong, but can anyone enlighten me as to the logic behind it?
Logic as in why when there are yellow lines and none (but see below) when there are not: there is none. A footway is a footway and pedestrians couldn't give a fig whether waiting on the carriageway is restricted or not, because that's not where they're walking, is it! A word to the wise, in Greater London parking on the pavement at any time is a contravention, irrespective of carriageway markings. Councils country-wide are pressing for this to be extended nationally otherwise they're powerless to stop parking on the footway other than when there are yellow lines. Some authorities have been known to issue PCNs when there are on-street parking places using the pretext of parking beyond the markings, so be wary. And of course the police could issue a FPN if they caught you. |
|
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 17:02
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 972 Joined: 25 Jul 2010 Member No.: 39,245 |
To avoid PCNs just look up what are the motorcycle parking restrictions for where you are visiting.
In that particular town you park free in dedicated motorcycle bays so do your research including finding out where they are. I managed that just by looking up on the internet and found a car-park that has one. |
|
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 18:03
Post
#12
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 16 Jan 2019 Member No.: 101,946 |
Clearly, from a legal perspective I was wrong, but can anyone enlighten me as to the logic behind it? Logic as in why when there are yellow lines and none (but see below) when there are not: there is none. A footway is a footway and pedestrians couldn't give a fig whether waiting on the carriageway is restricted or not, because that's not where they're walking, is it! I mean why the logic of extending the area of effect of a double yellow to the pavement. If double yellows are to avoid road congestion what is the (il)logic/justification of extending that to the pavement ESPECIALLY when you consider the fact that blocking or causing a hazard on any pavement can already get you a FPN? I'm merely curious and not arguing against the facts.... |
|
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 18:32
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
See para 20.3 here
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/go...-chapter-05.pdf The definition of road is from property boundary on one side to property boundary on the other carriageway is the part reserved for vehicles -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 19:44
Post
#14
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 16 Jan 2019 Member No.: 101,946 |
That is very interesting because the paragraph you've referenced says: QUOTE The restriction imposed by these markings applies from the centre of the road to the highway boundary on the side of the road that the marking is laid (including any lay-bys). I think it would be fair to say that any layman (in road jargon) such as myself, would read that to be the actual road asphalt and not the pavement beyond the road surface. I searched the entire Chapter 5 manual...all 162 pages and nowhere in there is a definition for the "highway boundary". I would also read that paragraph to mean the restriction doesn't apply past the "lay-by" since lay-bys are explicitly mentioned. It seems to me that you would have to be a legal expert to understand the laws as laid out in that publication. |
|
|
Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 00:02
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
tootomthumb upload the back of the PCN, there can be errors in the small print that make it invalid.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 10:15
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,049 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
OP, the law is clear.
Pavements are for walking and the logic for extending the restriction to this area is clear: there are drivers around who think that just because they cannot park on the carriageway won't stop them, they'll park on the pavement instead. And with such motorists on the loose it is of course necessary to extend the restriction to the footway in order to avoid the nonsensical situation where the carriageway is clear but the footway's like a car park. But leaving aside motorists, pedestrians have a right to travel the Queen's highway on foot without hindrance and that there isn't an enforceable contravention available to councils to ensure this in all cases (without converting every inch of carriageway into a no parking area) is currently under review. You have no defence against the contravention. Mitigation is your best bet and your chances would not be enhanced if you challenged with an 'attitude'. C'est la vie. |
|
|
Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 12:15
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
You have no defence against the contravention. Mitigation is your best bet and your chances would not be enhanced if you challenged with an 'attitude'. C'est la vie. I reiterate, errors on the back of the PCN give more hope, if only the OP will show us. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 09:16 |