Parking ticket, contravention:27, Grounds for appeal parking adjacent to a dropped kerb in residential a |
Parking ticket, contravention:27, Grounds for appeal parking adjacent to a dropped kerb in residential a |
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 11:50
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 30 Joined: 9 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,862 |
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 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 11:50
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 11:52
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Start by posting the pcn photos and a GSV link
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 11:52
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
Lets see the PCN, CEo pictures and a streetview link please.
|
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 11:59
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
use a pic site such as Flickr for pics.
|
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 13:25
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 30 Joined: 9 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,862 |
I have added relevant pictures, can people see these?
Thanks |
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 13:39
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
|
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 15:32
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 30 Joined: 9 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,862 |
Ok bare with me, this is proving difficult. I uploaded to Flickr but can’t seem to send back.
|
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 16:01
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
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 |
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 16:07
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 30 Joined: 9 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,862 |
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 |
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 16:16
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
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. This post has been edited by stamfordman: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 16:43 |
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 17:37
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,063 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
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. |
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 17:46
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
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. +1 -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 20:45
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 30 Joined: 9 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,862 |
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 |
|
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 20:54
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
File the challenge online if Hillingdon allows and keep screenshots/copies of everything.
It is good practice to post a draft here first. |
|
|
Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 08:02
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 30 Joined: 9 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,862 |
Ok great, I will drag something this morning and post it.
|
|
|
Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 14:51
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 30 Joined: 9 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,862 |
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 |
|
|
Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 14:57
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
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. This post has been edited by stamfordman: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 14:59 |
|
|
Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 14:58
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
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. no contravention occurs.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 Delete the blue add the red. Obstruction is not a factor in the contravention Thank you -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 15:16
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 30 Joined: 9 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,862 |
Thanks that is useful feedback
|
|
|
Fri, 9 Feb 2018 - 11:36
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 30 Joined: 9 Jan 2018 Member No.: 95,862 |
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 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 22:33 |