PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

NTO Leeds City Council - Permit sign but no corresponding lines, What are the rules???
Mailshere
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 19:09
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Member No.: 89,109



Hi there,

NTO received for the PCN details below.
Evidence can be found via the link here : https://parkingfines.leeds.gov.uk

Reg: SG60EAE
PCN: LS11728264

Yes the vehicle is parked in front of a permit sign but there is no marked bay and no yellow line.

Clear google maps link here: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.8047098,-...3312!8i6656

My vehicle was parked where the blue corsa is in this link - i have checked the TRO and they do not match the YLs that are actually there!

Thanks

This post has been edited by Mailshere: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 19:16
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 18)
Advertisement
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 19:09
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Incandescent
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 19:26
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,914
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



I would think you're in a Resident Parking Zone, and the sign you saw is one of the repeaters. No road markings are needed at all for these zones unless there is a specific need, as for a disabled bay. If this is the case, you're bang to rights as you are right by the repeater sign. Did you look at it before you walked away ?

GSV is 2015, plenty of time for alterations to the parking arrangements, so please post some pictures of how it looks now.

This post has been edited by Incandescent: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 19:28
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 19:27
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



I don't think the evidence is clear is a permit zone or is this a permit bay either way the correct contravention should be code 11 Parked without payment of the parking charge


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mailshere
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 19:31
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Member No.: 89,109



GSV is bang up to date DYL unto where the Corsa is parked then that sign. The CPZ are at the bottom of every street surrounding that road and clearly marked by gate signs. Of course i saw the sign but there is no markings to suggest where it relates to as everywhere around there is DYL, YL or CPZ with entrance signs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 19:36
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,914
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 20:27) *
I don't think the evidence is clear is a permit zone or is this a permit bay either way the correct contravention should be code 11 Parked without payment of the parking charge

I think it is a resident scheme: -

http://www.leedstraffweb.co.uk/main.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mailshere
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 19:38
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Member No.: 89,109



So should there be a clearly defined yellow line or parking space? Traffweb won't work on my mac sad.gif have to use it at work
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 20:19
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,914
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



QUOTE (Mailshere @ Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 20:38) *
So should there be a clearly defined yellow line or parking space? Traffweb won't work on my mac sad.gif have to use it at work

No, that is the whole point about a RPZ, they require no yellow lines or marked spaces, as all the streets in the zones are for resident parking only.The only lines they can put down are double-yellows that bar parking 24x7 even for residents. However a key element of an RPZ are the signs at the entrance(s) to the zone announcing "Resident parking only beyond this point". These MUST be in place and if they aren't you have an appeal case.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mailshere
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 20:35
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Member No.: 89,109



This is not a RPZ / CPZ as stated. On this very road the RPZ entrance gates are clearly marked further down if you check the google maps link! This formed part of my initial response to them which they declined to accept.

The response to my email which included pictures of my vehicle 100m+ before the entrance signs to the multiple RPZ surrounding this road:

'Thank you for your email regarding the above PCN.

The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a permit zone without displaying a permit.'

I can't link to the traffweb TROs but have a look on there you can clearly see each RPZ/CPZ.

Thanks for your replies so far smile.gif

This post has been edited by Mailshere: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 20:37
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 20:47
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,050
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



???

Evidence.

A photo of a traffic sign which regulates a parking place which is required to be marked with prescribed road markings, but isn't.

Let's stop second guessing (RPZ is irrelevant, it's not the cited contravention) and permit holder zone (which would allow the authority to dispense with markings) doesn't apply because there's no evidence (at least as far as you've posted) that one exists and the contravention doesn't refer to a zone.

On the basis of what you've posted the contravention did not occur.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 20:48
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 20:52
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



It's the road just across from Lovell Park Gate. The dotted areas are RPZs. There doesn't seem to be anything apart from the DYLs there.

EDIT - I have put a marker where I think the car was.



This post has been edited by stamfordman: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 20:58
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 20:59
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,050
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



RPZ is irrelevant, it establishes a waiting restriction whereas this is a parking place contravention.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 21:02
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 21:04
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 21:59) *
RPZ is irrelevant, it establishes a waiting restriction whereas this is a parking place contravention.



Which is why I said there's nothing there. Just unrestricted road on one side after DYLs end, according to Leeds TraffWeb.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mailshere
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 21:06
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Member No.: 89,109



Thanks Hcandersen for being straight to the point and Stamfordman you are correct thanks for posting that for me! So my response to the NtO is simply the contravention did not occur. I clearly submitted evidence of no road markings in my initial email so will submit these again in the 'formal appeal'.

Anything else I should include?

smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 21:36
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,914
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



OK, so what seems to have happened is the CEO has issued a PCN with a contravention that doesn't match the RPZ, because the street is in an RPZ according to the Leeds information.

However, I think one should note that an informal challenge is likely to be rejected, thus forcing the OP to wait for the Notice to Owner when the PCN might be cancelled on submission of a formal appeal.But, of course, it might not, so then the OP will have to take them to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. However nothing is lost by making the challenge and seeing what they say. Just making sure the OP understands what is involved in these things.

This post has been edited by Incandescent: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 21:37
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mailshere
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 22:13
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Member No.: 89,109



Incandescent what evidence is there that this is in a RPZ? You have stated 'according to the leeds information' but from the above post from stamfordman there is clearly no restrictions in place if I am correct?

In this case would it still stand that the contravention did not occur even if this is a RPZ because of the contravention the CEO has used?

I understand the process to follow with losing out on the discounted rate and I have the NtO smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 22:17
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



I think Mr I is not right - there is nothing at all on Traffweb where you parked. Rien, nada, nichts, This presumes it is up to date.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mailshere
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 22:21
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Member No.: 89,109



I drive this route and park next to here 5 days a week and there are no entrance signs for a RPZ just numerous CPZ around the area and parking bays clearly signposted and marked on the road. In this location there may be a sign but no road markings of an actual space.

My understanding is for a permit space not in a CPZ/RPZ there has to be a sign and clear road markings defining the space. For example - I often park in a taxi rank in leeds city centre which is clearly marked Taxi on the road paint but has no sign in place and I never get a ticket (neither do any others drivers who have found this spot much to my annoyance ha)

This post has been edited by Mailshere: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 22:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 22:26
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,914
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



OK, I may well be wrong, but lets see what happens at appeal. If everybody is right the PCN will be cancelled, but it may be necessary to go all the way to TPT
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mailshere
post Sun, 22 Oct 2017 - 22:52
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Member No.: 89,109



From my last point above they haven't complied with this:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/7/made
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 10:05
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here