PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN contravention 62 at the entrance of garage
Giank
post Fri, 20 Oct 2017 - 10:53
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 20 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,664



Hi all,

I received a PCN (copies at the end of this post) from TfL for contravention 62: "Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway."

All I was actually doing was entering a Hertz's garage to return a vehicle.
Here's a picture(with details blurred for privacy reasons), that should speak for itself.



The cars inside the garage were not moving quickly and so I stayed in the same position for a few of minutes and this appears to be enough to issue a fine.

Here are a couple of considerations:

1) is the space I am on with the car considered a foothpath?

2) From the road, before turning left to enter the garage, I could not possibly see the vehicle that is in front of me in the picture above or predict how long it would take for it to free the "foothpath".
Once in that position it would have been a far more dangerous offence to back my vehicle up (this is on Edgware road, a very busy road indeed, here is a screenshot from Google Maps).



Also, even if had noticed that the entrance to the garage was not entirely free, I could not have waited at the side of the road as there is a continuous double red line long miles.
What could I do differently?

3) I never left the vehicle until inside the garage, when I gave the keys back to Hertz (according to their records at 08:24 on the 29/08/2017, i.e. 8 minutes after the contravention which include the vehicle check from a Hertz's employee). This is evident by the stop lights being on in all the pictures collected by the CCTV.
According to Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 section 15 (As to parking on footways, grass verges, etc.) at point (3) states:
"A person shall not be convicted of an offence under this section with respect to a vehicle if he proves to the satisfaction of the court that the vehicle was parked—
(d)for the purpose of loading or unloading goods, and—
(i)the loading or unloading of the vehicle could not have been satisfactorily performed if it had not been so parked; and
(ii)the vehicle was not left unattended at any time while it was so parked."

I wasn't unloading the vehicle but I was dropping the actual vehicle. I could not possibly stop/park elsewhere given the double red line and I never left the vehicle unattended. Does this section apply to my case?



I want to challenge the PCN as it feels unfair, but I am not sure if I am in the right and what is the best way to proceed.

So if anyone know about this and could help clear this up for me I would be most grateful!

Thanks.











This post has been edited by Giank: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 - 13:04
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 23)
Advertisement
post Fri, 20 Oct 2017 - 10:53
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sat, 11 Nov 2017 - 12:43
Post #21


Member


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



Good result and good for Hertz too although I would have been surprised if the supposedly no 1 hire firm wouldn't refund the fee.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Sat, 11 Nov 2017 - 19:46
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,912
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



Well done, congratulations !!
What sticks in my throat is the last sentence of their letter, where PCNs issued in the same or similar identical circumstances may not be cancelled ! And just why not, may I ask the High and Mighty Managers of Transport for London !! You venal mountbanks !
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John U.K.
post Sat, 11 Nov 2017 - 19:51
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,308
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,515



QUOTE
What sticks in my throat is the last sentence of their letter, where PCNs issued in the same or similar identical circumstances may not be cancelled !


Their computer knows not how to take it out of a letter of acceptance.... and what's this about 'withdrawing your appeal' rather than not contesting?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Deficit
post Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 20:47
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 22 Feb 2017
From: Bristol
Member No.: 90,446



QUOTE
"Don't faff around with technicalities about the PCN"

Haven't had a proper look, but there is one technicality in the PCN that should be challenged. page3

"your representation may be disregarded if it is received more than 28 days after service of this notice" This is not the correct time allowed in law and TfL know it


What is the correct time allowed in law?

This post has been edited by Deficit: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 20:48
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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 - 08:24
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