PCN Contravention 21 – ISLINGTON BAY SUSPENSION |
PCN Contravention 21 – ISLINGTON BAY SUSPENSION |
Mon, 10 Feb 2020 - 06:40
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 592 Joined: 2 Nov 2010 From: north london Member No.: 41,774 |
I parked my car on my road, on 23rd Jan 2020, not directly outside my house but approx. 5 houses down, as is a busy road since Islington repositioned Arsenal stadium. Also there is now an Arsenal ticket booth shop across the road, approx. 15 houses down. On 6th Feb 2020, I found my car missing. As I saw a suspension notice for 3rd to 5th of Feb, (which was removed by the time I had walked up and down the road looking for my car) and bollards on the pavement around some builder’s works, I suspected the council moved my car. Unfortunately, they didn’t move it to another space on the same road, but around the corner, which I was informed when I rang the council.
I had to tear off the yellow sticker, the blue one came off easily, as I had an appointment. Do I have any grounds for an appeal? PCN FRONT PCN BACK SUSPENSION NOTICE YELLOW STICKER BLUE STICKER This post has been edited by cc120: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 - 08:53 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 10 Feb 2020 - 06:40
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 15 Mar 2020 - 20:44
Post
#41
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 592 Joined: 2 Nov 2010 From: north london Member No.: 41,774 |
|
|
|
Sun, 15 Mar 2020 - 21:24
Post
#42
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,308 Joined: 9 May 2014 Member No.: 70,515 |
QUOTE if I lose will I have to pay £130 or more? IF you stick to deadlines then £130 is the maximum you might have to pay if unsuccessful. If formal reps against the NTO are unsuccessful the Council may re-offer the discount to tempt you into parting with something. If you appeal to the tribunal and if you are unsuccessful you will have to pay £130. If successful you pay nothing. |
|
|
Sun, 15 Mar 2020 - 22:00
Post
#43
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 592 Joined: 2 Nov 2010 From: north london Member No.: 41,774 |
QUOTE if I lose will I have to pay £130 or more? IF you stick to deadlines then £130 is the maximum you might have to pay if unsuccessful. If formal reps against the NTO are unsuccessful the Council may re-offer the discount to tempt you into parting with something. If you appeal to the tribunal and if you are unsuccessful you will have to pay £130. If successful you pay nothing. Thank you John U.K.. As a successful outcome is not guaranteed I am tempted to pay the £65. I do have up to the 30th March to decide, therefore I will be ruminating for a couple of weeks. |
|
|
Mon, 16 Mar 2020 - 13:39
Post
#44
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
You mentioned something about being unable to leave the house due to being unwell, this could strengthen your case so tell us more. How much of your personal medical information you wish to share on here is obviously up to you, but if you could tell us what the underlying condition was, what the change of medication was and whether there's any confirmation that it might have made you feel unwell (list of side effects from the medicine's leaflet, doctor's note telling you to change your medication again or stop taking it...) that is something we can use.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 16 Mar 2020 - 14:40
Post
#45
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,577 Joined: 16 Aug 2010 From: People's Republic of Lambeth Member No.: 39,819 |
Well in Alan Francis v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (2160242963, 11 July 2016) it was held that a 16 day period was not an unreasonable amount of time to leave a car parked, of course whether another adjudicator would agree that a period of 11 days is reasonable or not cannot be guaranteed. It's notable the council says the signs were put up more than 10 days before the restrictions came into force, but no date is given. As your car was repositioned, it seems the council accepts your car was parked before the signs went up. Personally I would carry on. The council in their letter of rejection said QUOTE I would advise that the suspension signs were erected alongside the bay on 23 January 2020, several days before the suspension order was due to come into force. So OP is effectively saying he parked on the same day that the suspension warning signs went up, just earlier in the day. I am not sure this really changes anything of substance. It comes down to this perennial arguement about whether the motorist has an obligation to check his car periodically just in case a bay gets suspended. "What about when I go on holiday for two weeks?" says the motorist. "Have a neighbour check on your car says the council." "All very well", says the motorist "but what am I supposed to do if my neighbour rings me in Portugal and tells me that they have suspended the bay?" "Leave your car keys with the neighbour" says the Council. "Either I don't trust any of my neighbours with my car keys, or more likely they are not insured to drive my car" says the motorist. You can see this one can run and run. I fear that the council will not give way at the formal representation stage. They will say "11 days is plenty of warning and if you didn't check your car in that time then too bad. At least we didn't tow it to the pound". If you take it adjudication then you are effectively asking the adjudicator to direct the council to exercise their discretion to cancel the PCN, which is outside his remit. It goes against the grain, but unless you can come up with some pretty compelling medical support for your claim that you were unable to check on your car, I would be tempted to pay at the reduced rate. -------------------- Chaseman
|
|
|
Mon, 16 Mar 2020 - 16:38
Post
#46
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
If you take it adjudication then you are effectively asking the adjudicator to direct the council to exercise their discretion to cancel the PCN, which is outside his remit. This is not the case at all, see Peter Brosnan v London Borough of Brent (2180194309, 18 June 2018). In essence the issue boils down to this: the tribunal takes the view that it can't be right that you park your car lawfully, maybe you've even paid to do so, and within half an hour the council comes along, puts up a suspension sign, tows your car to the pound and you're guilty as charged even though you had no idea the bay had been suspended. The logic is that if the notice period is too short, regulation 18 of The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 has not been complied with, hence the contravention did not occur. At the other extreme, a motorist cannot reasonably park his car for years and years without moving it (as you could do with an MOT exempt vehicle) as this would make it impossible to ever suspend a bay. So the issue is how long a notice period is "reasonable" and given that Parliament has not given anyone a steer on this, it's up to the adjudicators to decide in each individual case. In at least one case it was held that 16 days was a reasonable period to leave a car without moving it, whether the period in this particular case would be reasonable or not would be up to the adjudicator and it could go either way, though where the period is less than two weeks we seem to win more often than not. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 16 Mar 2020 - 18:01
Post
#47
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,577 Joined: 16 Aug 2010 From: People's Republic of Lambeth Member No.: 39,819 |
If you take it adjudication then you are effectively asking the adjudicator to direct the council to exercise their discretion to cancel the PCN, which is outside his remit. This is not the case at all, see Peter Brosnan v London Borough of Brent (2180194309, 18 June 2018). In essence the issue boils down to this: the tribunal takes the view that it can't be right that you park your car lawfully, maybe you've even paid to do so, and within half an hour the council comes along, puts up a suspension sign, tows your car to the pound and you're guilty as charged even though you had no idea the bay had been suspended. The logic is that if the notice period is too short, regulation 18 of The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 has not been complied with, hence the contravention did not occur. At the other extreme, a motorist cannot reasonably park his car for years and years without moving it (as you could do with an MOT exempt vehicle) as this would make it impossible to ever suspend a bay. So the issue is how long a notice period is "reasonable" and given that Parliament has not given anyone a steer on this, it's up to the adjudicators to decide in each individual case. In at least one case it was held that 16 days was a reasonable period to leave a car without moving it, whether the period in this particular case would be reasonable or not would be up to the adjudicator and it could go either way, though where the period is less than two weeks we seem to win more often than not. CP I was making a slightly different point on which I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong. I do not believe in the general case that the Tribunal can order a LA to exercise its discretion to cancel where the issue of the PCN is otherwise in order. I was not addressing the specifics of this case along the lines of "how long can you reasonably leave your car unattended in a parking bay for"? I was proceeding on the basis that the LA said it would give 10 days' notice of suspension, had duly given this notice (or so it says) and prima facie the case is proved. Now if the LTs have shown a willingness to debate what is or is not reasonable notice then I stand corrected. -------------------- Chaseman
|
|
|
Mon, 16 Mar 2020 - 18:33
Post
#48
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I was proceeding on the basis that the LA said it would give 10 days' notice of suspension, had duly given this notice (or so it says) and prima facie the case is proved. Whether 10 days' notice is adequate or not is a decision for the adjudicator, not the council, because the adjudicator decides whether regulation 18 has been complied with. I would say 10 days isn't log enough because it's hardly unusual for people to take a two week holiday, but there's no hard-and-fast rule, it's somewhat location specific. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Mar 2020 - 13:27
Post
#49
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 592 Joined: 2 Nov 2010 From: north london Member No.: 41,774 |
Well in Alan Francis v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (2160242963, 11 July 2016) it was held that a 16 day period was not an unreasonable amount of time to leave a car parked, of course whether another adjudicator would agree that a period of 11 days is reasonable or not cannot be guaranteed. It's notable the council says the signs were put up more than 10 days before the restrictions came into force, but no date is given. As your car was repositioned, it seems the council accepts your car was parked before the signs went up. Personally I would carry on. The council in their letter of rejection said QUOTE I would advise that the suspension signs were erected alongside the bay on 23 January 2020, several days before the suspension order was due to come into force. So OP is effectively saying he parked on the same day that the suspension warning signs went up, just earlier in the day. I am not sure this really changes anything of substance. It comes down to this perennial arguement about whether the motorist has an obligation to check his car periodically just in case a bay gets suspended. "What about when I go on holiday for two weeks?" says the motorist. "Have a neighbour check on your car says the council." "All very well", says the motorist "but what am I supposed to do if my neighbour rings me in Portugal and tells me that they have suspended the bay?" "Leave your car keys with the neighbour" says the Council. "Either I don't trust any of my neighbours with my car keys, or more likely they are not insured to drive my car" says the motorist. You can see this one can run and run. I fear that the council will not give way at the formal representation stage. They will say "11 days is plenty of warning and if you didn't check your car in that time then too bad. At least we didn't tow it to the pound". If you take it adjudication then you are effectively asking the adjudicator to direct the council to exercise their discretion to cancel the PCN, which is outside his remit. It goes against the grain, but unless you can come up with some pretty compelling medical support for your claim that you were unable to check on your car, I would be tempted to pay at the reduced rate. Thank you very much Chaseman. You mentioned something about being unable to leave the house due to being unwell, this could strengthen your case so tell us more. How much of your personal medical information you wish to share on here is obviously up to you, but if you could tell us what the underlying condition was, what the change of medication was and whether there's any confirmation that it might have made you feel unwell (list of side effects from the medicine's leaflet, doctor's note telling you to change your medication again or stop taking it...) that is something we can use. Thank you cp8759. It's slightly complicated. Medication for hypothyroidism from NHS isn't sufficient to stabilize condition, so additional meds acquired online. The new brand I bought wasn't as strong as previous, so was extremely fatigued and befuddled for many days. I eventually found it necessary to double the dose. In any case, I doubt any of this can be proved, aside of I am diagnosed with the condition and receive NHS meds. |
|
|
Thu, 19 Mar 2020 - 12:49
Post
#50
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Thank you cp8759. It's slightly complicated. Medication for hypothyroidism from NHS isn't sufficient to stabilize condition, so additional meds acquired online. The new brand I bought wasn't as strong as previous, so was extremely fatigued and befuddled for many days. I eventually found it necessary to double the dose. In any case, I doubt any of this can be proved, aside of I am diagnosed with the condition and receive NHS meds. I don't see why it can't be proved, it's your medication so you must have first hand knowledge of the facts and are therefore equipped to give evidence. Of course anything that supports your testimony would help, did you tell your doctors about the new meds, i.e. were you taking them under medical supervision? If not, for privately bought medication you must have receipts, and a leaflet listing side effects / dosage etc, right? Remember you only need to persuade the adjudicator on the balance of probabilities, you don't need to prove anything beyond reasonable doubt. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Thu, 19 Mar 2020 - 14:09
Post
#51
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,060 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
There are numerous images on the council website establishing that my car was parked within the suspended area. Would it be worth my posting them on here?
Yes. |
|
|
Sat, 21 Mar 2020 - 02:07
Post
#52
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 592 Joined: 2 Nov 2010 From: north london Member No.: 41,774 |
There are numerous images on the council website establishing that my car was parked within the suspended area. Would it be worth my posting them on here? Yes. Hi hcandersen, I have posted them. Thank you cp8759. It's slightly complicated. Medication for hypothyroidism from NHS isn't sufficient to stabilize condition, so additional meds acquired online. The new brand I bought wasn't as strong as previous, so was extremely fatigued and befuddled for many days. I eventually found it necessary to double the dose. In any case, I doubt any of this can be proved, aside of I am diagnosed with the condition and receive NHS meds. I don't see why it can't be proved, it's your medication so you must have first hand knowledge of the facts and are therefore equipped to give evidence. Of course anything that supports your testimony would help, did you tell your doctors about the new meds, i.e. were you taking them under medical supervision? If not, for privately bought medication you must have receipts, and a leaflet listing side effects / dosage etc, right? Remember you only need to persuade the adjudicator on the balance of probabilities, you don't need to prove anything beyond reasonable doubt. Thank you cp8759. I do have an online invoice, but no leaflet listing side effects/ dosage. Have mentioned to GP previously that I had been taking them. I am leaning towards paying the £65 rather than relying on an understanding adjudicator. You would think the council would have enough to worry about with coronavirus. Though coronavirus escalated after I was sent the letter of refusal. |
|
|
Sat, 21 Mar 2020 - 09:28
Post
#53
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,060 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
OP, IMO your instincts are sound.
IMO, there are two issues for consideration, both of which are based upon essentially similar facts i.e. you parked and left the car on 23 Jan. and did not move out of prospective contravention prior to the suspension coming into effect of 3 Feb. So: You either knew of the suspension or you did not, and you either could have moved the car on the day and time in question or you could not. As regards knowing of the suspension, I don't think you would convince an adj on this point bearing in mind that the signs were erected on 23 Jan, 11 days before the suspension came into effect. Even you say the suspended area was 5 houses down the road and, as can be seen, we're looking at terraced properties with limited frontages. If you live on the opposite side of the road then no way could you have missed the signs even if you'd just poked your head out for 10 seconds. And if you live on the same side and given that the area covered 138-142 I wouldn't want to find you live at 134 or 146! So I think you'd be relying on not being able to move the car on the day in question i.e. circumstances beyond your control. I don't think you have the ammo for this argument. And I don't think the adj would give a second thought to whether the sign was or was not up at the exact moment you parked (in any event we're looking at a very small area and if the authority say you were not, then you would not convince the adj otherwise) because 11 days passed when you could and should have seen the signs. |
|
|
Sat, 21 Mar 2020 - 09:35
Post
#54
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 592 Joined: 2 Nov 2010 From: north london Member No.: 41,774 |
OP, IMO your instincts are sound. IMO, there are two issues for consideration, both of which are based upon essentially similar facts i.e. you parked and left the car on 23 Jan. and did not move out of prospective contravention prior to the suspension coming into effect of 3 Feb. So: You either knew of the suspension or you did not, and you either could have moved the car on the day and time in question or you could not. As regards knowing of the suspension, I don't think you would convince an adj on this point bearing in mind that the signs were erected on 23 Jan, 11 days before the suspension came into effect. Even you say the suspended area was 5 houses down the road and, as can be seen, we're looking at terraced properties with limited frontages. If you live on the opposite side of the road then no way could you have missed the signs even if you'd just poked your head out for 10 seconds. And if you live on the same side and given that the area covered 138-142 I wouldn't want to find you live at 134 or 146! So I think you'd be relying on not being able to move the car on the day in question i.e. circumstances beyond your control. I don't think you have the ammo for this argument. And I don't think the adj would give a second thought to whether the sign was or was not up at the exact moment you parked (in any event we're looking at a very small area and if the authority say you were not, then you would not convince the adj otherwise) because 11 days passed when you could and should have seen the signs. Thank you hcandersen. I'm about 9 houses down so would only see the sign if I went outside and walked down a 4 houses. |
|
|
Sat, 21 Mar 2020 - 13:25
Post
#55
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Thank you cp8759. I do have an online invoice, but no leaflet listing side effects/ dosage. Have mentioned to GP previously that I had been taking them. As long as you can prove what medicine it was, it will be possible to find a lists of side-effects, such information is normally available online or at worst could be obtained from the manufacturer. I am leaning towards paying the £65 rather than relying on an understanding adjudicator. You would think the council would have enough to worry about with coronavirus. Though coronavirus escalated after I was sent the letter of refusal. I read once that in Milan even at the height of the black death, the tax collectors' office never closed down... Whether you carry on or not is up to you but you have an arguable case. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 19:08
Post
#56
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 592 Joined: 2 Nov 2010 From: north london Member No.: 41,774 |
Thank you cp8759. I do have an online invoice, but no leaflet listing side effects/ dosage. Have mentioned to GP previously that I had been taking them. As long as you can prove what medicine it was, it will be possible to find a lists of side-effects, such information is normally available online or at worst could be obtained from the manufacturer. I am leaning towards paying the £65 rather than relying on an understanding adjudicator. You would think the council would have enough to worry about with coronavirus. Though coronavirus escalated after I was sent the letter of refusal. I read once that in Milan even at the height of the black death, the tax collectors' office never closed down... Whether you carry on or not is up to you but you have an arguable case. Thank you cp8759. I wasn't effected by side effects but (I believe) an insufficient dose (it seems) as this brand must be weaker than my previous brand. This post has been edited by cc120: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 - 10:17 |
|
|
Fri, 27 Mar 2020 - 16:26
Post
#57
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Thank you cp8759. I wasn't effected by side effects but (I believe) an insufficient dose (it seems) as this brand must be weaker than my previous brand. Well as I said you have an arguable case if you want to carry on, but it's up to you. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 30 Mar 2020 - 15:04
Post
#58
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 592 Joined: 2 Nov 2010 From: north london Member No.: 41,774 |
Thank you cp8759. I wasn't effected by side effects but (I believe) an insufficient dose (it seems) as this brand must be weaker than my previous brand. Well as I said you have an arguable case if you want to carry on, but it's up to you. Thank you cp8759. I have decided to continue. |
|
|
Tue, 31 Mar 2020 - 10:58
Post
#59
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Are you the registered keeper? If yes, please check the address on the V5C and make sure it's correct. Don't assume, physically check it.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 31 Mar 2020 - 18:36
Post
#60
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 592 Joined: 2 Nov 2010 From: north london Member No.: 41,774 |
Are you the registered keeper? If yes, please check the address on the V5C and make sure it's correct. Don't assume, physically check it. Hi cp8759. Yes, just 'physically' checked and all correct and above board. Thank you. This post has been edited by cc120: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 - 18:36 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 16:02 |