PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Cambridge - Ticket Parking outside my house
Olympian
post Sat, 9 Feb 2019 - 10:51
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 7 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,336



Hi, I got a ticket on Thursday for not parking 'correctly within the markings of the bay,' almost directly outside of my house.

On the road I live on, you can only park on one side of the road and must purchase a permit to do so. I have bought this permit and was parking on the correct side of the road.

I parked in the bay, having reversed as much as I could. There was a car behind me, so I left the car a bit of space, so the driver could get out if he needed to. As a result, my front wheel was out of the 'bay.'

I partially 'blocked' a driveway.. My driveway. I don't see why i got a ticket for this?

If i reversed into the bay, i would have been being a ***** to my neighbour, so i gave them space.

I don't know what to say. I have already had two tickets for driving in a bus lane recently, due to dropping somebody off at the train station in the night and not seeing the road marking. The road marking itself was around 5ft long and I appealed. They replied understanding that it was a mistake, as the road markings are new. However 'a mistake is not a mitigating circumstance' and I still had to pay....

I've attached some pictures of the scene from the parking fine



Unfortunately these pictures are just a snapshot in time. When these pictures were taken, the 4x4 behind me had moved and instead there was a small Vauxhall. That had enough space , although it was still behind me and i had parked i would have gone further back but i would have still been giving the car some space and so would have been outside of the bay regardless.


Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image


Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 33)
Advertisement
post Sat, 9 Feb 2019 - 10:51
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
DancingDad
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 11:42
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (Olympian @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 11:18) *
Hey,

I just found this in:
'You must park completely inside the bay markings and you should not use the space unless all
of your vehicle can fit inside the bay markings. Any vehicle parked with at least one wheel
outside the bay markings may be issued with a Penalty Charge Notice.'...……..


It is a valid statement in any/all CPZs and a valid statement where you were parked.
You were liable to get a PCN.
But for the yellow line.
My argument is based around that the contravention cited cannot be applied without appropriate signage.

You will have noted that others disagree with me.


QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 11:31) *
1. It's not an RPZ.
I know, I only refer to them to show that there are situations within normal signage that would warrant this contravention

2. If mulitple contraventions apply then the authority may choose whichever they consider more/most applicable.
I know that as well. But remain to be convinced that the one chosen is a valid contravention that they can enforce in the circumstances, ie NO Signs.

3. Just make a challenge based on an honest mistake.

Rant... for goodness's sake, you want them to exercise dicretion, so apologies, balm and flattery NOT bull in a china shop!



Where have I advocated bull in a china shop?
I just want to ask a simple question as part of the challenge.
And fully agree to keep it simple and apologetic, not confrontational.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 12:44
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



@DD, not you, this was intended for the OP.

We are where we are.

The OP's objective at this stage is to bring all circumstances to the authority's attention and IMO an unsupported claim that the authority were not allowed to issue a PCN in respect of this contravention absent a (non-specified) traffic sign is not the appropriate gambit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Olympian
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 23:11
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 7 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,336



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 11:42) *
It is a valid statement in any/all CPZs and a valid statement where you were parked.
You were liable to get a PCN.
But for the yellow line.
My argument is based around that the contravention cited cannot be applied without appropriate signage.

You will have noted that others disagree with me.


QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 11:31) *
1. It's not an RPZ.
I know, I only refer to them to show that there are situations within normal signage that would warrant this contravention

2. If mulitple contraventions apply then the authority may choose whichever they consider more/most applicable.
I know that as well. But remain to be convinced that the one chosen is a valid contravention that they can enforce in the circumstances, ie NO Signs.

3. Just make a challenge based on an honest mistake.

Rant... for goodness's sake, you want them to exercise dicretion, so apologies, balm and flattery NOT bull in a china shop!


Thanks for all the help!

I've drafted a plan of what I'm going to appeal with. Do all of these points make sense?


Plan:
Ø There was a car behind me, so I parked in front of it. Didn't realise my wheel was outside of the bay.
Ø Wasn't aware that I had to park wholly inside the bay, was only aware that if I parked within a bay that I need to display my permit.
Ø If parking partially within a bay, I assumed I would be subject to any restrictions that may apply outside of the bay, as I already have permission to be within the bay
Ø The pictures taken from by the civil enforcement officer show that I was not on any yellow lines. My car was actually parked on the ground just before the yellow line.

Ø I have since re-read the TROs and can see that it has been written that one must park completely inside the bay. I am originally from Birmingham, and this requirement is not present in the Birmingham TROs.
ØThus the implication to park wholly within bays is not a common term, nor is it a specified nationwide legislation. Therefore, I feel that if it is mandatory to adhere to and if it is in the best interest of residents, the rule should be seen in signage.
Ø There are indeed signs with the wordings of 'Except in signed bays'
Ø Schedule 5, part 4 demonstrates the term 'except in signed bay' for the lower panel if it is a required ruling (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/5/made)


Ø I accept that if parking was not controlled then this could present a problem for the resident whose driveway meets the carriageway at this point, however in this case the resident of driveway is me.
Ø It was my own driveway


Ø Furthermore, on nidirect.gov.uk (https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/further-details-contravention-code-24) the terms for Code 24 (which I have been charged with) state that 'This contravention applies only to pay and display spaces within Controlled Parking Zones.'
I was not parked within a pay and display space, and therefore the contravention I have been charged against in unjustified.




I also wanted to add in:
LATOR S18 says restrictions must be signed

However I cant find what LATOR S18 is? I googled it and I find nothing...


I'll type this up nicely tomorrow and send it if the points I have made all sound ok?

thanks again!

This post has been edited by Olympian: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 23:12
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 23:24
Post #24


Member


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



Lator is the local authorities (traffic orders) regulations 1996.

You have 14 days in which to make your challenge when the council will most likely re offer the discount (they dont have too) it may tell you on the back of the PCN.

post the rest of the PCN we need to check it in particular the payment section. There is a possible ground that is going to review, it that is won and your PCN has the same detail it will be a sure fire win so I suggest taking all the time you have in order to get that decision before you need to finally decide what you will do


--------------------
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
DancingDad
post Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 00:02
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



Much as I have argued the case, this is not the time to fire off all guns, that will only put their backs up and virtually guarantee a rejection while closing one avenue that may work, discretion.

I fully agree with the point that HCA made earlier that any challenge should be apologetic not confrontational.
The only disagreement we have is that I believe some fishing ought to take place while HCA is against it.
Are you from Birmingham BTW? Not a good idea to claim anything that is not true, there are other ways of getting the point across, if/when needed.


At the moment IMO


Dear Sirs
Ref PCN ????
I am a little confused about receiving this PCN and feel I must apologise if I inadvertently broke any rules.
I did squeeze into the box but had to leave room behind for my neighbour to get their vehicle out, a large 4x4 and it would have been totally wrong to have blocked them in. They had left by the time your CEO arrived.
In doing so, it seems that I misjudged the position of the front of my vehicle but as any overlap caused only a slight obstruction to my own drive, didn't and I must admit still don't see this as an issue.
I had of course displayed my permit as the parking bay rules require.
I do accept that perhaps I should have been fully in the box and will ensure that in future I will not park in this fashion.
And once again apologise.
Please exercise your discretion and cancel the PCN on this occasion
Many Thanks
Also, I have looked around the area and cannot see any signs that say drivers must park wholly within parking bays. Could you explain what makes this mandatory and if any signs are needed, I do not want fall foul of this again in other areas that may apply rules differently.
Many thanks again
Hugs and kisses.

My take on it, others may suggest different.
This approach gives the council chance to cancel without losing face and may well give something concrete to fight on with should they reject.
May not but....
And remember that though I may be positive I do not know that they have not done something to inform drivers of their TRO conditions, just guessing they haven't.

The alternative is head on.... Where are the signs that say I must park. No signs you must cancel, etc, weigh in with LATOR and a demand that they detail the full legislation.
That could also win but is likely to see them dig their heels in. And would gain little sympathy with an adjudicator should it get that far. Sympathy that could well be present as this is a notional contravention that affects no one but yourself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
baroudeur
post Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 12:05
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 938
Joined: 24 Sep 2014
Member No.: 73,212



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 00:02) *
I do accept that perhaps I should have been fully in the box and will ensure that in future I will not park in this fashion.



huh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 12:14
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (baroudeur @ Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 12:05) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 00:02) *
I do accept that perhaps I should have been fully in the box and will ensure that in future I will not park in this fashion.



huh.gif


???

Rewording not objected to but I cannot see an error ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Olympian
post Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 18:39
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 7 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,336



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 23:24) *
Lator is the local authorities (traffic orders) regulations 1996.

You have 14 days in which to make your challenge when the council will most likely re offer the discount (they dont have too) it may tell you on the back of the PCN.

post the rest of the PCN we need to check it in particular the payment section. There is a possible ground that is going to review, it that is won and your PCN has the same detail it will be a sure fire win so I suggest taking all the time you have in order to get that decision before you need to finally decide what you will do




I'll rewrite my appeal, guess I went a bit too far with my other draft.

I'm actually from Bham^ Just started renting a house here last year
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Olympian
post Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 19:06
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 7 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,336



I guess this is my less confrontational reply:



To whom this may concern,

I recently (07/02/19) received a PCN (YA...) under code 24, for not having parked correctly within the markings of the bay or space.

I am a little confused as to why I have received this PCN, though I do apologise if I have inadvertently broke any rules.
I did squeeze my car into a parking position that I found, at a time when there was a 4x4 behind me, and had to leave enough space for the car to get out if needed, as it would wrong of me to block them in. There were no other spaces available at the time on my road (Glisson Road).
By the time the CEO had arrived and taken a picture it is clear that the 4x4 had moved and it looks like I could have reversed a little further, though at the time when I parked, this was not possible.

I realise that it could be argued that my car was partially into the curb cut, however I must admit that I didn’t see this as an issue as it was the curb cut in front of my own home's driveway.
Furthermore, the pictures taken from by the civil enforcement officer show that I was not on any yellow lines. My car was actually parked on the ground just before the yellow line. I wasn't aware that I was doing anything unlawful.

Once again I apologise and understand that in future cases I should perhaps try my best to avoid situations like this.

I kindly ask if you understand my innocent misunderstanding and cancel the PCN on this occasion.

Also, would it be possible for somebody to explain the rulings to me?
I am originally from Birmingham, and I used to park on my curb cut fairly often and have never received a PCN before. I understand that different cities may have different rulings, but I have not seen any signs in Cambridge that said we had to be wholly parked within the bays. I simply thought we had to purchase a permit if we wanted to park within the bays - which I have purchased.

I apologise for my lack of knowledge on the topic and for the misunderstanding. I would appreciate if one could take the time to explain these rulings to me, so I do not fall short of this again.

Kind regards,





Is this better? I feel it will be rejected, because the Cambridge council aren't a very nice bunch...

This post has been edited by Olympian: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 - 12:40
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Olympian
post Fri, 15 Feb 2019 - 12:41
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 7 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,336



The website doesn't let me send off my appeals? I keep getting errors, I have tried on multiple browers and on two different laptops. I'm a bit confused as to why I cant appeal?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Fri, 15 Feb 2019 - 12:46
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



Print it out, stick in envelope, post at post office and get a certificate of posting (not recorded)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Olympian
post Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 13:55
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 7 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,336



Hey guys, think I owe you guys an update. Would be useful for anybody in a similar position to me.

I emailed them and complained about the fact that i could send a representation online because I wasn't going out of my way to post a letter for something that i think i was falsely charged against.

They phoned me and gave me an email to send my representation to.

Today I got the reply:

Thank you for your representation about this Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

The vehicle was observed from 15:32 to 15:38, parked beyond the bay markings. I note in your representation that you were unaware of the restrictions relating to parking contraventions in Cambridge, however bay boundaries are enforced within many authorities across England and Wales; with the vehicle always expected to be parked wholly within the boundaries of the variant bays.

Further in your representation you enquire as to the restrictions in relation to parking on pavements and kerbs, I can advise you that pavement parking restrictions are documented within the Highway Code and are a national restriction on public highway.

On this occasion as a gesture of goodwill, I have cancelled this PCN and no further action shall be taken. However I must advise you that it is always the responsibility of the driver of the vehicle to ensure that they have not surpassed the boundary of the bay, as any PCNs issued in similar circumstances may not be cancelled.

Yours sincerely,
...


Cancelled PCN^

Thanks a lot guys!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 14:17
Post #33


Member


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



That was the right result. Council should not be pursuing footling PCNs against its own residents outside their homes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 15:46
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



To me, "gesture of goodwill" means "fecked if we know"

Well done mate.
Though I would suggest not overlapping the boundaries in future.
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 02:09
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