Stopped on a Red route |
Stopped on a Red route |
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 14:18
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20 Joined: 1 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,671 |
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 14:18
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 15:49
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,919 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
As usual for this forum post up the PCN leaving in everything except car/name/address. A GSV link would be useful. I am assuming you went into that bay. Key thing is that if you stopped, read the sign, then moved off, you're in with a chance, but if you just parked-up and left the car, I think you'll be whalloped, no matter how far you take it.
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 16:38
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20 Joined: 1 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,671 |
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 16:58
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,270 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Am I reading this sign right?
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5515201,-0....3312!8i6656 Second nonsensical red route one this week. The camera shouldn't even be manned at that time. -------------------- |
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 18:27
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Am I reading this sign right? https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5515201,-0....3312!8i6656 Second nonsensical red route one this week. The camera shouldn't even be manned at that time. looks like it - I can't imagine how many bogus PCNs TFL is sending out possibly due to an untrained operator |
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 18:42
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20 Joined: 1 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,671 |
So, can I appeal? And under what circumstances can I appeal.
Thanks |
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 18:59
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,270 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
So, can I appeal? And under what circumstances can I appeal. Thanks There was no restriction at the time you stopped. -------------------- |
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 19:31
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Need to be absolutely clear - you were in the marked bay controlled by that sign and not outside it?
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 19:51
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20 Joined: 1 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,671 |
Yep I was in the marked bay
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 20:41
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Yep I was in the marked bay That's a shame the restriction for the bay is no stopping at any time https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5514302,-0....6384!8i8192 The single red line is only 7 til 7 I think there is a very good chance that the TMO only has the no stopping restriction for the bay as 7 til 7 also but whatever representation you make you must demand the TMO for that bay -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 21:05
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,919 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
It seems to me that the description of the location is totally wrong. 34-36 are on the opposite side of the road to where the OP parked. There is no bay by 34-36, it is double-red lines. The bay is opposite 27 to unidentified odd number. What a dump this road is ! Surely they are under a duty to specify which side of the road the alleged contravention took place, bearing in mind each side has different restrictions.
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 21:23
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Yep I was in the marked bay That's a shame the restriction for the bay is no stopping at any time https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5514302,-0....6384!8i8192 The single red line is only 7 til 7 I think there is a very good chance that the TMO only has the no stopping restriction for the bay as 7 til 7 also but whatever representation you make you must demand the TMO for that bay Arrgh - that's the infamous taxi bay we've seen so many cases of but it has been won. |
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 22:32
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,270 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Yep I was in the marked bay That's a shame the restriction for the bay is no stopping at any time Ouch. How did GSV throw up 2012 for me. -------------------- |
|
|
Wed, 18 Sep 2019 - 22:48
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20 Joined: 1 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,671 |
Thanks for quick replies guys, so should I appeal? If yes what kind of reasoning can I give them?
Thanks again |
|
|
Thu, 19 Sep 2019 - 07:46
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,919 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
I'd say you're bang-to-rights, but I don't like their quoting the opposite side of the road for the location. You could appeal on this, I suppose, but I don't expect them to accept it, and an adjudicator may not either.
|
|
|
Thu, 19 Sep 2019 - 08:20
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,072 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
It's not your or our task to gather the authority's evidence.
The PCN simply states you were stopped on a red route etc. There are no signs in the pics, therefore in order to satisfy yourself as to the correctness of the allegation - NB. PCNs are sent to owners who may may not have been driving, therefore there is NO presumption that you, as owner, have any prior knowledge of the events - you should obtain or view the video. Instructions are in the PCN. I suggest you do this before making representations so that at least we'll all know what their evidence, as opposed possibly outdated GSV, shows. |
|
|
Thu, 19 Sep 2019 - 08:24
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Note this:
2180149133 This PCN was issued for the alleged contravention of being stopped where prohibited on a red route in Stoke Newington Road at 8.14pm on 22 February 2018. I have reviewed the CCTV footage and the site images submitted by TfL. These show that Mr Ruesom's vehicle was stopped in a red route bay. TfL submits a library image of the sign for the bay which shows that the bay is signed as being no stopping at any time. There is then a panel beneath for a loading exemption between 10am and 4pm and then, in the same panel, appears a further restriction of taxis only between 7am and 7pm. I allow the appeal for the reasons set out by Mr Edward Houghton in his Decision in appeal no. 2160287156. The sign does not comply with the authorised sign "D" or "E" of the Secretary of State's 2013 Authorisation in that the "Taxis only" wording is required to be shown in a separate panel. Nor is the sign compliant with the more recent Schedule 6 Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016. As Adjudicator Mr Houghton stated, the omission of the separate panel is not a matter which can be overlooked on the principle of substantial compliance. The separate panel serves to highlight what is a fairly uncommon type of restriction and the motorist is entitled to the full impact of the sign. and: http://imageshack.com/i/pmth86Z9j here are few previous: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=114256 http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=120403 http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=121299 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 15:30 |