PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN Code 12: Parked in a residents parking zone
swelliott
post Sat, 25 Jan 2020 - 13:13
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Member No.: 57,290



I'll try to keep this as simple as possible. I received a PCN from Richmond Upon Thames Council (PCN #RT37822013) for parking in a permit holders only parking bay.

You can see from the warden’s photos that I never had any intention of parking illegally because as soon as I had parked the car, I went to the pay & display machine and purchased a ticket to cover 30 minutes of parking.

When I first drove into Moor Mead Road from Hill View Road, I looked for somewhere to park. Because I was facing south, I was looking out of the driver’s side window (westerly direction) looking at the controlled parking signs, and could see that it was pay and display parking up until 16:30. I had arrived at 16:22 so knew I had to buy a ticket. I was visiting No. 6 Moor Mead Rd and saw a parking space close by outside so parked in it, which just happened to be on the East side of the road.

As I then purchased a parking ticket and displayed it properly on my dashboard, I thought I had done everything I should have done to legally park where I had done. It was only when I returned to the car and saw the PCN, that it made me look at the controlled parking signs on that side of the road, and that’s when I noticed that the East side of the road was permit holders only – different to the other side of the road.

It may be naievity but I never knew that 1 side of the road could have different controlled parking to the other. I just presumed it was done on a road by road basis. I had done everything possible to legally park, and if it was my intention to try and park without paying for 10 minutes, I would never have bought a parking ticket. The fact that I did only goes to show I was acting in the proper manner with all the right intentions.

There were parking spaces on the other side of the road, so had I parked in one of those spaces, I would never have received a PCN, but as stated above, when I arrived I thought I was parking legally. Had there been no spaces anywhere else and I was parked in a permit holders only space, then I can see why a PCN would have been issued. However, because of the fact that there were other spaces on both sides of the road, this can clearly be seen as being a simple mistake that I now know I will not make again. But to charge me £55 when it can clearly be illustrated that I never had any intention of parking illegally, and did everything to park legally by purchasing a ticket, I think that is quite unfair and disproportionate.

So this is the first angle I could try and appeal on - a sympathy card that reiterates the fact that I bought a ticket and did everything I thought was correct. The 2nd angle is...

I could appeal the PCN based on the timing it was issued. I had parked at 16:22, and on the council website, it states the car was observed from 16:23, and then the PCN was issued at 16:29, 1 minute before the controlled parking ended. According to the photo of the PCN stuck on my windscreen, the PCN was stuck on my car at 16:29:39 - 20 seconds before the end of the controlled parking time. In fact, half of the photos have a timestamp of 16:30:02 or later. Could I appeal on something like the time is so close to the end that we cant be sure the times of their sytem is 100% accurate to the second, and therefore the PCN could have actually been issued on or slightly after 16:30?

I have attached some photos of the PCN as well as copies of what the warden took. Any help/guidance in this would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks,
Shaun.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
6 Pages V  « < 4 5 6  
Start new topic
Replies (100 - 107)
Advertisement
post Sat, 25 Jan 2020 - 13:13
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 28 Aug 2020 - 17:34
Post #101


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Longtime Lurker the trouble would be getting through to the chief adjudicator. I'm sure the tribunal gets one heck of a lot of complaints from disgruntled appellants who refuse to accept the law as it stands. To this day I remember a random case I listened into where a lady refused to accept that DYLs could extend over the pavement and over privately owned land, despite the adjudicator quoting Dawood and going over the law in detail, she insisted she would take it "further" and "higher up" and would go "as far as necessary" because she was "unwilling to accept" the outcome.

The tribunal will likely get thousands of people like that crazy lady writing all sorts of nonsense, so I fear that any complaint of this sort, no matter how well founded, would simply be ignored.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Longtime Lurker
post Fri, 28 Aug 2020 - 17:48
Post #102


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 719
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,615



Good point, CP8759... which is why this would need to be very carefully drafted to stand out of the nonsense complaints pile. My guess is that 90% of formal complaints get bounced back with a template letter because people think it's another bite of the appeal cherry, another 9% are Freeman of the Land nonsense, and about 1% fits the complaint criteria and warrant a proper reply. The first hurdle would be convincing whichever minor functionary drew the short straw and has to bounce all the junk back that this is part of the 1%.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 28 Aug 2020 - 17:54
Post #103


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Well if we are to try and do that I would want it to be a clear-as-day case, as I suspect the % of meritorious complaints is closer to 0.1% than 1%. For example if Reading's bus lane PCN were upheld as substantially complaint, then it would be worth doing.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 28 Aug 2020 - 19:36
Post #104


Member


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



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 28 Aug 2020 - 18:54) *
Well if we are to try and do that I would want it to be a clear-as-day case, as I suspect the % of meritorious complaints is closer to 0.1% than 1%. For example if Reading's bus lane PCN were upheld as substantially complaint, then it would be worth doing.



Check the complaints section of the general info on the tribunal forum, the Chief adjudicator cannot entertain complaints about decisions


--------------------
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
cp8759
post Sat, 29 Aug 2020 - 10:49
Post #105


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Fri, 28 Aug 2020 - 20:36) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 28 Aug 2020 - 18:54) *
Well if we are to try and do that I would want it to be a clear-as-day case, as I suspect the % of meritorious complaints is closer to 0.1% than 1%. For example if Reading's bus lane PCN were upheld as substantially complaint, then it would be worth doing.



Check the complaints section of the general info on the tribunal forum, the Chief adjudicator cannot entertain complaints about decisions

No but it would need to be a complaint about the inconsistency of decisions, with a range of decisions given as examples. As long as the complaint is about the inconsistency, rather than the outcome of individual cases, I don't see why a complaint can't at least in theory be entertained. The essence would need to be "It's fine if all or most of these cases had been lost, or all or most of these cases had been won, but it's not fair that it's 50 / 50 as the law should not be a lottery".

I say in theory because whether it would get anywhere is another matter.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 - 10:49


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sat, 29 Aug 2020 - 11:36
Post #106


Member


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



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 29 Aug 2020 - 11:49) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Fri, 28 Aug 2020 - 20:36) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 28 Aug 2020 - 18:54) *
Well if we are to try and do that I would want it to be a clear-as-day case, as I suspect the % of meritorious complaints is closer to 0.1% than 1%. For example if Reading's bus lane PCN were upheld as substantially complaint, then it would be worth doing.



Check the complaints section of the general info on the tribunal forum, the Chief adjudicator cannot entertain complaints about decisions

No but it would need to be a complaint about the inconsistency of decisions, with a range of decisions given as examples. As long as the complaint is about the inconsistency, rather than the outcome of individual cases, I don't see why a complaint can't at least in theory be entertained. The essence would need to be "It's fine if all or most of these cases had been lost, or all or most of these cases had been won, but it's not fair that it's 50 / 50 as the law should not be a lottery".

I say in theory because whether it would get anywhere is another matter.


I think not. that JR is disproportionately expensive does not seem to compute with them


--------------------
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
cp8759
post Sat, 29 Aug 2020 - 11:39
Post #107


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sat, 29 Aug 2020 - 12:36) *
I think not. that JR is disproportionately expensive does not seem to compute with them

That's why I think legislative reform is the only real way to fix this.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Longtime Lurker
post Sat, 29 Aug 2020 - 15:38
Post #108


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 719
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,615



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 29 Aug 2020 - 12:39) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sat, 29 Aug 2020 - 12:36) *
I think not. that JR is disproportionately expensive does not seem to compute with them

That's why I think legislative reform is the only real way to fix this.


Well, there's an easy and practically free way to find out if a complaint would get anywhere... give it a try!

This post has been edited by Longtime Lurker: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 - 15:39
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

6 Pages V  « < 4 5 6
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 - 10:28
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