Received A PCN on Francis Road /E10 Contravention code 52m |
Received A PCN on Francis Road /E10 Contravention code 52m |
Fri, 19 Jan 2018 - 22:09
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 19 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,055 |
Hi,
I am hoping if someone can assist me in cancelling a PCN which I received on Francis Road in Leyton E10. It appears I drove through a restricted section of the road and got a ticket for it. The images on the PCN doesn't really tell me anything just a picture of my car . The contravention code on the ticket is 52m ( failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle) this doesn't tell me anything. I've requested to see the video or clearer pictures of the contravention but this isn't available to me just yet. After speaking with a friend who lives near there who coincidentally I was picking up at the time, has said that there is a new CCTV camera which oversee a section the the new restricted part of the road and it's only been there for about a week, It seems I've accidentally drove through it. Have I got any grounds of appeal? Am I right in thinking that every council whenever they want to enforce traffic violation via CCTV they have to gain some of approval, if so how can I check if they have received the necessary approval to enforce traffic on this road. Thanks 15041401.PDF ( 817.34K ) Number of downloads: 1495 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Fri, 19 Jan 2018 - 22:09
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Fri, 19 Jan 2018 - 22:34
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
It is indeed new and nearly caught me recently.
The PCN has a flaw but let's see what others have to say first. Post a Google Strertview link to location - even though it won't be up to date. Here is the notice of the Order. https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2900759 - Am I right in thinking that every council whenever they want to enforce traffic violation via CCTV they have to gain some of approval, No. They already have the authority. -------------------- |
|
|
Fri, 19 Jan 2018 - 22:48
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 19 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,055 |
It is indeed new and nearly caught me recently. The PCN has a flaw but let's see what others have to say first. Post a Google Strertview link to location - even though it won't be up to date. Here is the notice of the Order. https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2900759 - Am I right in thinking that every council whenever they want to enforce traffic violation via CCTV they have to gain some of approval, No. They already have the authority. Hi Neil, Thanks for the link to the order. I've been struggling to find it. Not sure why they are trying to make Francis road into a mini Holland but that's another story. Seems like I was caught out with another car that was in front so just carried on driving What the potential flaw with the PCN, the contravention code? Link to street view below, you can see the alterations being carried out. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5636134,-...3312!8i6656 This post has been edited by tlogic2019: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 - 22:59 |
|
|
Fri, 19 Jan 2018 - 22:53
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Reading the 'anytime' one way restrictions and 10am -8pm NMV together and in combinarion with viewing this map, is reminiscent of a Buster Keaton movie. Pure comedy. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/248+Fra...33;4d-0.0072738 The latest operational mini-holland scheme. More to come. This post has been edited by Neil B: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 - 22:54 -------------------- |
|
|
Fri, 19 Jan 2018 - 23:12
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 19 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,055 |
Reading the 'anytime' one way restrictions and 10am -8pm NMV together and in combinarion with viewing this map, is reminiscent of a Buster Keaton movie. Pure comedy. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/248+Fra...33;4d-0.0072738 The latest operational mini-holland scheme. More to come. I see what you mean It's hilarious. |
|
|
Fri, 19 Jan 2018 - 23:57
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Just hang on until other members have a look.
Try and get the vid and put it up here. Also up-to-date pics of the signs. Host images and vid externa;;y; e.g. 'Flickr' and paste the BB codes in a response here. -------------------- |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 16:04
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 19 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,055 |
Hi,
I requested the CCTV video footage from WF council the same day the PCN landed on my doorstep. After putting in the request for the CCTV Footage through the website, it said to check back after 24 hours when the footage will be available. 8 days has passed and the video footage is still not available for viewing. Only thing that is available is still images as the ticket. I've uploaded one of the still images which shows the sign. Shall I lodge my appeal on the basis that there is no sufficient evidence available to suggest I contravened any traffic laws. https://ibb.co/iarMww |
|
|
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 11:11
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
There's no legal requirement for them to provide you the vid but it's unhelpful of them not to.
Can't recall other WF cases experiencing a delay though. We've not seen up-to-date sign pics. I note from your last link they are relying on a stock photo taken 8 days earlier. I recall hearing they had to correct the signs on another mini-holland several times. It follows that there is no proof the sign was in place when you allegedly passed it. But ultimately, an adjudicator might accept their word. Maybe worth representations to see if they cock up I suppose. They generally re-offer the discount if it reaches them by 14th day. In this case 31st. -------------------- |
|
|
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 15:32
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
The contravention given cannot be right with that sign.
A 619 sign without an additional plate means motor vehicles are prohibited--end of (unconditional). The contravention "Failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle" is conditional--what types of vehicle are allowed? (a cycle is not classed as a vehicle IIRC). As usual a balls-up with a mini Holland scheme --why they don't just sign them as pedestrian zones escapes me. Plus it looks as if the blue and white arrow is there which gives approaching motorists the wrong indication. Mick This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 17:04 |
|
|
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 18:23
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Gazette notice in #2 explains a bit Mick.
This post has been edited by Neil B: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 18:24 -------------------- |
|
|
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 19:28
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
Neil,
I did read it. A RZ which prohibits entry by any vehicle between 10 am and 8 pm, which is what the sign says. This is further reinforced by:- "All Loading Places and Free Short Stay Parking Places will operate Monday to Fridays between 8am and 6.30pm (except within the prohibited area – see (d)(iii) above)". Ergo there is no "certain types of vehicle" exemption and the contravention given is therefore perverse in legal terms. Or am I missing something obvious? Mick |
|
|
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 19:35
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Neil, I did read it. A RZ which prohibits entry by any vehicle between 10 am and 8 pm, which is what the sign says. This is further reinforced by:- "All Loading Places and Free Short Stay Parking Places will operate Monday to Fridays between 8am and 6.30pm (except within the prohibited area – see (d)(iii) above)". Ergo there is no "certain types of vehicle" exemption and the contravention given is therefore perverse in legal terms. Or am I missing something obvious? Mick Not sure. I think cycles are vehicles, by virtue of the meaning of a 'no vehicles' sign, so the restriction is on motorised 'types' ---- perhaps? -------------------- |
|
|
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 23:07
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 19 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,055 |
The video has finally been made available.
You can see the video below, My car is the second one that goes through. http://sendvid.com/ovp8isrl It appears I followed someone in front thinking it was OK to drive through. Poor guy in front must of also got a ticket The signage on the video is not very clear and you can tell the signs have just been put up as you can still see some black tape left on them. There is a miss mash of signs which is really confusing. Notice how the camera only focuses on one sign. If you pause the video at 21 seconds there is another sign. In total I would say there is probably about 4 different signs all close together. Going back to Mad Mick V point in regards to the wrong type of signage, shouldn't sign 618 be more appropriate? I think these signs are too small particularly down a not very lit road. Any last tips on what I can base my appeal before I send something through to them tomorrow. p.s Neil thanks for the heads up in relation to lodging my appeal. I thought it was 14 working days and not 14 days. Nearly got caught out again lol This post has been edited by tlogic2019: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 23:16 |
|
|
Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 07:10
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
Confused by a plethora of signs is always a worthwhile punt.
On the cycle point mentioned above:- “cycle” means a bicycle, a tricycle, or a cycle having four or more wheels, not being in any case a motor vehicle, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/192 A 619 sign without an additional plate means motor vehicles are prohibited So my point on the contravention is still valid. Mick |
|
|
Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 09:36
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
tlogic
If you are looking to preserve the discount your reps must arrive at WF by today, so I presume you are using their e-mail. If not already sent, add in > Your PCN makes an unlawful statement. It says "If the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge of £195 may be payable" The only 28 day period mentioned thus far is that beginning with the date of the notice. The relevant legislation does not allow you to increase the charge at the point you state. -------------------- |
|
|
Fri, 2 Feb 2018 - 02:03
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Neil, I did read it. A RZ which prohibits entry by any vehicle between 10 am and 8 pm, which is what the sign says. That's not what the sign says at all, diagram 619 prohibits entry to motor vehicles, to prohibit any vehicle the council would need to use the sign shown in diagram 617. The RZ prohibits only a certain type of vehicle, i.e. motor vehicles, thus the wording of the contravention appears to be correct and is consistent with the sign installed by the council. This post has been edited by cp8759: Fri, 2 Feb 2018 - 02:04 -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 2 Feb 2018 - 02:51
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 36 Joined: 25 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,152 |
Although there is a notice of a experimental order in the Gazette it will do no harm to enquire if the experimental order actually exists in physical form and if it does obtain a copy to see what it says. I have known many times where a notice is placed in the local paper but the actual physical sealing of the legal order is forgotten about or visa versa. This is because the highway department and legal department don't always work in unison.
|
|
|
Fri, 2 Feb 2018 - 11:08
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Is worth checking but I'm unsure if OP is still with us.
-------------------- |
|
|
Fri, 2 Feb 2018 - 19:04
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 19 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,055 |
Hi,
I am still here. I ended up making representation on the 30th just before the discounted period ended. I made my representation on the basis the signs were confusing particularly the black tape that is stuck to the sign which caught my attention rather then time of the restriction in place. @keyser how do I go about obtaining an actual copy of the experimental order to see if it exists? tlogic If you are looking to preserve the discount your reps must arrive at WF by today, so I presume you are using their e-mail. If not already sent, add in > Your PCN makes an unlawful statement. It says "If the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge of £195 may be payable" The only 28 day period mentioned thus far is that beginning with the date of the notice. The relevant legislation does not allow you to increase the charge at the point you state. Hi Neil, I will also use this when I appeal to the adjudicator as I know my representation will get rejected. cheers This post has been edited by tlogic2019: Fri, 2 Feb 2018 - 19:09 |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 22:21
Post
#20
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 2 Joined: 22 Feb 2018 From: London Member No.: 96,711 |
tlogic2019, I've just been caught out by the poor, obscure signage at the Francis Road, Albert Road junction. Totally drove through it without seeing it. So easy to miss it. How did you get on with your appeal? Any luck? Thanks for starting this thread btw. Glad to see I'm not the only one who's missed the signage!
I've just contacted Waltham Forest Council asking for some figures about how many vehicles have been caught out by this poor signage since it was first put up and in the last month particularly. I can imagine it's a high number! They must be making a killing from this junction. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 10:35 |