Hackey PCN/Tow appeal, Contradictory Parking Suspension Signs |
Hackey PCN/Tow appeal, Contradictory Parking Suspension Signs |
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 - 13:29
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 16 Mar 2009 Member No.: 27,048 |
I am looking for some help please.
I recently had my car towed by Hackney Borough Council (or an agency working on their behalf) for parking in a suspended parking bay. The background is that in Hoxton Square, there was a parking suspension advertised around the railings to be between 25th and 28th May. Given the date I was parking was the 30th May, I assumed that the suspension had now lapsed. So of course I was mightily surprised to find my car vanished (as well as some other people parking in the same predicament) when I returned. Of course to get your car back, you have to pay the fines and charges, a cool £240.00 in total. The reason my car was towed is mounted at 2m on a lamppost was a sign informing that the suspension was running until 23:59 on the 30th May. I have appealed to Hackney but it has been rejected, I will appeal again in the basis that the prominent suspension signs displayed were for contradictory dates to those on the smaller sign on the lamp-post. I simply did not see the sign on the lamp post and took the information on the railings at face value (I have images of the signs) Any in appealing this decision is welcome!! |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 - 13:29
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 - 13:33
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Post up the PCN and all the council photos Redact personal details only leave in dates times and location
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Wed, 22 Jul 2015 - 16:02
Post
#3
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 16 Mar 2009 Member No.: 27,048 |
See attached the original PCN + Council photos
The basis of my appeal is that although the sign on the lampost shows the date up to 23:59 on the 30th May (they towed me at 22:03 on the 30th May), the signs attached to the railings at ground level state the suspension finished on the 28th May. I saw the signs on the railings and saw no reason to check with the lamppost as the date was clearly stated on the railing signs around the entire square that the suspension finished on the 28th May. I have images showing this, but I have exceeded the upload limit. |
|
|
Wed, 22 Jul 2015 - 16:21
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 188 Joined: 8 Jun 2013 Member No.: 62,571 |
Use tinypic to host your images and post the img links here (the ones stated as "for forum use").
This post has been edited by Tipthemout: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 - 16:21 |
|
|
Wed, 22 Jul 2015 - 17:02
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
As per the Worthing case does the TMO allow a suspension for filming purposes?
Otherwise if the OP can provide evidence that another sign misled him then IMO the Council's position is compromised. Mick |
|
|
Wed, 22 Jul 2015 - 21:40
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
Any photos of the contradictory sign?
ATM we have the CEO photo that puts you bang to rights. Or seems to. With two differing signs in separate places the council do not have a leg to stand on. But proof would be good. Also copy of your challenge and the rejection please |
|
|
Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 11:26
Post
#7
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 16 Mar 2009 Member No.: 27,048 |
Link for contradictory signs. These were the signs you can see attached to the railings in the original uploads |
|
|
Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 12:18
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 535 Joined: 13 Feb 2015 From: Carl Teper's bad books Member No.: 75,724 |
email them and ask for all photos and copy or suspension order
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 01:55 |