Contravention 21 for vehicle parked in bay before notice |
Contravention 21 for vehicle parked in bay before notice |
Sun, 1 Mar 2020 - 20:26
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 106 Joined: 21 Nov 2010 Member No.: 42,289 |
Dear FightBack Forums
I've received a Contravention: 21 - Parked in suspended bay in Wandsworth for a motorcycle that was parked in a bay that was not marked for suspension when it was parked. Where I live in Tooting broadway there is no parking near where I rent a flat, on the high street, so I park my bike on a street 10 mins walk away and I can leave my bike without checking on it or moving it for up to 3 weeks at a time. Is there any grounds for appeal a contravention 21 if the vehicle was parked there before the counsel put up the signs suspending the bay? As has happened here. Probably a stupid question but are the counsel not required to take photos of all the vehicles parked in bays they're suspending, before they put up the notices? - You know, in case the owners are overseas and wont be aware that they're car is about to get a 55 quid fine. Here's the front of the ticket - http://disc7.com/files/ticketFront.jpg and the back - http://disc7.com/files/ticketBack.jpg Thanks for your help |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 1 Mar 2020 - 20:26
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Mon, 5 Jul 2021 - 08:41
Post
#101
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 106 Joined: 21 Nov 2010 Member No.: 42,289 |
Hi all
Wanted to share some great news about this PCN. Following the appeal with London Tribunals on Friday have received a confirmation email (attached) that the appeal was successful. Thanks for your help with this everyone. Was massively helpful, especially CP who wrote up the final appeal and spoke at the hearing. All the best
Attached File(s)
|
|
|
Mon, 5 Jul 2021 - 09:27
Post
#102
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,063 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
I'd curb your enthusiasm for a while if I were you as I can see Wandsworth asking for a review, and IMO quite correctly as I believe that the adj has applied the wrong legal test.
Although it is incumbent upon a driver to check any vehicle left for prolonged periods of time, the question for determination in this case is whether it was reasonable of the Appellant to have left his vehicle for three days without checking it. Nonsense. Frankly what you or any other motorist might do in the period leading up to a suspension is not relevant, the legal test is whether you caused or permitted your vehicle to be in contravention of the prevailing restriction, in this case a suspension, when it came into effect! But don't get too concerned because even if the authority were successful at review they would not pursue the penalty, this is one of the unwritten conventions of the game, but they would want clarity about the issue of principle if I know them. |
|
|
Mon, 5 Jul 2021 - 09:56
Post
#103
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I'd curb your enthusiasm for a while if I were you as I can see Wandsworth asking for a review, and IMO quite correctly as I believe that the adj has applied the wrong legal test. Your belief is incorrect. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 5 Jul 2021 - 09:57
Post
#104
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
I wouldn't worry in the least the adjudicator followed the findings of the only high court case witch is binding HCA like to spout the musings of an appeal court on the issue where provisionally the judges by a split decision said the contravention is one of strict liability
This finding is not binding nor could it be for there was no arguments put to this appeal court on the matter Experienced adjudicator have also with respect decided they do not agree and would not follow a provisional view No appeal could rightly be allowed because the adjudicator was not wrong in law and was entitled to reach the decision she did -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Mon, 5 Jul 2021 - 10:01
Post
#105
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
There is also the fact that the Court of Appeal's comments were orbiter, and all they effectively said is that the High Court decision might be overturned in a future case. That is all well and good, but unless and until Humphreys is actually overturned, it remains a binding authority on the tribunal. If an adjudicator disagrees with it, all he can do is allow the appeal and invite the council to take the matter to judicial review. The adjudicator can't over-rule the High Court just because the Court of Appeal might do so.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 02:05 |