PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

bus lane pcn issued after 3 months
F.F.Habibi
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 20:35
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 13 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,510



Hi,

I am new here and I would like to get advice one how to deal with this please.
Also what I should write to appeal. From what I understand is that the council
have certain amount of time to issue the pcn letter to your house if the picture
been captured by cctv. please see that attachments.

Just to add more information. This car was rented due to been into accident. If
that will make any different. Plus the car was few meters away from being out of the
bus lane, should they give you some grace amount of space when you enter the bus lane?
correct me if I am wrong.

Attached Image
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 22)
Advertisement
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 20:35
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 15:09
Post #21


Member


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



QUOTE (Neil B @ Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 15:00) *
Yep.
On the face of it so far, simple as that.


Can they re issue back to the hire firm? Mr Chan seems to think so

2180002805

he Appellant attended the hearing in person.
The Authority had purported to transfer liability from the registered keeper (a hire firm) to the Appellant. There is legal provision for transfer of liability in bus lane cases. I must therefore allow the appeal.
I would add the following in case the Authority is thinking about re-issuing proceedings against the hire firm, which may then seek to recover the penalty from the Appellant.
First, the signs used by the Authority is for a bus only route and not a bus lane. Secondly, the use of CCTV enforcement for bus lane contravention must be accompanied by evidence that the recording device has been approved. There is no such evidence. Thirdly, the Authority must serve notice that it intends to use CCTV evidence giving the Appellant the right to require the attendance of the camera operator. This has not happened. Fourthly, the bus lane starts after the blue sign. There is no evidence that the Appellant proceeded beyond the sign.

I wonder if 3(2) would prevent this. Are they "another person" if the council have already served a PCN on 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
Neil B
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 15:19
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,265
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 15:09) *
Are they "another person" if the council have already served a PCN on them?

I'd argue it would be invalid as they've already conceded to that party.

But perhaps hire Co should test it if it happened.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Tue, 20 Feb 2018 - 19:14
Post #23


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9,710
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



This was an appeal by a hire/rental company:-

216000903A

This is a bus lane contravention.

There is no dispute that this vehicle was on hire at the relevant time pursuant to the hiring agreement supplied.

The appellants seeks to transfer liability for the charge to their hirer.

There is no legislative provision that allows liability for a bus lane penalty charge to be transferred to the short term hirer of a vehicle (where the period of hire is less than 6 months) but on the agreement provided this appears to be a long term hire. I have considered in those circumstances whether the hirer of the vehicle can be regarded as being keeper of it and thus liable as owner for penalty charges incurred by the vehicle. I am not however satisfied on the agreement that the hirer exercised the rights of the owner in respect of this vehicle there being nothing in the agreement, for example, stating that the hirer is to insure the vehicle and/or to maintain it, and I am satisfied against this background that the hirer was not this vehicle's keeper and that the appellants as owners of the vehicle remain liable for this penalty charge.

I note the appellants' submissions as to the penalty payable but given the reduced payment period has long expired in this case the council is entitled to enforce the charge at the full rate.

I cannot prevent it from doing so.

The appeal is refused.
________________________

Mck
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 15:51
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