PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN - Western Rd, Romford (again!), 50r PCN received for doing a U turn in Western Rd
LotusOne
post Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 16:35
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,282



[attachment=61139:PCN_1___003.jpg]Hi,

We have received a 50r PCN for doing a U turn in Western Rd, Romford at a point where the Council claim no Right-turn is allowed. Scans of PCN attached.

My first thoughts are that we would have entered the service road with the intention of performing a 'U' turn not turning right into the service yard. We would never have any need to actually enter the service yard.

I also doubt whether there is appropriate signage indicating that right-turns are prohibited at this point. See attached photo of this entrance to the service yard where you can see that there are no road markings to indicate that a right-turn is prohibited at this place. There is a no right turn sign further back along the road but that clearly relates to not turning right into Margaret Thatcher House, not into the Service Road.

Any thoughts on how to deal with this?

This post has been edited by LotusOne: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 16:44
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 16:35
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 17:17
Post #2


Member


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



Well there's a clear sign here: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5788675,0...33;8i8192?hl=en

However the discounted period on the PCN is wrong, it should be 14 days not 21, Papjinder Gahir v London Borough of Havering (case reference 2180111742) is the relevant case. I would concede the contravention and challenge on the basis of the flawed PCN.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 17:17


--------------------
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
LotusOne
post Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 17:59
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,282



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 17:17) *
Well there's a clear sign here: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5788675,0...33;8i8192?hl=en

However the discounted period on the PCN is wrong, it should be 14 days not 21, Papjinder Gahir v London Borough of Havering (case reference 2180111742) is the relevant case. I would concede the contravention and challenge on the basis of the flawed PCN.

I would suggest from that picture that the no right-turn sign indicates no right-turn into Margaret Thatcher House and is not intended to apply to the service entrance. The Ahead-Only road markings also stop before the driveway into Margaret Thatcher House further adding to the evidence that the no right-turn sign is not intended to apply to the service road.

Thanks for the info ragarding the Papjinder Gahir v London Borough of Havering case. How likely is that appeal to work, surely that same reason could be used to nullify every PCN which Having Council have issued?

Edit:
If the no-right-turm sign is supposed to relate to the service road why is it not located on the lamp post directly opposite the service road where there would be no question what drive-way it related to.

Edit2:
This view shows how from further back up the road shows how the sign is partly obscurred by the tree trunks.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5791102,0...33;8i8192?hl=en

This post has been edited by LotusOne: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 18:20
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 18:44
Post #4


Member


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



QUOTE (LotusOne @ Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 17:59) *
Thanks for the info ragarding the Papjinder Gahir v London Borough of Havering case. How likely is that appeal to work, surely that same reason could be used to nullify every PCN which Having Council have issued?

You're quite right, yes it could. But every recipient would need to know about that case, or they would need to come here and get advice.

IMO the signage is more than adequate. Failing to concede a contravention which, in all fairness, should be conceded, will do nothing except damage your credibility. However it's your PCN so if you want to argue on the signage ultimately you can do what you like, I'm just telling you what I would do if I were in your position.


--------------------
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
Mad Mick V
post Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 18:59
Post #5


Member


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



The data protection statement is incorrect if it refers to the TMA. Also the Charge Certificate para is wrong if it relates to date of service.

We probably need to see the video.

The standard contravention is performing a prohibited turn, not what it says on the PCN.

I used the following in another case:-

The Contravention did not occur

The Council’s Notice of Rejection confirms that my vehicle undertook a U-Turn which is correct. I never completed a manoeuvre which could be described as a prohibited right hand turn..

With respect, I would draw attention to the PATAS Panel Hearing on U-Turns noted in its 2010-2011 Annual Report because the issue of “leaving the road“ or rather entering a road is critical to my case. The Panel concluded as follows:-

The Adjudicators also found it to be irrelevant that the reverse gear may be utilised but that once a vehicle had left the road, the Traffic Management Order did not apply. It therefore followed that even in the event of an immediate return to the road by the vehicle, the contravention cannot occur whatever direction the vehicle then travels in. However the Adjudicator reaffirmed that, as always, each case will turn on its own facts and that the road is generally all land from the building line on one side to the building line on the other. It typically has a carriageway in the middle with footways on either side. A footway may include ‘crossovers’ which give access from the carriageway to adjoining premises. They may all be part of the road, as may grass verges, flower beds or paved areas.

In my case the manoeuvre was completed on the footway and I would contend that I never left the road to the degree that constitutes a no right turn infringement.


The Contravention given is invalid

It is a tenet of English law that one must have clear understanding of the charge to be answered. The contravention noted on the PCN does not comply in this regard. The London Councils contravention code list indicates Code 50 relates to “performing a prohibited turn”. There is nothing of that nature on the PCN and therefore that document should be regarded as invalid and unenforceable for that reason alone.


The PCN is a nullity
I am of the opinion that the PCN, which only states the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 is a nullity and unenforceable for the following reasons:-

(a) the contravention given is incorrect it should be "Performing a prohibited turn" as per the agreed contravention code list. It fails to comply with the requirements of section 4(8)(a)(i) of the 2003 Act, which provides that "A penalty charge notice ...must- (a) state- (i) the grounds on which the council or, as the case may be, Transport for London believe that the penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle".

(b) the 21 day discount period is incorrect --- the Act states 14 days.

© the 2003 Act 4(8)(a)(v) indicates that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable; The dates are therefore conflated;

(d) the key statutory ground given in the legislation is "fails to comply with an indication given by a scheduled section 36 traffic sign". Nothing about this on the PCN so I have not been given the opportunity to argue there was no failure to comply.


Given the above grounds I believe the Council’s case is unsustainable.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 14:54
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,270
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 17:17) *
However the discounted period on the PCN is wrong, it should be 14 days not 21,

Wow. They corrected this (albeit still wrong - using service date) in January last year!
And they're still occasionally loading old stock into the printer. Incredible.

Apart from anything else, it renders all Havering mtc a case of 'pot luck' in what you're told and none of it correct.

This one should be taken past day 14, to, say, 19 or so, to then check on-line the amount demanded.
But it's up to OP of course.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:05
Post #7


Member


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



IIRC the TMO is specific in that it prohibits a turn into the service area, so if you did not enter the service area then you did not commit a contravention.

You need to get

The video

The Traffic management order


--------------------
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 Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:16
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,270
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Neil B @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 14:54) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 17:17) *
However the discounted period on the PCN is wrong, it should be 14 days not 21,

Wow. They corrected this (albeit still wrong - using service date) in January last year!
And they're still occasionally loading old stock into the printer. Incredible.

Oh no!
I SEE WHAT THEY'VE DONE! Incompetent muppets.

Probably in response to recent adjudications we've guided and maybe others, they've tried to correct it and fu cked it up a third way.

It's not old stock, must be new.

Removed the 'service' element but reverted to 21.



Lotus.

How much is currently being demanded online?


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LotusOne
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:34
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,282



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 18:59) *
We probably need to see the video.



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:05) *
You need to get

The video


Unfortunately no video available, just the original picture and another (very dark) one showing the number plate.


QUOTE (Neil B @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 14:54) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 21 Jan 2019 - 17:17) *
However the discounted period on the PCN is wrong, it should be 14 days not 21,

Wow. They corrected this (albeit still wrong - using service date) in January last year!
And they're still occasionally loading old stock into the printer. Incredible.

Apart from anything else, it renders all Havering mtc a case of 'pot luck' in what you're told and none of it correct.

This one should be taken past day 14, to, say, 19 or so, to then check on-line the amount demanded.
But it's up to OP of course.

Well currently at day 18 and charge of £65 is still showing online. How does this help us?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:43
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,270
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (LotusOne @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:34) *
Well currently at day 18 and charge of £65 is still showing online. How does this help us?

If you wanted to pay at discount the law says 17th was the last day.
Havering have given you, according to the PCN, until 24th (today is day 19, not 18).

I was looking to see if they'd withdrawn the discount, in line with the law, but at odds with what the PCN offers.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LotusOne
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:48
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,282



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:05) *
The Traffic management order

Anyone know how to go about getting a copy of the Traffic Management Order, can't find much info online about how to get this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:57
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,270
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (LotusOne @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:48) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 15:05) *
The Traffic management order

Anyone know how to go about getting a copy of the Traffic Management Order, can't find much info online about how to get this.

We've seen it in previous identical cases.
It specifically prohibits turning right into the loading area IIRC.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 16:34
Post #13


Member


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



It falls under this schedule: https://www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk//data/ms...d/W10_rv0_2.pdf

It turns out that only turning right into the yard is prohibited, it's not a contravention to turn right into the adjacent lane.


--------------------
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
LotusOne
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 17:12
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,282



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 16:34) *
It falls under this schedule: https://www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk//data/ms...d/W10_rv0_2.pdf

It turns out that only turning right into the yard is prohibited, it's not a contravention to turn right into the adjacent lane.

Where did you get the info about only turning right into the yard being prohibited, I have looked at that .pdf but can't see any detail other than the map?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 17:39
Post #15


Member


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



QUOTE (LotusOne @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 17:12) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 16:34) *
It falls under this schedule: https://www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk//data/ms...d/W10_rv0_2.pdf

It turns out that only turning right into the yard is prohibited, it's not a contravention to turn right into the adjacent lane.

Where did you get the info about only turning right into the yard being prohibited, I have looked at that .pdf but can't see any detail other than the map?

In the top right hand corner they have marked where you're not allowed to turn with a blank line that ends with a little red box. There's a legend here that (sort of) explains the symbols: https://www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk//data/sc...%20Havering.pdf


--------------------
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
LotusOne
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 20:48
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,282



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 16:34) *
It falls under this schedule: https://www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk//data/ms...d/W10_rv0_2.pdf

It turns out that only turning right into the yard is prohibited, it's not a contravention to turn right into the adjacent lane.

Do you have the actual text of this Traffic Management Order available?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 23:22
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,270
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (LotusOne @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 20:48) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 16:34) *
It falls under this schedule: https://www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk//data/ms...d/W10_rv0_2.pdf

It turns out that only turning right into the yard is prohibited, it's not a contravention to turn right into the adjacent lane.

Do you have the actual text of this Traffic Management Order available?

It's freely available from the Council.
As I said, it also featured in an earlier case here, 2015 maybe; you'd just have to do a search.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 13:34
Post #18


Member


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



QUOTE (LotusOne @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 20:48) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 16:34) *
It falls under this schedule: https://www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk//data/ms...d/W10_rv0_2.pdf

It turns out that only turning right into the yard is prohibited, it's not a contravention to turn right into the adjacent lane.

Do you have the actual text of this Traffic Management Order available?

Not to hand, but if you email the council and ask for it they will provide it. Just email or call and ask for THE BOROUGH OF HAVERING (TRAFFIC MOVEMENT AND SPEED LIMIT REGULATIONS)
CONSOLIDATION ORDER 2017


--------------------
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
LotusOne
post Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 17:05
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,282



QUOTE (Neil B @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 23:22) *
QUOTE (LotusOne @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 20:48) *


QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 16:34) *
It falls under this schedule: https://www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk//data/ms...d/W10_rv0_2.pdf
It turns out that only turning right into the yard is prohibited, it's not a contravention to turn right into the adjacent lane.


Do you have the actual text of this Traffic Management Order available?


It's freely available from the Council.
As I said, it also featured in an earlier case here, 2015 maybe; you'd just have to do a search.


Despite much Googling I have not yet been able to find the actual text of the Traffic Management Order. I can find other references to it but not the actual text.


QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 13:34) *
QUOTE (LotusOne @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 20:48) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 16:34) *
It falls under this schedule: https://www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk//data/ms...d/W10_rv0_2.pdf

It turns out that only turning right into the yard is prohibited, it's not a contravention to turn right into the adjacent lane.

Do you have the actual text of this Traffic Management Order available?

Not to hand, but if you email the council and ask for it they will provide it. Just email or call and ask for THE BOROUGH OF HAVERING (TRAFFIC MOVEMENT AND SPEED LIMIT REGULATIONS)
CONSOLIDATION ORDER 2017


Have spent much of the afternoon on the phone to various different departments within Havering Council but no one seems to know where this document can be obtained from.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LotusOne
post Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 17:25
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,282



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 16:34) *
It falls under this schedule: https://www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk//data/ms...d/W10_rv0_2.pdf

It turns out that only turning right into the yard is prohibited, it's not a contravention to turn right into the adjacent lane.

If the actual text of the Traffic Management Order specifically prohibts vehicles from "turning right into the loading area opposite the Romford United Reformed Church Building" as it seems it might, it depends on what counts as the "loading area". To the left is the loading yard for Wilkinsons which some might consider to be the "loading area". However continuing straight-on leads to the underground loading bays for ASDA. So it is debatable just what location is meant by "loading area".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
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 - 15:59
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