PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Help & your views please
BONGOBOY
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 18:33
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,549



Firstly, Thanks for all replies to my query.
I will post the photo of my car.
The PCN had the reason of
01 Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours.

I am parked outside my business, not on the double yellow lines.
I managed to stop the parking attendant before he raced off, and he said i was given the ticket as i was parked on the pavement.
There are no signs to restrict parking on a pavement.
The council is Leeds.

Thanks
Bongoboy

This post has been edited by BONGOBOY: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 17:59
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image


Attached Image
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 13)
Advertisement
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 18:33
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 18:40
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,179
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



please post the PCN both sides, all the council photos and a GSV
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 18:43
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,021
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



As PMB said post a copy of the PCN and the council photos. Having said that, if that's the contravention they're alleging then it should be straightforward to challenge.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 21:37
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,808
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



If you're on the 'pavement' then so are the DYL.

But that would be unlawful!

The contravention is nonsense, whether on the pavement or in a restricted street.

The council have made a hash of the road markings, so expect to have to take them to adjudication.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Thu, 15 Feb 2018 - 00:38
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,049
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Is that just a fence or a gate that opens?


--------------------
17/10/11.

Sme f yu may have nticed I dn't currently have a letter ' ' n my keybard!!!!

S if I appear t be talking mre gibberish than nrmal then that's the answer - the missing 'o' --<<<< Aha, clever eh!? (reserve on-screen keyboard)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BONGOBOY
post Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 18:35
Post #6


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,549



Photo's as requested. Thanks for your advice so far.



Photos on a previous posting.

This post has been edited by BONGOBOY: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 18:01
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 18:48
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,387
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



This is typical Leeds where the location clearly was once an entrance to premises, but is no longer, but they've not done anything at all the change the yellow lines arrangement. Enforcement is clearly for the money and nothing else, again, typical. So PCN is for parking on carriageway where there is a restriction, presumably meant to be the DYLs, but CEO says it is for parking on the pavement !! And it does look as if you are not on the DYLs, but the way the DYLs curve round into the unused entrance means it is not cut and dried, (at least I don't think so).

This post has been edited by Incandescent: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 18:49
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BONGOBOY
post Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 19:11
Post #8


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,549



the entrance is indeed an entrance to my business premises.

My proposed response to the ticket is as follows, does this sound reasonable ?

As can be seen from the photographs, the car was not parked on the street, the car is on the entrance to my business, and not on the double yellow lines.
The car was parked there temporarily whilst I sought access from inside the business premises, and on my return 5 minutes later, a ticket had sneakily been applied to my windscreen.
Pedestrians can safely pass my car without having to walk on the road, so I can see no reason for this penalty to stand.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 19:42
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,179
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (BONGOBOY @ Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 19:11) *
the entrance is indeed an entrance to my business premises.

My proposed response to the ticket is as follows, does this sound reasonable ?

As can be seen from the photographs, the car was not parked on the street, the car is on the entrance to my business, and not on the double yellow lines.
The car was parked there temporarily whilst I sought access from inside the business premises, and on my return 5 minutes later, a ticket had sneakily been applied to my windscreen.
Pedestrians can safely pass my car without having to walk on the road, so I can see no reason for this penalty to stand.


This the spot?

Two reasons that the PCN is invalid. 1 it was not in an area controlled by DYL and 2 even if the council believe that it was then there is an exemption to wait whilst a gate is opened. This can include having to get the keys
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BONGOBOY
post Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 19:57
Post #10


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,549



Thanks PASTMYBEST.
I also am Past My Best, but at least we are still here !
I will use that info on my reply.

Ta

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 21:07
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,049
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (BONGOBOY @ Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 19:11) *
the entrance is indeed an entrance to my business premises.

As I asked, is that a gate that opens?


--------------------
17/10/11.

Sme f yu may have nticed I dn't currently have a letter ' ' n my keybard!!!!

S if I appear t be talking mre gibberish than nrmal then that's the answer - the missing 'o' --<<<< Aha, clever eh!? (reserve on-screen keyboard)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 08:23
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,808
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



OP, when you submit your challenge you MUST get them, should they reject your grounds, to specify the precise markings which they claim apply to the contravention.
Do the authority claim that the relevant marking which regulates the location is the DYL below your car in the photo where it follows the curve of kerb or the matching line ahead of your car or both. The authority are obliged to specify the marking which applies otherwise there is no basis for the alleged contravention.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 08:50
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,715
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



The PCN is probably flawed as it will refer to an increase of 50% and the bailiffs. If so I would add this:-

The PCN is ineffective for enforcement purposes because it contravenes the enabling legislation.

1. The PCN states that failure to pay will result in an increased charge. This relates to the Charge Certificate procedure. The legislation does not impose a mandatory obligation on the Authority to serve a Charge Certificate where the Penalty Charge Notice remains unpaid and an appeal is not submitted. The legislation indicates the Council “may” but the Council indicates that charge “will” be increased rather than considering whether to do so under their discretionary power. This represents a procedural impropriety.

As regards the will/may situation I would refer the Council to TPT case UW05060M which adequately describes the issue.

2. The second issue on the PCN is that, in specifying that the charge will be increased and that action by baliffs will occur, the Council has indicated action will be taken well before it should. This step is procedurally premature and prejudicial to the PCN recipient.

This represents a procedural impropriety which renders the PCN a nullity and unenforceable. The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 clearly states:-

4(5) In these Regulations “procedural impropriety” means a failure by the enforcement authority to observe any requirement imposed on it by the 2004 Act, by the General Regulations or by these Regulations in relation to the imposition or recovery of a penalty charge or other sum and includes in particular—

(a) the taking of any step, whether or not involving the service of any document, otherwise than—
(i)in accordance with the conditions subject to which; or
(ii)at the time or during the period when, it is authorised or required by the General Regulations or these Regulations to be taken;

I argue that the Charge Certificate actions noted in a PCN mean the Council has taken a step long before it is due and therefore this represents a procedural impropriety.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BONGOBOY
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 09:13
Post #14


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,549



Yes, the gate opens.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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: Monday, 19th February 2018 - 15:27
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.