PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

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


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
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
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
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: 13,774
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: 4,935
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.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Wed, 14 Feb 2018 - 21:37
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,363
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: 19,408
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Is that just a fence or a gate that opens?


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BONGOBOY
post Fri, 16 Feb 2018 - 18:35
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
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: 12,217
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


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
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: 13,774
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


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
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: 19,408
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?


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 08:23
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,363
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: 6,640
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


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,549



Yes, the gate opens.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BONGOBOY
post Wed, 28 Mar 2018 - 18:46
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,549



I appealed to my ticket on 18/2/18 to Leeds Council.
I've heard absolutely nowt.
Do i assume they have agreed to my appeal, lost my appeal, or is it still pending ?
How long do they have to respond, and do they have to respond at all ?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Wed, 28 Mar 2018 - 19:20
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,901
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Please don't start new threads for the same case.

There's no set time to respond to an initial informal challenge but it should be reasonable. You'll need to be patient.

There is to respond to a formal appeal made to the notice to owner.

Is your car registered to you at your current address.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BONGOBOY
post Thu, 29 Mar 2018 - 07:06
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,549



Ok, sorry.

Yes it is registered to my current address.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BONGOBOY
post Sat, 14 Apr 2018 - 14:31
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,549



My Informal appeal was as follows:

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 (car is parked over 2.5m away from double yellow lines).
The car was parked there temporarily whilst I sought access from inside the business premises, On my return 5 minutes later, a ticket had sneakily been applied.
Pedestrians can safely pass my car without having to walk on the road, so I can see no reason for this penalty to stand.
Attached is photo showing entrance to my work premises and the gate now open for me to access inside.

The PCN appeal was rejected after 52 calendar days, as follows. What do you think my chances are ? They claim i am parked on double yellow lines. I dont believe that i am.
I'm sure that Councils reject almost all informal appeals, on the hope that you will fold, and pay the reduced penalty, which i am contemplating !!!!

Traffic Management Act 2004
Penalty Charge Notice (PCN): LS07741713
Date of Issue: 13/02/2018
Location of Contravention: MILFORD PLACE - BURLEY
Nature of Contravention: 01 PARKED IN A RESTRICTED STREET
Thank you for your email received 17/02/2018 in regards to the above PCN.
Please accept our apologies for the delay in forwarding a response to you.
The Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) issued the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) because the vehicle had parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours.
I note your comments and would advise that the vehicle was found to be parked in an area governed by double yellow lines. Double yellow lines advise no waiting at any time and do not require a sign to be displayed. The restriction is referred to in the Highway Code which the motorist should be familiar with.
The restriction incorporates the width of the public highway from the centre of the carriageway to the building line of the property or adjacent land. Road is defined in section 142 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 as, “any length of highway or of any other road which all members of the public have the right to pass and re-pass”.
A highway therefore includes a footpath over which the public right of passage is on foot.

I have considered everything in your email but do not feel that you have made grounds for cancelling the PCN.
As you wrote to us during the period when you could have paid the penalty charge at the reduced rate, I have decided to offer you a further 14 days from the date of this letter, during which you can pay the reduced amount of £35.00.
If you decide to pay, please refer to the ‘How to Pay’ notice enclosed with this letter.
If you decide to continue to appeal, please refer to the ‘Further Information’ notice also enclosed with this letter.
Yours sincerely
Saba Choudhry
Appeals Officer
Enc
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 14 Apr 2018 - 16:45
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,935
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



It is quite clear that Mr Choudhry has no idea what he's talking about. Your were obviously not parked on double yellow lines. Even if you had been parked on double yellows, clearly you are allowed a brief but reasonable amount of time to physically open the gate (Maybe Mr Choudhry has a fancy remote control gate at his house, but we don't all live in such luxury), whether the amount of time you took to fetch the keys was reasonable or not is arguable but Mr Choudhry has obviously failed to consider whether the exemption applies and that is a procedural impropriety ("I have considered everything in your email but do not feel that you have made grounds for cancelling the PCN" is not evidence of consideration and it is obviously a "catch-all" paragraph that in all likelihood is included in all rejections).

I don't know why you didn't include the points made by Mad Mick V, but if you post both sides of the PCN in full we'll be able to advise whether those points are relevant. At this point your best bet is to wait for the Notice to Owner and then make formal representations, if the council refuse to cancel you'll have good grounds to make an application for costs at the tribunal. I would definitely not pay the reduced rate, if all goes well you might even end up with them paying you.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 - 16:46


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BONGOBOY
post Sat, 14 Apr 2018 - 16:55
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,549



Added both sides of the PCN.
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 

Attached image(s)
Attached Image
 
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: Saturday, 20th October 2018 - 09:45
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.