Havering Council Tangent Link Harold Hill |
Havering Council Tangent Link Harold Hill |
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 13:57
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 108 Joined: 8 Sep 2017 Member No.: 93,916 |
Hi.
Received Pcn today on Tangent Link. It's on the entrance/exit of B&Q. I live 2 min walk from here and have been living on this adress for 15 years so i know this area very well.I checked on Google Street and there is sign of no right turn which seems new.I know it's my fault as driver to look for sign . I have not been to B&Q in long time and used this route many times in past. I was dropping my kid to tuition center and she needed something from BNQ so had a quick visit on this particular day. I have no idea when this sign came into action. Little bit of research.this camera was installed last year in march. I don't remember going B&Q since then but because I always take left to go home so may be dint notice.this time I had to turn right. Kindly advise as to what I should do. https://www.instantstreetview.com/@51.59574...h,-21.18p,1.51z This post has been edited by EssexGB: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 15:04 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 13:57
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 15:10
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,656 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Your PCn contains the same error that this appeal was allowed for.
2170217168 The appellant attended. Amongst other things the appellant queried the penalty amount, which caused me to look at the penalty notice. The penalty notice in this case was issued under Section 6 of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. The local authority is entitled to issue the penalty notice to the person appearing to them to be the owner of the vehicle concerned. Section 4(8) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London act 2003 says that the penalty notice must state: 1 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; 2 the amount of the penalty charge which is payable; 3 that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice; 4 that if the penalty charge is paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the notice, the amount of the penalty charge will be reduced by the specified proportion; 5 that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable; 6 the amount of the increased charge; 7 the address to which the penalty charge must be sent; 8 that the person on whom the penalty notice is served may be entitled to make representations under paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Act; and 9 specify the form in which such representations are made. The penalty notice does not concur with Section 4(8)(3) and (4). The penalty notice refers to the date of service. In the case of Hackney Drivers Association Limited v The Parking Adjudicator and Lancashire County Council CO/7565/2012 on 31st October 2012 Mr. Justice Raynor when considering a penalty notice asked at paragraph 11 of his judgment, "what was fairly conveyed by the penalty notice, read as a whole?" The recipient requires certainty. The notice does not reflect the legislation and does not provide certainty. I will therefore allow the appeal. -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 19:52
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 108 Joined: 8 Sep 2017 Member No.: 93,916 |
Thanks PAST MY BEST.
I have not come across any successful post regarding tangent link Harold Hill pcn. It's fairly new camera since March 2017. When I mentioned it to friends and family living localy and I was shocked to hear that most of them have been the victim of this camera. |
|
|
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 20:22
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,656 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Thanks PAST MY BEST. I have not come across any successful post regarding tangent link Harold Hill pcn. It's fairly new camera since March 2017. When I mentioned it to friends and family living localy and I was shocked to hear that most of them have been the victim of this camera. Been a few check the LT register -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 22:58
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,280 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Thanks PAST MY BEST. I have not come across any successful post regarding tangent link Harold Hill pcn. On here? http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...60&start=60 -------------------- |
|
|
Fri, 27 Apr 2018 - 07:50
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 108 Joined: 8 Sep 2017 Member No.: 93,916 |
Thank you every one.
Apology for not doing proper research.I read these posts. Neil B kindly assist me with representation. |
|
|
Sun, 29 Apr 2018 - 01:14
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 108 Joined: 8 Sep 2017 Member No.: 93,916 |
Hi.
Mad Mick kindly create a draft for me to appeal as you had done in the past for me . Thank you in Advance. |
|
|
Sun, 29 Apr 2018 - 08:11
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
OP--- to be honest anyone making that turn would be bang to rights IMO. But you have three options :-
---find a flaw in the lines and signs, --- submit a technical defence on documentation, --- the road itself--vague location and adoption by the Highway Authority. The core traffic order can be found here:- https://issuu.com/pepipoo/docs/traffic_order_2015 The Notice "amending" that order is here:- THE HAVERING (PRESCRIBED ROUTES) (CONSOLIDATION) (AMENDMENT NO. 1) ORDER 2017 PTO1014 1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Council of the London Borough of Havering proposes to make the above-mentioned Orders under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 as amended. 2. The general effect of the Order will be to:- Prohibit motor vehicles from making a right turn into Tangent Link from the exit to the B&Q Superstore. 3. Full details are available for inspection together with the deposit documents for the orders referred to above and can be inspected for a period of 21 days either through www.haveringtraffweb.co.uk or s in the Public Advice and Service Centre, London Borough of Havering, Liberty Shopping Centre, Romford between 9am and 4pm on Mondays to Friday. Further information may also be obtained via schemes@havering.gov.uk. Trafficweb documents refer to the road as "car park access road" and the sign as "No Right Turn Except Cycles" I would use PMB's draft slightly updated: Dear Mr Parking Representations against PCN number XXXXXXX vehicle registration mark AB 12 CDE Your name and address I make these representations under the statutory ground that the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case and that the location given on the PCN is incorrect. The London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 at 4(8)(a)(iii) states. That the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice" The PCN fails here. It states " 28 days beginning with the date on which this PCN is served. This is in the normal course of post, two working days later. this would create an obvious prejudice, and fail to comply with the regulations. The PCN fails similarly at 4(8)(a)(iv) using the same date of service rather than date of notice. The PCN fails to comply with the regulations, it is thus not a valid document and no penalty may be demanded on the back of it. Therefore the penalty demanded exceeds the relevant amount in the circumstances of the case, as the only amount that can be due on the strength of this PCN is NIL. To amplify this ground I would refer the Council to ETA 2180111742. Second I doubt that the Council can be classed as the Highway Authority for this exit road and therefore they do not have the right to erect traffic signs on private land. Lastly, I would contend a vague locus situation on the PCN since the road leading from B&Q is neither Tangent Link nor Harold Hill it is classified as a "car park access road" by the Council. I look forward to confirmation of cancellation at your soonest convenience. Yours ------ Mick This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 - 08:11 |
|
|
Sun, 29 Apr 2018 - 22:38
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 108 Joined: 8 Sep 2017 Member No.: 93,916 |
Thanks Mad Mick as always you have been very helpful.
I will send out Appeal ASAP. |
|
|
Fri, 8 Jun 2018 - 20:00
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 108 Joined: 8 Sep 2017 Member No.: 93,916 |
Hi Every one please find below Notice of rejection along with all the pages came with it. Kindly advise the best course of action at this stage. Much appreciated. |
|
|
Fri, 8 Jun 2018 - 20:44
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Wow, that's one of the worst failures to consider I have ever seen.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 8 Jun 2018 - 21:00
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,656 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Wow, that's one of the worst failures to consider I have ever seen. Yep and the tell you to send the appeal to Sale, They've not been there for about 3 years -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Fri, 8 Jun 2018 - 21:03
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Wow, that's one of the worst failures to consider I have ever seen. Yep and the tell you to send the appeal to Sale, They've not been there for about 3 years Which confirms it's a pro-forma rejection. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 8 Jun 2018 - 21:20
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,280 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
and they're still very confused with their 14/21 days.
On that matter - 1/. Perhaps they'd like to explain to the adjudicator why your PCN offers 14 days discount (still wrong as beginning service rather than notice) while they've been issuing subsequent PCNs allowing 21 days? (we have at least one example on forum) 2/. From the wording used, they've offered to allow discounted payment until 29th June. Subject to the approval of others, I'm going to recommend you don't register your appeal just yet Let's monitor status on-line, to see exactly how long they really allow you. This what adjudicators repeatedly fail to examine. -------------------- |
|
|
Sat, 9 Jun 2018 - 19:48
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 108 Joined: 8 Sep 2017 Member No.: 93,916 |
Thankyou every one
I will hang around and wait for status online. I appreciate more light on this. |
|
|
Sat, 9 Jun 2018 - 20:12
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,280 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
I will hang around and wait for status online. That's good. Are you intending to take it further, to adjudication anyway? -------------------- |
|
|
Sun, 10 Jun 2018 - 06:21
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 108 Joined: 8 Sep 2017 Member No.: 93,916 |
After reading above comments, I think I should go all the way.
I am not expert but always follow the honest advise here. I appreciate ongoing support. |
|
|
Sun, 10 Jun 2018 - 09:10
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,656 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
and they're still very confused with their 14/21 days. On that matter - 1/. Perhaps they'd like to explain to the adjudicator why your PCN offers 14 days discount (still wrong as beginning service rather than notice) while they've been issuing subsequent PCNs allowing 21 days? (we have at least one example on forum) 2/. From the wording used, they've offered to allow discounted payment until 29th June. Subject to the approval of others, I'm going to recommend you don't register your appeal just yet Let's monitor status on-line, to see exactly how long they really allow you. This what adjudicators repeatedly fail to examine. +1 -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sun, 10 Jun 2018 - 12:18
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,280 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Just dropping a note for myself here for later.
Penultimate para of 2180111742 -------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 09:57
Post
#20
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 12 Jun 2018 Member No.: 98,393 |
Mr Mcmahon attended today. He appeals as he states that there was no sign in the vicinity to indicate that moving traffic contraventions would be enforced by camera. He states that there was a flimsy and inadequate sign below the no right turn sign. The appellant provides a photograph taken on about 10th February.
The local authority states that it is prohibited to turn right from Tangent Link into Harold Hill. The London Borough of Havering has not provided any Traffic Management Order. In the absence of this evidence I cannot be satisfied that right turns are prohibited. I allow this appeal. this may help you Mr Grayson has attended in person. This PCN was issued for an alleged Code 50 contravention which is "performing a prohibited turn". That turn may be a no left turn, a no right turn or no U-turn. The PCN in this case does not correctly cite the alleged contravention. It states simply "No right turn". The wording "performing a prohibited turn" must be included and followed with the words "No right turn" which then convey to the motorist the nature of the alleged prohibited turn. It follows that the PCN was defective. The appeal is allowed for these reasons. or you could try this one |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Tuesday, 16th April 2024 - 17:43 |