PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN for contravention 33E, Moving Traffic PCN for Camrose Avenue, Harrow
Ajay1
post Tue, 14 Jan 2020 - 22:25
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 Jan 2020
Member No.: 107,411



I have received a PCN from Harrow Council for alleged contravention: 33E: Using a route restricted to certain vehicles buses, cycles and taxis only today. This was for the contravention on 1st Jan, 2020 03:08 am when my wife was driving us back from a NY party. This is for her driving on a bus stop path as I stopped her only after she had passed through enough. I recd the PCN dated 13th Jan today.
I have seen some posts here where some members have been able to appeal successfully while some others had their appeals rejected which led to them paying the full fine of £130 instead of the reduced fine of £65 if paid within the first 14 days.
I am confused whether to appeal or just pay the fine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 14)
Advertisement
post Tue, 14 Jan 2020 - 22:25
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Ajay1
post Wed, 15 Jan 2020 - 09:59
Post #2


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 Jan 2020
Member No.: 107,411



The photographic evidence is shown here.

PCN is enclosed here. There are cases where people have appealed and won the argument. Any help?



This post has been edited by Ajay1: Thu, 16 Jan 2020 - 09:17
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 

Attached File(s)
Attached File  PCN.pdf ( 707.46K ) Number of downloads: 100
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ajay1
post Wed, 15 Jan 2020 - 21:10
Post #3


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 Jan 2020
Member No.: 107,411



Refer to my post dated 18th Jan.

This post has been edited by Ajay1: Sat, 18 Jan 2020 - 22:30
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ajay1
post Sat, 18 Jan 2020 - 10:07
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 Jan 2020
Member No.: 107,411



No response yet. Anyone has had experience related to this? Appreciate feedback on this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 18 Jan 2020 - 21:38
Post #5


Member


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



I'm not sure we've had much success here and your proposed representations is all over the place. You need to use paragraphs, quotations marks and/or italics formatting so one can distinguish what it is that you are saying, what is quoted from the regulations, what is quoted from the tribunal and so on. Nobody is going to trawl through one mass of text. Also consider breaking it down into sections with headings.


--------------------
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
Ajay1
post Sat, 18 Jan 2020 - 21:45
Post #6


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 Jan 2020
Member No.: 107,411



I copied bits without amending them much when I posted the above. However, the amended draft is enclosed.

This post has been edited by Ajay1: Sat, 18 Jan 2020 - 22:33
Attached File(s)
Attached File  PCN_appeal.pdf ( 88.46K ) Number of downloads: 117
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 18 Jan 2020 - 23:29
Post #7


Member


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



Sorry but that is truly awful, don't send it as it is.


--------------------
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
Ajay1
post Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 07:57
Post #8


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 Jan 2020
Member No.: 107,411



Which parts are awful? I have removed all the parts related to interpretation of sections by judiciary as anyway, I do not understand all this. The revised draft is enclosed. Does this look better?

This post has been edited by Ajay1: Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 11:57
Attached File(s)
Attached File  PCN_appeal_Rev1.pdf ( 24.17K ) Number of downloads: 63
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 19:17
Post #9


Member


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



QUOTE (Ajay1 @ Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 07:57) *
I do not understand all this.

Well it's generally a terrible idea to engage in any sort of litigation if you don't know what you're doing. It might be a good idea to do a lot more research and try and get your head round things.


QUOTE
Before I realised, I was in the island, unable to react since reaction time is inadequate
particularly at night-time.

This implies that you were driving too fast, or weren't (aren't?) fit to drive.

QUOTE
Hence, bus gates need more than a
Section 36 sign to disallow entry and greater distance than a few metres to the island for
motorists to be able to take action.

This will be news to the adjudicator, as they deal with bus gate cases all the time. There is no case law that suggests a bus gate "needs" more than a section 36 sign, and just because you say more than a sign is needed does not make it so.

Reason 2 has merit, but there is no "schedule 1(5)(2)(a)", I think you mean paragraph 5(2)(a) of Schedule 1 but that's not the same thing. You're not quoted the rationale from Shelley Sinclair v London Borough of Lewisham (218033612A, 26 September 2018) which is the leading case on this topic.

QUOTE
This in effect means that the contravention description in failing to comply with the sign is
incorrect, as the failure to include this sign in section 36 means enforcement is only applicable
for contravention of a traffic order

This says the opposite of what it should say

Reason 3 is of no merit whatsoever, it's like telling a policeman that it's ok to do more than 70 on the motorway because that limit was introduced to reduce deaths on foggy nights, and because it's a bright sunny day it's ok to do 100.

To be honest, I think you'd be better off waiting to see if anyone would be willing to write a representation for you because I think that on your own, you don't stand a chance. You have another week before the discount expires so there's no need to rush.


--------------------
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
stamfordman
post Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 19:32
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



A recent allowed appeal is:

219043298A
09 Nov 2019
The contravention alleged on the PCN is that this vehicle 'Used a route restricted to certain vehicles buses, cycles and taxis only'. The appellant submits however that the contravention is correctly stated as being of the council's S.36 sign conveying the restriction rather than of the restriction itself as set out in the Traffic Management Order she citing previous decisions of the adjudicator in support. The council does not appear to make any submissions in response to the point raised. I am satisfied having considered the matter my noting the review decision of the adjudicator under case reference 2170323030 as relied upon by the appellant that she is correct. I accordingly find that the contravention as stated on the PCN did not occur. Given my determination on that point I need make no further findings in this case. The appeal is allowed.

2170323030 referred to is one of Mr Mustard's reviews at a different location in Harrow.

The appellant was represented by Mr Dishman at this scheduled personal application hearing but the Enforcement Authority did not attend and was not represented.

This is an application by the appellant for review of the original Adjudicator’s decision to refuse the appeal.

The application is made under Regulation 11(1)(e) of the Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators) (London) Regulations 1993 on the basis that the interests of justice require such a review.

Mr Dishman submits that the original Adjudicator erred in law by refusing the appeal because the Penalty Charge Notice, issued under the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003, stated that the contravention was issued for ‘using a route restricted to certain vehicles local buses and cycles only’.

The Enforcement Authority state that they have a valid Traffic Management Order to enforce this restriction and that it is clearly signed in accordance with the relevant legislation. They then refer to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002.

Section 36 of the 2003 Act provides in subsection (5) that, subject to subsection (6) below, for the purposes of this section, a penalty charge is payable with respect to a motor vehicle by the owner of the vehicle if the person driving or propelling the vehicle

(a) acts in contravention of a prescribed order; or

(b) fails to comply with an indication given by a scheduled section 36 traffic sign.

Subsection (6) provides that no penalty charge shall be payable under subsection (5)(a) above where

(a) the person acting in contravention of the prescribed order also fails to comply with an indication given by a scheduled section 36 traffic sign; or

(b) the contravention of the prescribed order would also give rise to a liability to pay a penalty charge under section 77 of the Road Traffic Act 1991.

There is no dispute that the sign at this location is a scheduled section 36 traffic sign, as specified in Schedule 3 to the 2003 Act, even though the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 have been superseded by the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016.

This Penalty Charge Notice does not allege that the vehicle failed to comply with a sign indicating a route restricted to certain vehicles.

Considering all the evidence before me carefully the application for review is successful and the appeal must be allowed.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ajay1
post Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 20:04
Post #11


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 Jan 2020
Member No.: 107,411



Thanks for your inputs, guys. I will remove point 3. The main point appears to be related to s36 sign. From the precedence above, it looks like the council will reject the appeal and then it will be my risk to make representation to tribunal citing s36 sign and its non-applicability to this PCN.

Should I give above examples in this appeal or when I make representation to the tribunal?

I can see past posts related to the first case. I will check the appeal draft there and modify mine accordingly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 20:27
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



You should look at the other tribunal decisions - most are refused. Personally I would pay this one at discount and not waste time on it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ajay1
post Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 20:52
Post #13


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 Jan 2020
Member No.: 107,411



Thanks, stamfordman. I have amended my appeal as attached. Have added the decision related to 219043298A as this presents a precedence to follow for the council.

ok, stamfordman. I will just appeal and then pay, if not allowed. Am I not allowed another 14 days after appeal rejection to pay at a discount?
Attached File(s)
Attached File  PCN_appeal_Rev2.pdf ( 18.38K ) Number of downloads: 76
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 21:23
Post #14


Member


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



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 20:27) *
You should look at the other tribunal decisions - most are refused. Personally I would pay this one at discount and not waste time on it.

So would I.

QUOTE (Ajay1 @ Sun, 19 Jan 2020 - 20:52) *
Am I not allowed another 14 days after appeal rejection to pay at a discount?

That's at the discretion of the council, it's not guaranteed. I see virtually zero chance of the council cancelling so some might say that unless you have an argument that could succeed at the tribunal, you're likely wasting your time.


--------------------
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
Ajay1
post Mon, 20 Jan 2020 - 06:24
Post #15


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 Jan 2020
Member No.: 107,411



Understood. Thanks for the help.
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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 18:07
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