PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

910 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 13:08


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Evidence must be exact. If they rely on a direction needed to support the erection of an otherwise non-prescribed sign then they must produce the actual plan in evidence to the adjudicator otherwise how could they evaluate its effect and the authority's compliance?

And IMO as the Restricted sign is now prescribed, which includes clear meanings then IMO the direction lapses

How can you have a time plate whose extent is infinite? No markings = no limits.

IMO 'directs that the road markings 1025.1 ..need not be used..' must include permitted variants.

Or have they tried to indicate limits by the use of contrasting patterns, in which case where is the authority for this because the 2016 TSRGD make no such provision?

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441386 · Replies: 92 · Views: 5,042

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 12:41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, is that all you have of the authorisation?

Schedule 6 to the 1994 Regs?

And it says ...'except where such markings are indicated..'

In what, a map or plan?

And where is this map or plan - not some bespoke update, the map or plan issued with the authorisation.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441375 · Replies: 92 · Views: 5,042

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 12:16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


I suggest you email parking:

Re: PCN ***********

I refer to your letter dated 6 December rejecting my representations.

Wihndtm?
'Awa Nns Nlds Nbbs'

R

Your name

Then email them the next day, re PCN ********

I refer to my email dated ****.

For the purposes of clarification which is totally absent from your letter, 'wihndtm' means 'what in heaven's name does this mean'.

I look forward to your response and, where necessary, an explanation of the words hidden within your acronyms.

Regards,

For the avoidance of doubt, a plea to other esteemed posters: I don't want to know whether you know the meanings of the acronyms, I want the council to explain how it could issue such gobbledygook.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441361 · Replies: 8 · Views: 165

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 10:44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, sorry to keep on about this point, but the address is fundamental.

I am sorry to doubt your friend's account, but let's say that their name is A N Other, IMO it would be unlawful for the postman to deliver to a non-specific address because for all they knew the occupiers of every other one of the 21 properties could have had a friend staying with them by the name of A N Other all of whom were waiting for an important letter. Addressee is not synonymous with occupier or name on the bell.

So, can you go back to your friend pl. How exactly did they get the letter? Was it put through the letter box of their unique address, do all properties share the same letter box e.g. collective postal arrangements, they met the postman at their door etc.

Service of docs forms part of a legal process. The overarching provision is here:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/30/contents

S7 refers.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441307 · Replies: 29 · Views: 315

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 09:53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


With respect, I think the OP is probably misinformed.

There would be revolution on the streets if a scheme whose sole purpose was to alleviate parking problems for residents did not have sufficient permits - within a published scheme of allocation- to achieve this at least on the basis of 1 permit per property.

It cannot be first come, first served.

OP, you need to understand that there are two issues in play here:
Your PCN and possible defences;
Your purchase.

While matters that pertain to the purchase may be put forward in mitigation against the PCN, IMO this is all they are. Whether you pursue the vendors and/or your conveyancer is another matter.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441286 · Replies: 31 · Views: 381

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 09:04


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


You are correct.

To be precise:
Was your car in contravention at 8.40? Yes.

Was it permssible in the circumstances to issue a PCN at 8.40? NO.

The 10-minute 'rule' doesn't affect contraventions, it solely prohibits a penalty being demanded until a period of 10 minutes (in contravention commencing when a restriction begins) has been exceeded.

Had a period of 10 minutes been exceeded at 8.40? You argue no, the contravention could not have begun until 8.30, therefore the authority were prohibited from serving a PCN until 8.41.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441269 · Replies: 19 · Views: 342

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 08:44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


OP, it is irrelevant for the general motorist what the Barnet website states, this has been taken from the blurb regarding a Barnet resident's application for a permit. It has no wider meaning for any other motorist who sees ONLY the unlawful sign.

It is the sign which gives rise to the confusion because it unlawfully uses a wheelchair logo and the phrase disabled permit holder together.

Mr M might resolve this through other channels, alternatively IMO wait for the NTO

And thanks to PMB for this:

Authorised sign Q here

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/trafficauths/case-3291.pdf


And where the hell is the wheelchair logo in the authorised sign? Of course it's not there, the SoS does NOT have any authority to disregard prescribed signs, they're there to address the anomaly that the number of permutations of restrictions permitted under the RTRA is greater than the number of prescribed signs. The SoS fills in gaps, they do not amend regs for an individual authority.

The sign neither conforms to the 2002 regs, which have been superseded anyway, nor to the new prescribed sign.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441266 · Replies: 20 · Views: 258

hcandersen
Posted on: Yesterday, 08:28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


You don't make life easy because you keep going back to the same points while ignoring the procedural steps AND what they said in their reply.

So, I'll try again.

The authority served the NTO in time and just, but only just, after the extended discount had lapsed. So, moving on..
They have a MAXIMUM 56 days in which to respond to reps. We still do NOT know when yours were served on them because you've not told us and they've not stated the date in the NOR. The NOR is in time, just. But I want to know exactly when and how you submitted your reps. Moving further on...
I read about white lines and can see dated GSV, but they state that there is a tariff board at the entrance to Market Place and that you risk being served with a PCN if not parked within a marked bay. THIS is likely to be your salvation, so please, please, get a photo of this. The contravention is not being parked outside a marked bay, is it? So firstly this betrays c**p reasoning and, secondly suggests it is a car park because there is NO on-street requirement for a sign to state this.

So OP, let's focus on these can we and forget about lines, white or otherwise, for the moment.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441263 · Replies: 45 · Views: 1,104

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 - 15:09


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Yes.

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441102 · Replies: 20 · Views: 258

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 - 15:07


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Write back for clarification.

Dear Sir,
Re:PCN **********

I refer to your letter dated *** rejecting my challenge against the PCN.

The purpose of this letter is to seek clarification on a matter of importance contained in the letter, namely that the authority believe that the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 prescribe signs and lines for use in off-street car parks and that their meaning is conveyed by virtue of those regulations alone, any further reference in the terms and conditions of use displayed at the car park being superfluous and unnecessary.

Please also confirm that no such references are included in the car park's displayed Ts and Cs.

I ahould be grateful for a response prior to me having to respond to any NTO.

Yours*******


Their letter suggests they're too stupid to know, but it's all grist to the mill.

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441100 · Replies: 30 · Views: 659

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 - 14:34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


The council website states that 'permits are available'.

And why would a council introduce a scheme to benefit residents and then deny them access? wink.gif

And as for 'conveyancing searches revealed NO local authority parking restrictions or schemes to be in place). My solicitor has said I would have a case...'

You do, against them!

https://hoa.org.uk/advice/guides-for-homeow...ches-explained/

Note the reference to 'proposals for.....'IMO, this covers consultations on TROs which could directly affect the property.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441082 · Replies: 31 · Views: 381

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 - 12:50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


'value of the property may well have been adversely affected by the imposition of the parking scheme.'


Why?

These schemes are not introduced for fun.

Even the date of March is probably incorrect.

The process is:
Is there a problem?
If so, consult with residents to see what they think is causing the problem
This informs whether to consider restrictions and what type/duration.
Develop options
Consult on options.
Draft order.
Consult on order.
Bring into effect.

Whoever sold the property knew full well that changes were being considered and your solicitor should have discovered this.

Back to the 'diminished value' point. IF there was a problem of such magnitude that these measures were needed (looks like a commuter problem, maybe there's a transport facility/hub nearby) then the owners of properties probably benefit from the change and thereby enhance values. Having to park X streets away from a house is rarely an attractive feature.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441042 · Replies: 31 · Views: 381

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 - 12:39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


@stamfordman, precisely. Nothing to mislead a BB holder.

Good exhibit for the OP who, having fired-off a challenge already, is now faced with making the argument at the NTO stage with the full penalty in play.

But OP, we need docs, not transpositions. And leave in dates.

It's Christmas, and we love dates!
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441034 · Replies: 20 · Views: 258

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 - 12:03


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


I'd play the she was confused card. And add that you have now looked at the council's evidence and can see why - the sign departs from the prescribed versions in the BB booklet and the signs regulations.

The sign is not permitted, see the regs below.

Firstly, you need to understand that a permit is not a blue badge, it is a permit. Whoever holds permit 233 does not require a disabled logo, it is wholly irrelevant to other motorists. Permit 233 exists and only its holder may park subject to its conditions. The sign for this is a blue P, not a wheelchair. That the council have issued it to someone who MIGHT qualify for a BB is wholly irrelevant.

As you will see, if they place a P with a wheelchair logo it has the potential to cause confusion. As a start, the BB booklet doesn't even contemplate the joint use of the P and wheelchair - see page 16 of the booklet. But the traffic signs regs allow this, but the wording options are limited and what is NOT permitted is the use of 'disabled permit holder'. The ONLY permitted wording with the wheelchair is Disabled Badge Holder.

Yes a 'permit identifier' may be added, as here, but this is a number or other character, it is NOT the word 'permit'.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/4/made

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/go...nsibilities.pdf

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1441022 · Replies: 20 · Views: 258

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 - 09:19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


PCN some time before 18 Oct.
Challenge similarly.
Reply similarly.

What the hell has happened since is anyone's guess except the OP seems to accept that they have received a NTO which we've not seen.

For all we know the OP's timed out.

OP, get back into procedure pl and forget far-flung legal principles for the moment.

Post the NTO, and leave in dates, they're critical.
Have you made reps? How and when? Copy?
Have you received a response.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440973 · Replies: 45 · Views: 1,104

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 - 09:08


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


We need an accurate timeline, so far it's not.

You posted: On the 19th of November 2018(a couple of months after) I receive a rejection letter


But the letter itself is dated 19th!

So when and by what method was the letter sent e.g. post or email. If the latter, the actual date of the email.

We can then and only then work out the date of service and then the last day for the discount and then whether the NTO was issued prematurely. I'm focusing on date of issue, the reason being that if the NTO was issued on the 4th and that was the last day of the discount, then it's been issued prematurely.

But we don't know yet.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440969 · Replies: 7 · Views: 77

hcandersen
Posted on: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 - 08:29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Perfectly acceptable reply timeframe (in fact the regs do not even require a written response at this stage).

Pay the discount, there are no other winnable defences evident at the moment.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440956 · Replies: 12 · Views: 225

hcandersen
Posted on: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 - 21:57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


You're missing the point.

The bay is marked by a dashed red line. It is part of the red route, unlike a 'normal' parking place where the markings appear from nowhere.

The default position is that the location is subject to the red route restriction except..as indicated on a plate.

And if not indicated, then the default position applies.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440904 · Replies: 18 · Views: 326

hcandersen
Posted on: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 - 21:49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Scheme coming into effect is not the issue.

A scheme requires a traffic order which must be consulted upon, so we're going back some months before Sept.

You need to establish when the committe or portfolio member decision was taken to introduce this scheme, if not, then the date it was published in the Lon Gazette and local press.

But back to my issue: according to the website, permits are available.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440901 · Replies: 31 · Views: 381

hcandersen
Posted on: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 - 20:10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


https://www.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/residents/transport-and-roads/parking-and-permits/residents-parking-scheme/chester-residents-parking-sche.aspx

Zone M, permits available!
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440869 · Replies: 31 · Views: 381

hcandersen
Posted on: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 - 20:03


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Marston letter has Op name, town, county and post code but no street/road address


IMO, not possible.

Post code is a sorting tool. It narrows delivery to possbly 30-40 addresses. It is not possible to deliver a letter only on a post code.

You'll need to explain further.

To test my point, put the post code into this and see what you get:

https://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440867 · Replies: 29 · Views: 315

hcandersen
Posted on: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 - 19:49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


And how about..

Do you have a permit now? When did you get it? Are there any other PCNs in the pipeline?

PCN dated 4 Nov. You challenged on 6 Dec and they replied on 4 Dec. Bring on Dr. Who.

Pl clarify
.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440864 · Replies: 31 · Views: 381

hcandersen
Posted on: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 - 19:45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


+1. The smart way to bring the factors together.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440861 · Replies: 43 · Views: 859

hcandersen
Posted on: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 - 17:48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


Another OP who neither posts a draft nor, as or more importantly, posts the authority's case summary.

Your problem is that you were at the personal hearing; you should have brought this (the false reference to the discount being re-offered) to the adj's attention, smartly...I agree that on its own the reference to £65 in the NOR might be considered a simple, one-off, error. But it wasn't. I refer the adj to the authority's case summary, page *****, where they state******.

Given that the NOR does not offer the discount in those or any terms, the only options which can surely arise taking these into account are:

They meant to re-offer the discount but omitted to include this in the NOR and didn't bother to re-read the NOR before preparing their evidence, or
They pay scant regard to accuracy and didn't mean to re-offer the discount, the figure should have been £130 in the NOR, and have lied to the adjudicator in their case summary.

And then see if the adj just accepts the £65 as a typo!

But you didn't, and this is not new evidence.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440835 · Replies: 36 · Views: 1,359

hcandersen
Posted on: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 - 14:15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,786
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551


I waited patiently for the police car to either pass me or stop me....


The NOR is then silent on the matter.

Does nobody know or is prepared to admit for how long you were stopped?
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1440775 · Replies: 43 · Views: 859

910 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

New Posts  New Replies
No New Posts  No New Replies
Hot topic  Hot Topic (New)
No new  Hot Topic (No New)
Poll  Poll (New)
No new votes  Poll (No New)
Closed  Locked Topic
Moved  Moved Topic
 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Wednesday, 12th December 2018 - 08:46
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.