PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )


!nsomniak
Posted on: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 - 11:05


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Many thanks Hippocrates, will get this sent off today.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #888997 · Replies: 16 · Views: 2,342

!nsomniak
Posted on: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 - 10:32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Here is the original PCN:







And the TFL rejection letter:





  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #888590 · Replies: 16 · Views: 2,342

!nsomniak
Posted on: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 - 09:36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Hi, just wondered if you had heard anything back yet from PATAS and what the outcome was?

I appealed mine under the fact the signs are confusing and contradictory along that route and also due to the fact that junction has no signs prohibiting a u-turn. I got a rejection letter the other day, just wondering if its worth appealing via PATAS, or just paying the £65 now.

Thanks
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #888584 · Replies: 15 · Views: 1,973

!nsomniak
Posted on: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 - 18:25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Appeal rejected:

My appeal as I sent it online:

I believe this contravention did not occur. For the following reasons.
The junction in question where this PNC was received DOES NOT have a “No U-Turn” sign in place.
The junction has its own right hand turn lane with its own set of traffic lights, there is NO sign in place along the approach to the junction saying that U-Turns are not permitted, neither is there correct signage in place anywhere at the traffic lights that effectively prohibits a U-Turn.
I would now like to explain the attached photographic evidence of a similar junction along the same road (A12 – Westbound Eastern Avenue) at the junction with Mawney Road.
I note that on the approach to this junction there IS a “No U-Turn” sign and then at the traffic lights there is again a “No U-Turn” sign. This junction clearly indicates that U-Turns are prohibited. This junction also has its own right hand turn lane. This is also the case for traffic travelling eastbound along the A12 at the same junction with No U-Turns in place.
Therefore IF the junction the contravention was incurred at prohibits such U-Turns why is there not similar signage to the Mawney Road junction.
I have attached photos of both junctions, therefore if you feel the need to reject this appeal I will require a written explanation as to why TFL’s signage is INCONSISTENT and thereby CONFUSING to motorists.

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #888464 · Replies: 16 · Views: 2,342

!nsomniak
Posted on: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 - 20:06


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


So can no one tell me the difference between the 2 junctions as the photos show?

Why does 1 get the No U-Turn sign and the other does not?

TFL should have consistent signage.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #881010 · Replies: 16 · Views: 2,342

!nsomniak
Posted on: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 - 09:23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


I have no intention of trying to get out of the PCN on a technicality with wording/details, but this user posted theirs and mine is the same bar the unique details: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=83671 my PCN is at the same junction for doing the same thing.

My main issue with this ticket is the fact that "IF" the signage along that stretch of road is correct, then it is also confusing and contradictory.

These photos are of the approact to the junction the PCN was received at. The first is approx 500 yrds from the junction as the sign indicates.









There is no "No U-Turn" signs anywhere along that part of the road approaching the junction or at the traffic lights.


Now compare those to this junction that is located along the same stretch of road within a mile of that one. (A12 / Mawney Road Junction) This junction also has its own right hand turn lane.

230 yrds from junction:






The same junction going in the opposite direction:





My question is, why go through all the effort with placing "No U-Turn" signs along certain parts of the road and having "No U-Turn" signs placed on traffic lights, when just a simple "blue sign/white arrow" on the lights would be sufficient?

It causes confusion as at some junctions they are saying NO U-TURN and others there is just an arrow, but apparently the U-Turn is still not allowed...
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #877337 · Replies: 16 · Views: 2,342

!nsomniak
Posted on: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 - 08:49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Hi, just wondering what the outcome was with this case as I have now got a PCN for doing a U-Turn at the exact same junction.

My PCN reads exactly as the one you posted, I will be sending an appeal in as I note that about a mile further down the same road (A12) at another junction there is a "No U-Turn" sign before the lights and where the right hand turn lane again has it's own dedicated lane, but on the traffic lights instead of a blue sign/white arrow they have the No U-Turn sign again.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #877332 · Replies: 15 · Views: 1,973

!nsomniak
Posted on: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 - 10:46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Hi,

Just had a PCN from Transport Of London, for an contravention 32T - Failed to drive in direction show by the arrow on a blue sign (turning in the wrong direction)

What I actually done was a U-Turn from the right hand turn lane, I have done this many times before as there are no signs saying that U-Turns are prohibited.

I have edited this Google maps photo to show where I was and the manoeuvre taken. (I know the google photo is from Nov 2012, but I am certain there are no "no u-turn" turns there still now.



The junction is where the A12(Westbound Eastern Avenue) meets Barley Lane and Hainault Road. I was in the lane to turn right into Hainault Rd, but made the U-turn to go east bound on the A12.

Is there any other reason why this move should not have been permitted?

Can I just appeal saying I made a U-Turn but there are no signs saying you cannot do them?

The rest of the ticket looks ok, time & date seem accurate. The 2 photos shown on the PCN are only of the car sitting in the right turn lane waiting at the lights. But I imagine they will have the full video available should I wish to view it.

Any help will be much appreciated.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #876617 · Replies: 16 · Views: 2,342

!nsomniak
Posted on: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 - 21:49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Thanks for replies, I got my V5 and a letter back from DVLA today they have amended it to now read that I acquired vehicle on 14th June 2012. So if the council refuse to listen to my initial letters I can always show them my a copy of my new V5.

I hope the previous owner enjoys his surprise when he gets them back through his door!
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #717830 · Replies: 8 · Views: 1,492

!nsomniak
Posted on: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 - 13:15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


I was willing to believe that a simple mistake had been made with regards to the date, and I know that I definitely signed the V5 as the the new keeper, I am pretty certain I would have dated it aswell.
However the fact that the most recent contravention had taken place on 10/06/12 and he would have been sent an initial letter with a discounted offer of a lower payment if made within 7 days, I never received this so it would have been sent to him and he has then told them he sold the car on "14/05/12" as the "Notice To Owner" has now come to me asking for the the full £120.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #717180 · Replies: 8 · Views: 1,492

!nsomniak
Posted on: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 - 09:37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Hi,

I bought a car second hand from someone recently, I paid in cash. I bought the car on 14/06/12 and everything was fine, I completed the logbook kept the "new keeper" slip and he said he would send it off to the DVLA. I received the new V5 in my name a few weeks later.

Then recently I received a PCN from Newham Council for an contravention that took place on 30/05/12 and then another for 01/06/2012. I then checked my V5 to find that it states the date I acquired the vehicle was 14/05/2012. (a whole month earlier than the true date) - Newham want £130 per PCN.

I contacted the DVLA to explain and they said to send back the V5 with a cover note etc. Luckily I have some evidence as I insured the car the same day I bought it (14/06/12) and my bank statements also show cash withdrawals to the value of £800 (the car was £850) on the same date and the original "new keeper slip". I have also sent letters to Newham Council explaining I was not the owner and forwarded copies of my evidence.

I have since received a further private PCN for another £120, that occurred on 10/06/12 so again I have written to them.

I now believe that the previous owner was fully aware of these charges before the sale of the car and was probably the reason he wanted to sell the car. I therefore believe that he has changed the date on the V5 to 14/05/2012 before sending it off to the DVLA. I am hoping the DVLA will be able to see that the V5 was altered in some way, or that the weight of my evidence backs up the fact I did not buy the car until 14/06/12.

Does anyone know if this can constitute fraud and if the police would do anything if I informed them?

I am not to worried about the fines as I will not be paying them and will go all the way to court if necessary.

Any help will be appreciated.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #717140 · Replies: 8 · Views: 1,492

!nsomniak
Posted on: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 - 16:57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


As for signage, the only sign that is around the area is one like this, but without the yellow background. Its stuck on a lampost, but facing the opposite way to which I entered the road, therefore would have never seen it.

  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #669568 · Replies: 7 · Views: 970

!nsomniak
Posted on: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 - 16:36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Thanks for that SRM,

I've just had a look on the LBBD website and their parking enforcement page states:

"There are compelling road safety reasons for enforcing parking and traffic restrictions - as our streets in Barking and Dagenham are getting busier, we have a responsibility to keep traffic flowing and to ensure we keep our streets safe for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians.

To achieve the aforementioned responsibility, parking contraventions are enforced by our Civil Enforcement Officers, and with the aid of our prescribed Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) equipments/mobile enforcement vehicles. In addition to the enforcement of parking contravention, our CCTV equipments are used to enforce bus lane and moving traffic contraventions.

Civil Enforcement Officers are assigned based on beat patterns to enforce parking restrictions in a fair, accurate and consistent manner. Penalty Charge Notices are issued accordingly when vehicles are seen in contravention of a restrictions in place, based on the trainings our officers have been given.

CCTV cameras are located across the borough and are also used to enforce parking regulations, traditionally enforced by Parking Attendants, including vehicles contravening footway parking bans, loading restrictions, pedestrian crossings and bus stops.

The mobile enforcement vehicles prioritise enforcement in areas where local residents have complained and highlighted level of non-compliance by motorists to restrictions in place - including, but not limited to, school keep-clear markings, banned turnings, disregarding traffic directional signs as well as bus lane restrictions.

When a vehicle is captured by CCTV for contravening a parking regulation, a penalty charge notice is sent by post to who we believe is the registered keeper of the vehicle."



Can anyone see if this is a decent policy, I thought I had spotted something when I read that CCTV was used to enforce moving traffic contraventions, and CEO's to enforce parking, but then they seem to cover themselves by the CCTV paragraph.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #669555 · Replies: 7 · Views: 970

!nsomniak
Posted on: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 - 14:21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Hi, as far as I can see they have not provided the info that I requested or given an in depth reply. They just state that they do not need a traffic order due to the General Powers Act 1974. They have not proved that they used an approved device, or that an enforcement officer could have issued the PCN on foot.

It's the kind of reply I was expecting, as its obviously too much work for them to prove that Frizlands Lane is "carriageway"
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #669057 · Replies: 7 · Views: 970

!nsomniak
Posted on: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 - 13:52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Member No.: 52,986


Hello, I wonder if anyone can help with the next step with this PCN from Barking & Dagenham Council.

It's for "Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway" (Code 62)

The PCN was received around 5 days after it happened, and as been done via a fixed CCTV camera.

I did a little searching on here and found a template reply by another member, and used that as a written appeal to the council.

"Dear Sir/Madam
Please be advised that on 9th January 2012, the day this alleged contravention occurred my husband ****** was the driver of the vehicle, I was a passenger in the vehicle and was with the vehicle for the entire duration of the time the vehicle was stationary in Frizlands Lane. My husband was unloading goods that were taken to the Post Office opposite and took no longer than 5 minutes to do so. At all times I was present with the vehicle and therefore could have moved it had it caused an obstruction to members of the public.
According to Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974, Section 15, part 3 – “A person shall not be convicted of an offence under this section with respect to a vehicle if he proves to the satisfaction of the court that the vehicle was parked (d) for the purpose of loading or unloading goods, (ii)the vehicle was not left unattended at any time while it was so parked”

I note from the PCN that the council believes my vehicle to have been parked on an area of road not considered by them to be carriageway.

It is necessary to bring to the council’s attention that the parts of a road considered by law to be and not to be carriageway, is not decided by physical appearance. A carriageway is not legally defined simply by the placing of tarmac and nor is a footway legally defined simply by the presence of a curb and a raised surface. Under law, what exists is road, otherwise known as highway.

The public has a right of way over all land that is public road. How the public exercise this right of way is not regulated by default. Therefore, unless regulation is imposed then the public can traverse over any road by any means, be it by foot, motor vehicle, bicycle etc. Government recognises that such unregulated use of a road is not only dangerous but also poor traffic management and so Government has introduced various laws to regulate how traffic flows over a road. Of these laws the most pertinent to this case is the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

The 1984 Act enables an authority to make an order regulating how different classes of traffic can use a road. Therefore, if an authority wants to prohibit vehicles or any other class of traffic from using a road or a part of a road then it is necessary for the authority to do this by order. Clear demonstration of this is the existence of orders that prohibit motor vehicles from cycle lanes and classes of traffic from bus lanes. Such orders are essential to lawfully deny a class or classes of traffic their right of way that would otherwise exist over those parts of road.

It is alleged that my vehicle was not parked on carriageway. All unregulated road is by default carriageway since the public has a right to pass and repass by vehicle if they choose. For the alleged contravention to be correct then the council needs to have regulated by order those parts of road where a right of way for vehicular traffic is prohibited, thus in effect making those parts of road footway, as only those on foot will have a right of way. The council however, has provided no evidence that the part of road my vehicle was parked on has by order been designated as a right of way for those on foot only. Therefore, I require the council to confirm if that part of road where my vehicle was parked is identified in any order as being footway. If there is such an order then I require the council to immediately make it available to me.

If no order under the 1984 Act prohibits vehicles from that part of road then the law does not recognise that part of road as being restricted to those on foot only (a footway) and therefore that part of road remains unregulated and does lawfully qualify as being carriageway. In such circumstances the penalty charge should be cancelled forthwith.

It is further noted that the penalty charge has been imposed under the provisions of the Traffic Management Act 2004. It is necessary to bring to the council’s attention their statutory duty to have regard to the Secretary of State’s Statutory Guidance. This statutory duty is imposed by section 87 of the Traffic Management Act 2004.

Paragraph 48 in the statutory guidance gives a clear instruction;

“The Secretary of State recommends that approved devices are used only where
enforcement is difficult or sensitive and CEO enforcement is not practical.

In addition, paragraph 50 instructs;

“The primary objective of any camera enforcement system is to ensure the
safe and efficient operation of the road network by deterring motorists from
breaking road traffic restrictions and detecting those that do. To do this, the
system needs to be well publicised and indicated with lawful traffic signs[/”

I find no reason for the council to conclude in the case of this alleged contravention, that enforcement by a CEO was difficult, sensitive or not practical. It is clear that the council simply enforced the restriction by approved device for their own convenience rather than for any of the reasons endorsed by the Secretary of State. It is also appears that the council failed to publicise well that the restriction is enforced by a camera system and failed to indicate the presence of the camera system with lawful traffic signs.

As a council must have regard to the Secretary of State’s statutory guidance, then where no regard to it appears to have been given a council is guilty of a procedural impropriety as defined by regulation 4(5) of the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007;

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—
I will also require evidence that the device used in this enforcement action is an “approved device”

I look forward to either the council’s confirmation that the penalty charge has been cancelled or a full explanation detailing why the council lawfully considers that part of road not to be carriageway and the council's explanation as to why they considered it necessary to disregard the statutory guidance.

Yours sincerely"


Here's the Initial PCN & Photos.










I have today received a letter titled "Notice of rejection of Formal Representation" along with a "Your Right To Appeal" form.

I have scanned the first 3 pages as the reply, the other 2 only contain information on how to pay.





I am now just wanting to know if its worth pursuing an appeal through the Parking & Traffic Appeals Service or just paying the reduced £55 now. I am not sure if the PCN was water tight, or as I have now appealed and not mentioned anything about errors if I can etc.

Any help would be much appreciated.

Thanks
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #669049 · Replies: 7 · Views: 970


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: Thursday, 15th November 2018 - 05:14
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.