PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Parked correctly according to bay suspension, received ticket and vehicle damaged
okyko
post Thu, 17 Nov 2022 - 23:57
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,359



Howdy folks.

My car was parked correctly outside my flat in the residents bay. Bay suspension signs were put up (printed on 4 Nov) stipulating suspension from 4 spaces (20m) away from a cross street. I was parked 20+m away so I didn't move my car, there are no individual space markings in the bay, making it tough to check without a 20m tape measure in the car! I double checked the signage and even checked it the next evening as I walked past my car., all good.

Next day I received 2 phone calls, one from Westminster landline and one (I think) from a PCO mobile number - asking if I could move the car, I was at work across the city and not in a position to do so, I advised them both about the signage wording, the council guy said, "ok I won't send a lift vehicle, it sounds right", the PCO just mumbled something that was along the lines of "ok". - I wasn't trying to be difficult, I genuinely thought I had complied.

I got back to the car that evening very late (9pm) (long day!!) Conway construction had erected barriers in the middle of the road, effectively narrowing the lane to approx 2m between my car and the barrier, it was now the only car on that side, making it highly likely to be hit, which it was. The wheel arch damaged, the rear wheel hub hit. I reported to police as a fail to stop. My car was also covered in broken vehicle glass (not mine) all over the roof weirdly, perhaps from a lifted vehicle? Oh.... and a PCN for good measure.

Now I noticed a new sign I hadn't seen before attached below the previous one, saying suspension was 35m from the other end of the bay also. This says "printed on the 10th Nov" (6 days after the others) and 3 days after the suspension started on the 7th Nov, so these were clearly added later. Who knows how long from printing to being put up, I suppose they should have photo evidence of the sign being put up?
This second sign has spurious information, stating, "Warwick Square, outside 59". There is no 59 Warwick square along that stretch, there is a 59 St Georges Drive.
Also it states 35m from one end, 20m from the other= 55m. I measured the bay, its 58m long, guess where the 3m gap is!

Also, if you look at the attached picture, there are essentially 3 parking control signs, 1 official standard bay sign, 1 bay suspension sign and 1 later added suspension sign. one could question which of these is in force? If you are effectively saying the entire bay is suspended, why not state - THE ENTIRE BAY IS SUSPENDED - I would have thought they should also cover the original parking sign with the suspension notice to avoid all confusion?
The sign at one end (the end I pass) is still just the single original sign, also as per attached photo.

I intend to appeal the ticket as honestly as far as I recall, there was only one sign at the time I parked and I was outside the stipulated distance. The 2nd sign was added later and if I recall correctly was NOT THERE when I checked it the evening before this incident. the car had not been moved, was parked mostly inside this 'gap', the signs contain confusing address information, and the council demonstrated their ability to contact me as a driver, remove the vehicle to safety rather than narrow the carriageway to probably dangerous width. Imagine if fire services had required access.

This post has been edited by okyko: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 - 00:19
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image

 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 35)
Advertisement
post Thu, 17 Nov 2022 - 23:57
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
okyko
post Fri, 2 Dec 2022 - 09:26
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,359



Thanks for correcting me. Apologies for my cynicism, I had only thought as far as the council, they're pretty good at saying no, in my experience. What is my next step? Formal representation I guess. I have never done this before, would you be able to offer some guidance?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
okyko
post Fri, 2 Dec 2022 - 10:46
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,359



Well....

City of Westminster

Our Ref: WE21681188


02 December 2022

Date of Contravention:

Penalty Charge Notice No: Vehicle Registration Mark: Location:


14/11/2022 14:23:01

St George's Drive [A1] 21

Contravention Code: Contravention Description:

Parked wholly or partly in a suspended bay or space


Thank you for your correspondence regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

I have carefully considered the points you have raised and reviewed the details of the case in full. I can confirm that this PCN has been cancelled.

The PCN was issued as the Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) believed the vehicle to be parked in a suspended Resident parking bay.

I have been able to use my discretion on this occasion only, and cancel the above PCN. Please note, this

does not set a precedent for any PCN's that may be issued in the future.

Please be assured that you are no longer liable for this PCN.

To find out why the Council needs%2

This post has been edited by okyko: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 - 10:48
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
okyko
post Fri, 2 Dec 2022 - 14:19
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,359



This is obviously great news regarding the PCN. Out of interest, since the appeal had already been declined, why would it have been looked at again and reconsidered?
This then brings me to the point of the damage to the vehicle that was caused whilst parked there.
The works barriers were not in place when I left my house that morning, there were also other cars parked in front and behind mine in the bay meaning it was not a singular pinch point.
Erecting the barriers caused the road to be so narrow. The car was there before they were put up.
Is there a minimum width that must be left to be a safe carriageway?
The damage caused was clearly from a vehicle squeezing past too close.
If I had approached to park there whilst the barriers were up, there's NO WAY I (or, I believe any sensible person) would have chosen to park in such a tight access area on a main road using a nice car that I care for, as a width restriction bollard. I would have sought an alternative space, of which there are many nearby.
In allowing a parking space there, there was not enough room for the car to be safely left.
In my opinion, seeing as they subsequently suspended the other end of the bay in a way that still left that spot unsuspended, it was ill conceived and poorly assessed. They could/should/ought/might? have suspended the entire bay, removing all risk of obstruction and keeping the road clear. Civil enforcement officers make sure drivers follow parking regulations on public streets, given that the regulations were followed, it appears to me the regulations were insufficiently applied and directly led to damage to my vehicle. Also, upon erecting the barriers the construction company would have seen immediately there was an issue that would mean not only potential damage to my vehicle, but also hindrance to emergency services.
How the glass subsequently ended up on my car I have no explanation, perhaps whatever hit my car was carrying a wrecked vehicle on it, it's very odd and I can only pluck guesses from thin air.
How to prove any of this? I have a photo of the car the day prior showing no damage, but there were no witnesses of the event itself, albeit my retired special constable neighbour who passed at 4pm, and again after 9pm when I was there assessing the damage and spoke with him, confirmed that at 4pm there was no damage to the car, which he always looks at when passing :)
My instinct would be to address a letter to Westminster council (for allowing it), co-mentioning Conway (for carrying out the work).
None of this damage would have occurred if this scenario hadn't taken place.
I have reported to the Police as a fail to stop and my insurance broker is aware.
I feel like there may be nuances to the argument, however I am certain my assessment is legitimate.

This post has been edited by okyko: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 - 17:30
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 3 Dec 2022 - 19:36
Post #24


Member


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



QUOTE (okyko @ Fri, 2 Dec 2022 - 14:19) *
This is obviously great news regarding the PCN. Out of interest, since the appeal had already been declined, why would it have been looked at again and reconsidered?

Because this isn't North Korea and the council don't get to be judge, jury and executioner: if a council rejects formal representations there is a right of appeal the London Tribunals, where an independent and impartial adjudicator with no financial interest in the outcome gets to decide who's right and who's wrong. We one of us offers to represent someone at the tribunal, we win in the vast majority of cases.

As for the damage to your car, you have a negligence claim against the unknown driver of the third party vehicle, I don't think you have a valid negligence claim against the council or its contractor.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Sat, 3 Dec 2022 - 19:38


--------------------
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
okyko
post Sat, 3 Dec 2022 - 21:56
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,359



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 3 Dec 2022 - 19:36) *
QUOTE (okyko @ Fri, 2 Dec 2022 - 14:19) *
This is obviously great news regarding the PCN. Out of interest, since the appeal had already been declined, why would it have been looked at again and reconsidered?

We one of us offers to represent someone at the tribunal, we win in the vast majority of cases.


Suggesting, someone, you, took the time to do this?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 01:39
Post #26


Member


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



QUOTE (okyko @ Sat, 3 Dec 2022 - 21:56) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 3 Dec 2022 - 19:36) *
QUOTE (okyko @ Fri, 2 Dec 2022 - 14:19) *
This is obviously great news regarding the PCN. Out of interest, since the appeal had already been declined, why would it have been looked at again and reconsidered?

We one of us offers to represent someone at the tribunal, we win in the vast majority of cases.


Suggesting, someone, you, took the time to do this?

There's at least three of us who do this regularly and others do it on an ad-hoc basis.


--------------------
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
mickR
post Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 01:50
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,235
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



I'm interested to hear how your special cuntsable friend can confirm there wasn't any damage to your car earlier in the day when the damaged area wasn't kerbside, does he/she normally walk in the road?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
okyko
post Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 10:25
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,359



[/quote]
There's at least three of us who do this regularly and others do it on an ad-hoc basis.
[/quote]

So, likely they received communication from you, had another look and reversed their decision.
Im very grateful for your help and for taking the time to host this forum, saved me time, money and stress. I recall seeing a donation button around somewhere.

I haven't had a parking ticket, or other driving penalties in over 10 years, considering I live and drive through London that's pretty good going I think. So, hopefully I wont be in need of further assistance too soon, but if I do, it's good to know you're here.

I would have expected there to be a minimum width allowed for a carriageway. It's a shame about the damage to the car, I have it well insured for a reason, doesn't seem fair to make my insurance guys pay out for someone else's negligence, but I guess that's why the premiums are what they are sad.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
okyko
post Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 10:40
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,359



QUOTE (mickR @ Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 01:50) *
I'm interested to hear how your special cuntsable friend can confirm there wasn't any damage to your car earlier in the day when the damaged area wasn't kerbside, does he/she normally walk in the road?


Correction..Neighbour. Not friend.
I can't think of a better way to get from one side of the road to the other.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Foxy01
post Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 11:26
Post #30


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 247
Joined: 4 Mar 2016
Member No.: 82,764



QUOTE (okyko @ Fri, 2 Dec 2022 - 14:19) *
Is there a minimum width that must be left to be a safe carriageway?
The damage caused was clearly from a vehicle squeezing past too close.


So what was the distance between the temporary barriers and your car?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
okyko
post Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 13:48
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,359



QUOTE (Foxy01 @ Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 11:26) *
QUOTE (okyko @ Fri, 2 Dec 2022 - 14:19) *
Is there a minimum width that must be left to be a safe carriageway?
The damage caused was clearly from a vehicle squeezing past too close.


So what was the distance between the temporary barriers and your car?


2.2meters
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickR
post Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 14:33
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,235
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



the damage to your car is very odd. to smash vehicle glass takes quite some impact yet very insignificant damage to your bodywork like a minor scrape, so would suggest the glass came from something already broken.
if it were a recovery vehicle I would have expected the drive to have preferred hitting barriers rather than a parked vehicle
its very strange

QUOTE (okyko @ Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 11:40) *
QUOTE (mickR @ Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 01:50) *
I'm interested to hear how your special cuntsable friend can confirm there wasn't any damage to your car earlier in the day when the damaged area wasn't kerbside, does he/she normally walk in the road?


Correction..Neighbour. Not friend.
I can't think of a better way to get from one side of the road to the other.


hmmm ok well you do indeed have a particularly observant friend neighbour
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
okyko
post Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 15:57
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,359



QUOTE (mickR @ Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 14:33) *
the damage to your car is very odd. to smash vehicle glass takes quite some impact yet very insignificant damage to your bodywork like a minor scrape, so would suggest the glass came from something already broken.
if it were a recovery vehicle I would have expected the drive to have preferred hitting barriers rather than a parked vehicle
its very strange

hmmm ok well you do indeed have a particularly observant friend neighbour


- Right, quite strange. I wish I had video just to know what happened. My reason for thinking recovery vehicle was like you say, not seemingly enough force from swiping bodywork, though as I said, the wheel hub shows strike marks, so sure it could have shaken already broken glass. Also, there are 2 patches of glass, one on the roof, one by the front wheel, the stuff on the roof landed there from above as there are paint chips on the roof, and also down the drivers door in small vertical lines commensurate with raining glass, perhaps momentum carried it forward to land near the front wheel. I certainly don't think it possible for a strike as low as this must have been on a vehicle to break glass above the height of my roof. Unless that vehicle has a glass door which reaches low, such as a bus (no buses use that route). A garbage truck seems a possible suspect due to the frequency they drive that route, but doesn't explain the glass. My other hunch is one of the Conway trucks. Rough bunch these guys, any damage to their vehicles is probably a 3rd party problem and a disgruntled road worker saying 'oh woopsie' doesn't sound too far fetched. But, all speculation.

He's an ex counter terrorism cop - you'd think they are pretty observant by training. Also, it's Pimlico, very very quiet streets and a lot of curtain twitchers observant neighbours.

This post has been edited by okyko: Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 17:38
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickR
post Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 16:10
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,235
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



shame none of them saw who hit your car
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
okyko
post Sun, 4 Dec 2022 - 17:41
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,359



useless cuntsables
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 17 Dec 2022 - 11:46
Post #36


Member


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



Interesting EIR response from Westminster:

190933416:
I can confirm that the information requested is held by Westminster City Council. The
photographs are attached, and the following details are according to our database.

3rd November - Suspension Booked
4th November - Sign Printed
4th November - Sign reported as being wrong
4th November - Sign Amended - Location description amended Changed from "Outside numbers 51 to 57" to "End bays outside 57 to Clarendon Street Junction"
4th November - Sign Reprinted and replaced
14th November – Request received for vehicle to be removed from bay
2nd December - Sign Removed

In the interest of advice and assistance, I can advise that vehicles would not be logged at the time the signage was installed unless the suspension had already started. According to our records, no vehicles were logged when the suspension sign was first implemented on 4 November. There was only one request received for a vehicle to be removed from this suspended bay whilst the temporary measures were active.








190933420:
I can confirm that the information requested is held by Westminster City Council. The photographs are attached, and the following details are according to our database.

3rd November - Suspension Booked
4th November - Sign Printed
4th November - Sign reported as being wrong
4th November - Sign Amended. Location details changed from "Outside number 29 to 59 as shown" to "Outside the entrance to 59 towards St Gabriel's Church"
10th November - Sign Reprinted
10th November - Sign Replaced
2nd December - Sign Removed

In the interest of advice and assistance, I can advise that vehicles would not be logged at the time the signage was installed unless the suspension had already started. According to our records, no vehicles were logged when the suspension sign was first implemented on 4 November and at the time the sign was replaced on 10 November. There were also no requests for vehicles to be moved from this suspended bay whilst the temporary measures were active.








Of course it's now academic.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Sat, 17 Dec 2022 - 11:59


--------------------
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

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 11:42
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