PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Southwark PCN received by post, No entry Upper Ground/Hatfields junction
Anononon
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 10:41
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 13 Nov 2017
Member No.: 95,074



I have a received a PCN by post for allegedly failing to comply with a no entry restriction. I have posted what I received below, looking at it are there any grounds for appeal? The date of issue on the PCN is 9 days after the date of contravention.

When I phoned to ask for the still images (as per the info on the PCN) the person I spoke to was completely baffled as to why I would phone to ask for this as they available to view online. They were surprised the PCN makes no mention of this. They talked me through how to view the images and recording online. I have now viewed them and will post them below.







Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 16)
Advertisement
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 10:41
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
peterguk
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 10:54
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,735
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



Either uncover the location on the PCN or post a link to GSV.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Anononon
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 11:01
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 13 Nov 2017
Member No.: 95,074



Google street view
https://goo.gl/maps/u682yZcvJuH2

The second photo down where I have pixelated licence plate was showing my vehicle registration clearly.









Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 11:22
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,444
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



That section of Upper Ground is a one way street all the way to Blackfriars Bridge - did you drive up it all the way?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 12:03
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,983
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



GSV is for 2015 here, and shows two prominent No Entry signs. The camera is positioned after these, so they don't show in the pictures, or, I suspect, the video. So you could appeal on the evidence shows no contravention. The trouble with this sort of defence is if it gets to adjudication, the council show library photos of the signs. If you're going to succeed at an adjudication, you have to show the signs are either (1) missing, or (2) not positioned correctly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Anononon
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:20
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 13 Nov 2017
Member No.: 95,074



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 11:22) *
That section of Upper Ground is a one way street all the way to Blackfriars Bridge - did you drive up it all the way?


Thanks stamfordman. I have no recollection of being there. According to my memory and messages on my phone I was on the tube from Stockwell to Seven sisters on the date/time in question. I was picking up my wallet from an uber driver, it had fallen out of my pocket in his taxi the evening before!

QUOTE (Incandescent @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 12:03) *
GSV is for 2015 here, and shows two prominent No Entry signs. The camera is positioned after these, so they don't show in the pictures, or, I suspect, the video. So you could appeal on the evidence shows no contravention. The trouble with this sort of defence is if it gets to adjudication, the council show library photos of the signs. If you're going to succeed at an adjudication, you have to show the signs are either (1) missing, or (2) not positioned correctly.


Thanks for that insight Incandescent
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:26
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,256
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Anononon @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:20) *
I have no recollection of being there.

Eh?

A bit vague.
Is it somewhere you might have reason to be, ever go to, etc ?


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:28
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,444
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



What is the date of issue of the PCN and the date of contravention.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:29
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,256
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Incandescent @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 12:03) *
GSV is for 2015 here, and shows two prominent No Entry signs. The camera is positioned after these, so they don't show in the pictures, or, I suspect, the video. So you could appeal on the evidence shows no contravention. The trouble with this sort of defence is if it gets to adjudication, the council show library photos of the signs. If you're going to succeed at an adjudication, you have to show the signs are either (1) missing, or (2) not positioned correctly.

I agree but it's a fair opening to reps before clumping them with the fact the PCN is duff.

Statement re Charge Cert.
Issue would be premature and unlawful.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:36
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,705
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:29) *
QUOTE (Incandescent @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 12:03) *
GSV is for 2015 here, and shows two prominent No Entry signs. The camera is positioned after these, so they don't show in the pictures, or, I suspect, the video. So you could appeal on the evidence shows no contravention. The trouble with this sort of defence is if it gets to adjudication, the council show library photos of the signs. If you're going to succeed at an adjudication, you have to show the signs are either (1) missing, or (2) not positioned correctly.

I agree but it's a fair opening to reps before clumping them with the fact the PCN is duff.

Statement re Charge Cert.
Issue would be premature and unlawful.


Got a case re that post later


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:40
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,058
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



OP--- if there are 616 signs this thread will be of interest:-

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=115175

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Anononon
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 16:21
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 13 Nov 2017
Member No.: 95,074



QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:26) *
QUOTE (Anononon @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:20) *
I have no recollection of being there.

Eh?

A bit vague.
Is it somewhere you might have reason to be, ever go to, etc ?


I live about 20 mins drive from there and I have parked on Hatfields (the road approaching the junction in question) on a couple of occassions, both on a Saturday, afternoon and evening, but I'm sure on the date of the contravention I was elsewhere retrieving my lost wallet.


QUOTE (stamfordman @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:28) *
What is the date of issue of the PCN and the date of contravention.


Contravention 29/10/17
PCN 07/11/17
I opened it this morning because I was away travelling last week

QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:29) *
QUOTE (Incandescent @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 12:03) *
GSV is for 2015 here, and shows two prominent No Entry signs. The camera is positioned after these, so they don't show in the pictures, or, I suspect, the video. So you could appeal on the evidence shows no contravention. The trouble with this sort of defence is if it gets to adjudication, the council show library photos of the signs. If you're going to succeed at an adjudication, you have to show the signs are either (1) missing, or (2) not positioned correctly.

I agree but it's a fair opening to reps before clumping them with the fact the PCN is duff.

Statement re Charge Cert.
Issue would be premature and unlawful.


Can I demonstrate at this stage the PCN is duff?


QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:40) *
OP--- if there are 616 signs this thread will be of interest:-

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=115175

Mick


Interesting. Thank you for the link Mick

This post has been edited by Anononon: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 16:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 21:51
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,705
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:36) *
QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:29) *
QUOTE (Incandescent @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 12:03) *
GSV is for 2015 here, and shows two prominent No Entry signs. The camera is positioned after these, so they don't show in the pictures, or, I suspect, the video. So you could appeal on the evidence shows no contravention. The trouble with this sort of defence is if it gets to adjudication, the council show library photos of the signs. If you're going to succeed at an adjudication, you have to show the signs are either (1) missing, or (2) not positioned correctly.

I agree but it's a fair opening to reps before clumping them with the fact the PCN is duff.

Statement re Charge Cert.
Issue would be premature and unlawful.


Got a case re that post later



Here

2170469036

The Appellant has not attended and the Authority is not represented.
The Authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was stopped in the box junction when prohibited when in Finchley Road/Bridge Lane on 27 June 2017 at 17.27.
The Appellant's case is that he had anticipated that the exit would be clear.
He also takes a point on the Penalty Charge Notice in relation to the time permitted time for representations to be considered and referred me to the case of Atlas - v Barnet case number 2170053479.
I have considered the evidence and I have allowed this appeal on the truncated period point that an Authority must consider representations. I have copied into this decision the relevant part of the Atlas case.
"Section 4(8)(a) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 provides that A penalty charge notice under this section must [amongst other things] state ... (iii) that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice; ... (v) that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable; (vi) the amount of the increased charge; ... and (viii) that the person on whom the notice is served may be entitled to make representations under paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Act; and (8)(b) requires that they specify the form in which any such representations are to be made.
Paragraph 1(3) of the Schedule provides that the enforcing authority may disregard any such representations which are received by them after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the penalty charge notice in question was served. {effectively 28 days + 2 days}
Mr Atlas correctly points out that in this case the Penalty Charge Notice states: 'The penalty charge of £130 must be paid not later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of this notice. If the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period and no representations have been made, an increased charge of 50% to £195 may be payable and a charge certificate may be issued.'
Mr Atlas submits that this wording is not compliant with the requirements of the 2003 Act and, further, effectively limits the time he has to make representations.
I accept this submission. The wording does not comply with the requirements of the Act and therefore effectively limits the time a recipient has to make representations or, indeed, to pay the full penalty charge before a Charge Certificate is issued."
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed.


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 22:35
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,256
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Anononon @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 16:21) *
QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:29) *
QUOTE (Incandescent @ Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 12:03) *
GSV is for 2015 here, and shows two prominent No Entry signs. The camera is positioned after these, so they don't show in the pictures, or, I suspect, the video. So you could appeal on the evidence shows no contravention. The trouble with this sort of defence is if it gets to adjudication, the council show library photos of the signs. If you're going to succeed at an adjudication, you have to show the signs are either (1) missing, or (2) not positioned correctly.

I agree but it's a fair opening to reps before clumping them with the fact the PCN is duff.

Statement re Charge Cert.
Issue would be premature and unlawful.


Can I demonstrate at this stage the PCN is duff?

See the case judgement PMB has given you.
That PCN, from Barnet, wasn't even so directly badly worded as yours here.

A Charge Certificate is a serious escalation of the case, removing any further right to defend yourself.
To threaten to send one earlier than the law permits is naughty corner time for Southwark.

Law here >

Charge certificates

5(1)Where a penalty charge notice is served on any person and the penalty charge to which it relates is not paid before the end of the relevant period, the enforcing authority may serve on that person a statement (in this paragraph referred to as a “charge certificate”) to the effect that the penalty charge in question is increased by 50 per cent.
(2)The relevant period, in relation to a penalty charge notice is the period of 28 days beginning—
(a)where no representations are made under paragraph 1 above, with the date on which the penalty charge notice is served;


Your PCN clearly states this period to begin 'date of notice'.
This is two days earlier because the law also defines 'service' as being 'two working days'.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Anononon
post Tue, 14 Nov 2017 - 11:01
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 13 Nov 2017
Member No.: 95,074



Thank you PMB & Neil! Very helpful
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Anononon
post Thu, 17 May 2018 - 08:43
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 13 Nov 2017
Member No.: 95,074



This PCN hasn't been resolved yet, timeline of events below:

07/11/17 - PCN by post for a moving traffic contravention

08/12/17 - Appealed online and received an email confirmation saying 'the case will be put on hold until you receive a reply from Southwark Parking Services.'

18/01/18 - Charge certificate

02/02/18 - I called Southwark Parking Services to tell them I hadn't received a reply to my appeal, only a charge certificate. I was advised it was out of their hands and I had to wait for the order of recovery from the TEC. I have the name of the person I spoke to and the time of the call.

14/02/18 - Notice of rejection of representations - I didn't appeal because of the charge certificate already having been issued. I was waiting for the order of recovery- as advised by Southward parking services staff.

22/03/18 - Another charge certificate

30/04/18 - Order for recovery. Statutory declaration says it must be signed before a commissioner of oaths.

There has been a bit of a delay in receiving my post because I separated from my partner who I shared a home and joint mortgage with at the end of January. I got a new address on 17/03/18 and my new V5 certificate showing this address was printed on 21/03/18. All this correspondence from Southwark is addressed to my old address. I've been feeling stressed to the point of not being able to remember the lifelong PIN number to unlock my phone, nor my postcode of my old home when dealing with Solicitors for the transfer of Equity. So yeah, I haven't been on top of dealing with this PCN.

Any input would be much appreciated. Thank you
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Thu, 17 May 2018 - 10:36
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,444
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



This doesn't look good because your phone call seems to have triggered a cancellation of the charge certificate despite what they told you and you needed to act on the rejection.

I'm not sure how you can truthfully respond to the OfR now - others will advise.
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: Monday, 16th December 2019 - 00:27
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.