PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

619 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Yesterday, 21:25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


You croosed the bridge drove up to the toll booth, then turned around and drove back. So 28 applies you did not pay when you should have
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472645 · Replies: 10 · Views: 135

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Yesterday, 20:39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


The law

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1983/5/...19830005_en.pdf


its just not worth going before a magistrate for £16
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472630 · Replies: 10 · Views: 135

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Yesterday, 20:22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


It doesn't matter cycle track or not the contravention is

Save as provided in subsections (3), (4), (7) and (11), any person who causes or permits any vehicle to be parked in Greater London with one or more wheels [F2on or over any part of a road] other than a carriageway [F3, or on or over a footpath,] shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 1 on the standard scale.]
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472620 · Replies: 10 · Views: 115

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Yesterday, 14:01


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


QUOTE (John Bravo @ Wed, 20 Mar 2019 - 13:52) *
Hi again stamfordman & PASTMYBEST,
I understand. What should I do now? What is the process?
I am under the impression that I should attend this hearing otherwise they just rule this out in someone elses favour if you do it "offline".
When I was there last time the adjudicator has instantly given me the answer and allowed for the appeal.
But I don't understand why this can still be a grey area to some other adjudicators.
Best regards


Post the case number The adjudicator seems to have erred in law so you can apply for a review as the interests of justice require it
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472514 · Replies: 30 · Views: 936

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Yesterday, 09:50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


QUOTE (stamfordman @ Tue, 19 Mar 2019 - 22:14) *
"In any event, the purpose for which the footway is dropped is not relevant."

That's not what the law says. I think this calls for a review.



+1 the purpose for the DK id central to the contravention
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472444 · Replies: 30 · Views: 936

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Yesterday, 09:45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


From the tribunal web site

If you wish to apply for review, you should write to the Head of Support Services at the address given on your decision letter within 14 days of the decision being sent to you or handed to you at the hearing centre.
You must:
Set out in full your grounds for asking for a review; and
Say which of the cases one to four above you claim applies and why; and
If you are writing outside the 14 days, explain why. The adjudicator will not accept an application out of time unless there is good reason for the delay
Request a personal hearing of your application if you want one – if you do not, the application will be decided on the papers only.
Unless you attend a personal hearing, the decision will be posted to you.
Please note that London Tribunals will not inform the enforcement authority of your application unless it is successful - you may wish to inform the enforcement authority of the application yourself.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472441 · Replies: 45 · Views: 1,555

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Yesterday, 09:22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


I think you have a very good chance of getting this overturned as the manoeuvre was for a reason beyond your control

this case has similarities

216045613A

This PCN was issued for the alleged contravention of failing to comply with a sign in Lionel Road North indicating that vehicular traffic must pass to the specified side of the sign.
I have reviewed the CCTV footage and this shows Dr Shahrabani's car driving to the right of a blue sign on an island bollard with an arrow directing traffic to pass to the left of the sign. I am, however, allowing the appeal because I accept the evidence of Dr Shahrabani that he drove to the right of the sign to avoid a collision with stationary vehicles. There was a line of parked vehicles to the driver's left and the last of these was parked with the nose almost touching the speed hump before the traffic island. Given that driving to the left could have been a dangerous manoeuvre, I find that the alleged contravention did not occur.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472437 · Replies: 2 · Views: 117

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 - 18:38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


Two ways of looking at your suggestion, but remember its your representations so we only advise. From experience the council will not consider your representation so is it worth the work involved to submit what is effectively your appeal

Signage issues are governed by The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 regulation 18. Adequacy is a subjective view, so you need to present a persuasive argument (we will help) you do not plea bargain with them if you make the argument re one PCN make it re both, whether you continue the argument to appeal should depend on the response you get


Getting the second PCN cancelled is not a foregone conclusion it is not a continuous contravention the time between the two is to great. But you/we can argue that it is a continuing contravention in that you made the same mistake twice, but did not have the opportunity to learn of the mistake before the second contravention because the first PCN was served after the second contravention occurred



you would only be making this argument against the second PCN

You still have plenty of time so don't panic I don't have a great deal of time for the next couple of days but after the weekend am completely free to concentrate on a few things on here
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472357 · Replies: 13 · Views: 172

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 - 16:56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


QUOTE (TouringMuso01 @ Tue, 19 Mar 2019 - 15:09) *
Thanks PMB - Just 3 small boxes on the form:

1.Please Explain why you think they should pay your costs

2.Costs You are applying for

and

3.Amount


The reason they should pay is that they were wholly unreasonable in pursuing enforcement and contesting your appeal

Explanation I will draft for you

and amount at the litigant in person rate of £19 per hour say 5 hours so £95
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472336 · Replies: 195 · Views: 6,445

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 - 14:07


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


QUOTE (StevieSpain @ Tue, 19 Mar 2019 - 12:07) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 19 Mar 2019 - 11:49) *
I think you should be looking at s110 to 117.

These deal with the Secretary of State, Traffic Commissioner, revocation and suspension of licences.?.
Mine has never been suspended, not revoked, it is (as of now, anyway) clean, no points.

Am I missing something?


110

(1)
Licences under Part III of this Act to drive motor vehicles of classes which include large goods vehicles or passenger-carrying vehicles or large goods vehicles or passenger-carrying vehicles of any class shall be granted by the Secretary of State in accordance with this Part of this Act and shall, in so far as they authorise the driving of large goods vehicles or passenger-carrying vehicles, be otherwise subject to this Part of this Act in addition to Part III of this Act.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1472280 · Replies: 9 · Views: 473

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 - 12:04


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


So its a no waiting restriction by their own admission so should have been code 01 parked in a restricted street
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472234 · Replies: 41 · Views: 769

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 - 11:59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


That your car was moved rather than impounded suggests that it was in situ before the sign went up, that could have been only that day as the sign states it was for emergency works
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472230 · Replies: 9 · Views: 102

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 - 11:49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


I think you should be looking at s110 to 117.


Member roythebus might be helpful with this try a PM to him
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1472225 · Replies: 9 · Views: 473

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 23:26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


I was thinking something similar re the signage and think a reasonable argument could be made re it being confusing

In both the CC surcharge and the phone service charge the council seek to off set their cost. It is that that the now lord chief justice ruled on I'm not as against the argument re notifying the right to view the CCTV but the tribunal do tend to dismiss this argument as without merit so it would only dilute the 0845 argument.
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472145 · Replies: 13 · Views: 172

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 21:23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


Have a read of this The first point will form the basis of any appeal you make

https://1drv.ms/w/s!AtBHPhdJdppVrmINLGYP8KloJnBT
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472115 · Replies: 13 · Views: 172

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 21:14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


If it wasn't for the overhang into the area that is clearly marked I would say you have a reasonable chance. But you would be arguing the lines are too faded to count with the back end in clear contravention

Be polite and diffident in making a challenge that the lines where you parked were so faded that you were led to believe that they ended where the more recently painted lines ended. I wouldn't risk the discount though
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472108 · Replies: 9 · Views: 86

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 21:04


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


I might be said that I am one of the more enthusiastic poster here when it comes to fighting box junction tickets, but your argument that you were cut up is doomed to fail.

I post this case 2170078458

Mr Preston does not dispute that his car stopped in this box junction at the time alleged by the Enforcement Authority, but put forward a number of arguments as to why he should not have been penalised. In essence he submitted that the traffic was moving steadily as he approached the junction, and that he could not from his point of view predict that the car in front of his would stop as it did, just beyond the box junction markings. He had made every effort to observe the box junction regulations. His car was only stationary for a short time, and in fact no obstruction was caused. He also questioned whether the box junction markings were compliant with the relevant regulations. I do not find that any of those points would give Mr Preston a ground of appeal.
However, having viewed the video footage of the incident provided by the Authority, I have formed the view that the contravention did not occur. Mr Preston’s car undoubtedly did enter the box junction and come to a halt within it. It is also the case that the car immediately ahead of his in the outside lane was stationary, and hence he could not have continued through the junction in that lane. (It actually appears that on the approach side of the junction there is only one lane, but that there are two beyond it, so it cannot strictly speaking be said that Mr Preston’s car was itself in the outside lane at the point when it approached or entered the junction.)
What is also evident is that the inside lane beyond the junction (marked with a Right Turn arrow on the road surface) was unobstructed for a distance that would readily have accommodated the full length of Mr Preston’s car, had he chosen to proceed into it rather than stopping (or indeed after stopping, since the space remained clear throughout the period during which his car remained stationary and even after it moved off). As he pointed out himself, his car had stopped only a short distance into the box junction, so such a manoeuvre would have been entirely feasible, without, for example, the necessity for him to reverse first (which might have been the case had he continued across the junction and stopped immediately behind the vehicle in front).
In his Notice of Appeal, Mr Preston referred to the cases of Gillingham –v- L.B. of Newham (2130193949) and Essoo –v- L.B. of Enfield (2130232767), which he contended supported his case.
The decisions in both of those cases were in fact reviewed and overturned by a panel of Adjudicators on 8 October 2013 – see under Box Junctions in the Key Cases section of the London Tribunals/Environment and Traffic Adjudicators website - and no doubt that was the basis on which the Authority said in their Notice of Rejection, “A motorist cannot escape liability for a box junction contravention by the argument that he/she could have proceeded in another lane but chose not to do so, the motorist who enters the box junction and has to stop because of the 'presence of stationary vehicles on his/her chosen course commits the contravention.”
Paragraph 11 of Part 7 of Schedule 9 to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD 2016) provides (so far as is material to this appeal) that that a box junction marking, “…conveys the prohibition that a person must not cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles.”
The issue therefore in this case is not whether Mr Preston’ car did stop due to the presence of stationary vehicles, but whether it had to do so. In my view it did not, as it remained open to Mr Preston at the point when he entered the junction, and even throughout the time his car was stationary, to move to the left into the empty inside lane and clear the junction.
If one considers the mischief that this box junction is aimed at, i.e. to keep a passage clear for vehicles entering from the side road, had such a vehicle approached the junction to enter the main road at the point when Mr Preston’ car was stationary in the box, he would have been able immediately to carry out what might be described as a “knight’s move” into the inside lane, thus clearing the junction of any obstruction.
I accept that this view is not one that was supported by the panel of Adjudicators in the above review cases, and that the Authority’s position is based on those decisions. However, as a preface to those review decisions the panel itself stated at paragraph 11, “It should be emphasised that Adjudicators are a Judicial Tribunal. They are not a Court of Record. Therefore, although the Adjudicators will have regard for each other’s decisions and treat them, where appropriate, as persuasive both as to accuracy of law and as to the desirability of consistency, that is the limit of the authority of their decisions. The same is, of course, true of this Panel Decision.”
I would of course advise Mr Preston in future to avoid even entering a box junction unless he can clearly see that there is already a space big enough to accommodate his car immediately beyond the junction and directly ahead of his car, but I am not satisfied that on this occasion the contravention as alleged occurred.



It is not the common finding of adjudicators but IMO it has more chance than the I was cut up argument


My advise would be pay the discount
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472102 · Replies: 12 · Views: 272

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 20:54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


The order for recovery is the next legal document, it will allow you to make a statutory declaration that you made representations but did not receive a reply. The council will then be ordered to revoke the CC and to refer the matter to the adjudicator they will in all likelihood list the case for appeal where you make the case that a CC was served before the council were entitled to this will win unless the adjudicator is particularly obtuse Then they will be wrong in law and open to review
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472095 · Replies: 7 · Views: 83

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 19:48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


They accept the grace period is correct but don't seem to understand that it applies
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472068 · Replies: 12 · Views: 123

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 19:46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


Forgot to add the case reference

2180447743
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472067 · Replies: 11 · Views: 127

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 18:56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


Got it that's far better. you are on the right lines but need to be in depth with your arguments because CCC do not back off easily so be prepared for tribunal

I haven't got time ATM but will give a full response later or tomorrow
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472041 · Replies: 13 · Views: 172

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 18:39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


this one offers little succour re your argument.

I would argue on the basis that 1(e) of the schedule in The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 has not been met if the council wish to pursue a PCN on the grounds of an incorrect reg number
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1472033 · Replies: 11 · Views: 127

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 15:48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


QUOTE (TouringMuso01 @ Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 15:27) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sun, 17 Mar 2019 - 16:52) *
QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Sun, 17 Mar 2019 - 15:42) *
OP----Very well done to seeing this through.

Subject to the views of others I would go for costs. The Council have been wholly unreasonable IMO.

The other issue I might look at is DPA-------were the Council correct to retain the video file for that amount of time? After all that is their only evidence.

Mick


My first thought was I don't see much chance but then given the particular mention by the adjudicator of the alarm and distress caused by the 2018 letter and the failing to inform of the options to re set the penalty, I would go for it using that letter as a starting point for all the research. Perhaps 5 hours @£19 per hour




Just as you think you've put it to bed wink.gif

I'll look in to this later on today or tomorrow - if there's nothing to lose and you think its worth a shot...



it costs nothing so for the sake of an e mail. I will draft something later
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1471955 · Replies: 195 · Views: 6,445

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 15:47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


QUOTE (Mimaw @ Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 15:33) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 15:11) *
Start by posting ALL correspondence yes we should be able to help you but need full information to do so



Thanks for your reply. I am just trying to get these documents uploaded. Am I right that ALL details personal to my fine should be removed? Date and time of offence etc? I didn't want to remove so much that it was of no help but also this is quite a unique situation so I feel the council will most likely know it's me posting.


no name address car reg if you want to and PCN number are the most you need to remove. times and locations are critical to forming a view as to appeal grounds
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1471954 · Replies: 7 · Views: 83

PASTMYBEST
Posted on: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 - 15:44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,544
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048


It seems unlikely but before you do anything get the v5c and check that the name and address are correct and that it is your address
  Forum: Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decr... · Post Preview: #1471953 · Replies: 19 · Views: 205

619 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: Thursday, 21st March 2019 - 12:55
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.