PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

parking ticket tear off slip, parking ticket tear off slip
snowno
post Sun, 21 Dec 2008 - 23:06
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 46
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,332



Hi, my wife has just come back from seeing Cinderella at the Wimbledon Theatre with the kids, and one of the Ugly Sisters gave her an early Christmas present, a PCN.

My question:

Is Glacier2's reply in http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t25440.html still valid in regards to the change in legislation earlier this year.

This post has been edited by snowno: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 - 17:21
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sun, 21 Dec 2008 - 23:06
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
snowno
post Mon, 22 Dec 2008 - 14:20
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 46
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,332



Got the scanner here are the images




Just to clarify Glacier2 wrote on a topic by Penykz the following:

Secondly and most important, the direction to turn over for payment info and NTO info is printed on the tear off slip. It has been ruled that the tear off slip does not form part of the PCN. Therefore the PCN does not comply with strict requirements of the RTA 1991. You will win on this ground. MacArthur v Bury (NPAS Circular 04/05) is the authority here. Moses/barnet is good to support the strict requirements of RTA1991.

This post was in Dec 2007 and I know the regs have changed since then, does the above argument still hold, or do I need to go and start checking signs
Thanks in advance

This post has been edited by snowno: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 - 14:28
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 22 Dec 2008 - 14:25
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Why take off your name and address and then leave ID all over it, at least be consistent!

We need the rear, not the front twice!

I can't see a PTO on that at all!

Simon


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Mon, 22 Dec 2008 - 16:56
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



More to the point, what relevance do you think it will have?


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
snowno
post Sun, 28 Dec 2008 - 16:56
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 46
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,332



Got the photos think I might have a chance

1. Is the Merton Council badge allowed ?





These are both ends of the group of parking bays, one end is hardly visible, both have the yellow line end missing.
2. Are these invalid ?







This is the outside edge of the bay the next image shows what the line markers were trying to do.
3. Does it look the correct width ?





These are the posts at the different ends of the road.
4.Are there some signs missing ?



I think I know the answer to question 2 but need to clarify my other questions.
Thanks in advance
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dave-o
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 11:18
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,878
Joined: 7 Jan 2008
From: London
Member No.: 16,454



Soem awfully faded end lines there.

And what the hell is with those double side dashes? Never seen anything like that......


--------------------
Dave-o 3-0 LB Waltham Forest.
Goalscorers: B. Alighting 08', G. Fettered 34', I. Markings 42'


Dave-o 2-0 LB Islington
Goalscorers: V. Locus 82', I. Dates, 87'


Dave-o 1-0 LB Redbridge
Goalscorer: I. Markings 79'


Dave-o 1-0 LB sCamden
Goalscorer: I. Dates, 86'

Dave-o 1-0 LB Hammersmith & Fulham
Goalscorer: T. Signage, 19'
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
snowno
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 11:31
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 46
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,332



They appear to be bay markings laid years apart, the line nearest to the kerb is the newest, and along the road they gradually converge until you get really thick lines
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dave-o
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 11:35
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,878
Joined: 7 Jan 2008
From: London
Member No.: 16,454



It's clearly meant to be one of these:



The double side dashes are confusing and should have been removed.

Also the bay seems a bit narrow. Perhaps you could go back with a tape measure?

Which bay were you in? The one with the ghost-like end markings?

This post has been edited by dave-o: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 11:36


--------------------
Dave-o 3-0 LB Waltham Forest.
Goalscorers: B. Alighting 08', G. Fettered 34', I. Markings 42'


Dave-o 2-0 LB Islington
Goalscorers: V. Locus 82', I. Dates, 87'


Dave-o 1-0 LB Redbridge
Goalscorer: I. Markings 79'


Dave-o 1-0 LB sCamden
Goalscorer: I. Dates, 86'

Dave-o 1-0 LB Hammersmith & Fulham
Goalscorer: T. Signage, 19'
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 12:21
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



On the issue of the logo on the sign. It was debated a few months ago as T Hamlets do the same. General consensus was that it shouldn't be there but don't recall a firm conclusion.

What is certainly wrong is the zone identifier tile. a) I don't think use of the word 'zone' is prescribed.

b) The tile is way out of place. It should be directly below the P symbol.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/workin...andvari4394.pdf





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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
snowno
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 13:53
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 46
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,332



Which bay were you in? The one with the ghost-like end markings?
[/quote]

Yes, if I remember correctly it is a group of 3 bays, my wife was in the middle one, the picture of the tyre and thick bay line to be exact.
On the point of the double side dashes they were the next group of bays along.
Will be going back with tape measure at some point.

What is certainly wrong is the zone identifier tile. a) I don't think use of the word 'zone' is prescribed.

b) The tile is way out of place. It should be directly below the P symbol.


Thanks Neil, your link states that " 'p' symbol and permit identifier are treated as one symbol for allignment",
I think I will going around different streets in Merton to see if other signs are similar and post results.

The question on missing signs, should there be CPZ signs on both ends of the road
Thanks in advance
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dave-o
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 13:55
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,878
Joined: 7 Jan 2008
From: London
Member No.: 16,454



There should be CPZ signs at all possible enttrances to the zone. The zone may be more than one road.


--------------------
Dave-o 3-0 LB Waltham Forest.
Goalscorers: B. Alighting 08', G. Fettered 34', I. Markings 42'


Dave-o 2-0 LB Islington
Goalscorers: V. Locus 82', I. Dates, 87'


Dave-o 1-0 LB Redbridge
Goalscorer: I. Markings 79'


Dave-o 1-0 LB sCamden
Goalscorer: I. Dates, 86'

Dave-o 1-0 LB Hammersmith & Fulham
Goalscorer: T. Signage, 19'
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
snowno
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 14:02
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 46
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,332



Thanks Dave-o, thats what I thought, the signs then are also missing
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dave-o
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 14:03
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,878
Joined: 7 Jan 2008
From: London
Member No.: 16,454



Are you sure they are not at a different location? Remember a zone is an area, not a single street.


--------------------
Dave-o 3-0 LB Waltham Forest.
Goalscorers: B. Alighting 08', G. Fettered 34', I. Markings 42'


Dave-o 2-0 LB Islington
Goalscorers: V. Locus 82', I. Dates, 87'


Dave-o 1-0 LB Redbridge
Goalscorer: I. Markings 79'


Dave-o 1-0 LB sCamden
Goalscorer: I. Dates, 86'

Dave-o 1-0 LB Hammersmith & Fulham
Goalscorer: T. Signage, 19'
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
snowno
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 14:24
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 46
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,332



I didnt realise that, will have to go back and see, but maybe as neil says the 'zone' is marked incorrectly on the sign, it might invalidate the whole area.
Will post again with more info
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clark_kent
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 21:04
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,964
Joined: 27 Aug 2007
From: Brighton
Member No.: 13,358



QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 12:21) *
On the issue of the logo on the sign. It was debated a few months ago as T Hamlets do the same. General consensus was that it shouldn't be there but don't recall a firm conclusion.

What is certainly wrong is the zone identifier tile. a) I don't think use of the word 'zone' is prescribed.

b) The tile is way out of place. It should be directly below the P symbol.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/workin...andvari4394.pdf


No debate needed, the use of both the zone and authority are clearly prescribed in sch. 16

(1) A symbol, logo, number, letter or letters (capitals, lower case or both), or name identifying a parking zone or parking permit identification may be added or varied as appropriate.

(2) The size of the code letter or letters and the code letter patch may be varied and may be in any contrasting colours.

(3) The name of the traffic authority may be added.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 21:51
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (clark_kent @ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 21:04) *
QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 12:21) *
On the issue of the logo on the sign. It was debated a few months ago as T Hamlets do the same. General consensus was that it shouldn't be there but don't recall a firm conclusion.

What is certainly wrong is the zone identifier tile. a) I don't think use of the word 'zone' is prescribed.

b) The tile is way out of place. It should be directly below the P symbol.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/workin...andvari4394.pdf


No debate needed, the use of both the zone and authority are clearly prescribed in sch. 16

(1) A symbol, logo, number, letter or letters (capitals, lower case or both), or name identifying a parking zone or parking permit identification may be added or varied as appropriate.

(2) The size of the code letter or letters and the code letter patch may be varied and may be in any contrasting colours.

(3) The name of the traffic authority may be added.


Ah, right. Thanks for that. So do you mean it is fully compliant then? As prescribed by TSRGD? i only ask cos i've noticed that you are very often quite selective in the information that you impart.


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

PS by the way "Several" - yes I'm quoting you, = Nil. 



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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Anorak_*
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 21:54
Post #17





Guests






Is the bay inside a CPZ or is it just a case that the local roads are limited to those able to display a resident's permit? Your photos do not show where the sign was in relation to the bay, can you specify?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
snowno
post Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 22:33
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 46
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,332



Drove around for half an hour and the zone 'W4' has CPZ signs with the same restricted times on all approaches bar one. I drove my car legally and on public roads to her parking spot without seeing a CPZ sign(its obviously the route she took).
Found the following on this website:

link http://web.mac.com/rmbscarb/iWeb/rmbconsul...0challenge.html

Quite simply, all roads must be marked and all entry points signed, when they are not, there is no CPZ meeting the requirements of the legislation.

So, with a defective CPZ the controls within it fall back to the wording of the Traffic Regulation Order and each road marking will stand on its own and be reliant upon its own individual time plate. In the absence of plates at the entry to a zone (notionally or actually) or at the point of marking the restriction will become unlawful or unenforceable


Do I have a strong case ?

Is the bay inside a CPZ or is it just a case that the local roads are limited to those able to display a resident's permit? Your photos do not show where the sign was in relation to the bay, can you specify?


The road is on my understanding within a CPZ , although the above I think makes it invalid, the permit sign shown would have dented my back door if the kids could work out the child lock, my wife parked right next to it.
Having gone down again this evening(no photos) the bays are even more of a mess, hope to get plenty of photos tomorrow.


Neil, the reason I asked the question about the council logo, is because somewhere on this site, I think in relation to a kensington & chelsea resident bay, someone posted a reply stating that the logo makes the sign invalid, I could not find that post hence the question.
However I searched for your post on T Hamlets and the link is:
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=&...st&p=268290

Hope this helps

If time permits will get plenty of photos tomorrow

Just a little teaser: If the council sign has no copyright, could I copyright it and get them to remove it for breach of copyright

Can someone tell me how to put other peoples posts in boxes with 6699 at the top and blue writing, pms only so as not to confuse this post Thankyou

This post has been edited by snowno: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 - 22:39
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clark_kent
post Tue, 30 Dec 2008 - 04:55
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,964
Joined: 27 Aug 2007
From: Brighton
Member No.: 13,358



I thought CPZ entry signs are only needed for yellow lines and bays without time plates so cannot see how if one was missing it would affect your bay which clearly has a timed restriction?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dave-o
post Tue, 30 Dec 2008 - 09:56
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,878
Joined: 7 Jan 2008
From: London
Member No.: 16,454



Clark does have a point.

Still, those bays were painted by Jackson Pollock.


--------------------
Dave-o 3-0 LB Waltham Forest.
Goalscorers: B. Alighting 08', G. Fettered 34', I. Markings 42'


Dave-o 2-0 LB Islington
Goalscorers: V. Locus 82', I. Dates, 87'


Dave-o 1-0 LB Redbridge
Goalscorer: I. Markings 79'


Dave-o 1-0 LB sCamden
Goalscorer: I. Dates, 86'

Dave-o 1-0 LB Hammersmith & Fulham
Goalscorer: T. Signage, 19'
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
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 - 05:33
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