PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

WF Council Vehicle Clamped/Towed - Medical Reason (Appeal Rejected)
John121
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 16:46
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 275
Joined: 9 Jun 2014
Member No.: 71,167



Hi all,
Last month my friends vehicle was clamped and towed away. This was of no fault of his and due to him having a sudden emergency (health scare) and being taken to hospital where he stayed for few days he couldn't move his vehicle. It is worth noting the time the vehicle was parked on the single yellow line was after 7pm (At which time there was no restriction as stated on the sign restriction is only 7am-7pm). Due to my friend being in hospital he couldn't move his vehicle and all of this has been mentioned in the representation which was sent to the council.

As a result he had to pay £305 to release his vehicle which was towed away, this included £65 for the PCN, £200 for vehicle removal fee and £40 storage fee per day.

Please see below the representation which was sent to WF council along with a letter from the hospital confirming, however to my amazement there have rejected this appeal.

Can you please advise the best way to proceed with this?

WF Representation:



Below is a letter from hospital confirming the above:



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 16:46
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 16:51
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,328
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (John121 @ Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 17:46) *
to my amazement there have rejected this appeal.

And that is where?


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John121
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 16:54
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 275
Joined: 9 Jun 2014
Member No.: 71,167



Please see WF councils response to the above:



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 17:17
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,328
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Brutal.


--------------------
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 Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 17:42
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10,853
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Indeed, a distinct lack of compassion. Nothing to lose by putting it front of an adjudicator.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 17:53
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,822
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:42) *
Indeed, a distinct lack of compassion. Nothing to lose by putting it front of an adjudicator.


The adjudicator can, and I would venture would find in your favour as the vehicle could not be moved due to reasons beyond your control, and/or that the council failed to consider other compelling reasons The council have failed to properly inform you of an adjudicators power to award costs This may by found a procedural impropriety which will win on its own


--------------------
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 Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 17:57
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,328
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



You're normally good at finding 'policy' Stamf?

Not sure where 7-7 comes in.

Border of AM and SBs zones but not finding signs on GSV.

John
Show us exactly where he parked and the sign, using this >

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5770036,-0....6384!8i8192

Also, when did his SBs zone come into operation?


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John121
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:20
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 275
Joined: 9 Jun 2014
Member No.: 71,167



This is the exact location where the vehicle was parked (you can also see the sign which shows no stopping 7am-7pm):

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5764284,-0....6384!8i8192

Where the vehicle was parked was on the left hand side of the road on a single yellow line and does not have resident permit controls in this place.

The SB permit is for his road which is Knotts Green Road (The road on the right behind where his vehicle was parked) and SB zone permit on Knotts green road is in operation from Mon-Sat 8am - 6:30pm.

Just incase it matters I will also add that with the appeal rejection letter council have sent an a4 paper (both sided) with at least 31 different pictures of the vehicle from where it was parked all the way down to it being towed and left in there compound.
The council have also given a "Your right to appel" document

This post has been edited by John121: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:21
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:28
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,328
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:53) *
the vehicle could not be moved due to reasons beyond your control

TMO gonna be useful.


--------------------
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 Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:30
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10,853
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



The rejection says driver was not unwell when it was 'left unattended'. This is BS of the first degree - car was legally parked.

There is an NHS consultant's letter advising of a life threatening condition.

I would write back to the council on this one to confirm that they have no policy to use discretion in these circumstances. I wonder if the driver had died they'd do the same. I can't see the difference.

At the same time we should ask for WF's enforcement policy as I don't think we've seen this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John121
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:44
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 275
Joined: 9 Jun 2014
Member No.: 71,167



Exactly - I have an email address for the head of parking services is it worth me dropping them a polite email asking them to review this again before I take it further?

Where do I get hold of Waltham Forest enforcement policy? Should I mention this in the email I write to head of parking?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:44
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,328
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 19:30) *
The rejection says driver was not unwell when it was 'left unattended'. This is BS of the first degree - car was legally parked.

I was just about to post that.
If that's their reasoning they're stuffed cos neither was it in contravention.

John.
We need the PCN.

This post has been edited by Neil B: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:56


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John U.K.
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:47
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,438
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,515



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 17:53) *
QUOTE (stamfordman @ Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:42) *
Indeed, a distinct lack of compassion. Nothing to lose by putting it front of an adjudicator.


The adjudicator can, and I would venture would find in your favour as the vehicle could not be moved due to reasons beyond your control, and/or that the council failed to consider other compelling reasons The council have failed to properly inform you of an adjudicators power to award costs This may by found a procedural impropriety which will win on its own


+1

'Failure to consider' is demonstrated by these paragraphs from the rejection:

QUOTE
Whilst I appreciate your circumstances, they do not warrant the cancellation of the PCN as although you became unwell, you were not unwell when the vehicle was parked and left unattended.

You were given a Penalty Charge Noticew (PCN) for parking on a single yellow line at a time when you were not allowed to park there, where you were parked waiting is not allowed during the hours stated on the nearby timeplate.

The sign clearly states 'No waiting 7am-7pm'. I can advise you that it is the responsibility of the motorists to ensure that they check relevant signs to ensure that they have parked in accordance with regulation before they leave their vehicle.


The aggregation of the bits I have highlighted invites the reader to infer that the behicle was parked and left unattended whilst the SYL was in force, demonstrating that the author has failed to consider at all the timings in the representation that show that at the time the vehicle was parked and left the vehicle was parked in 'accordance with regulation'

----------

The OP needs also to find Waltham Forest's guidane on parking enforcement and see what their poicy is on removals.


EDIT:
Realise that above crossed with others.

There is also something unpleasant about the way the second page is worded to imply that, in precis:

Your reps amount to mittigating circumstances.
The Adj cannot consider mitigating circumstances.
The Adj can award costs if he thinks your case unreasonable.
Can you spot the reasons for your reps in the lkist below?

Ergo, don't bother the Adj with an appeal.

This post has been edited by John U.K.: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 18:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 19:12
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,278
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



This is a deeply wicked council and somebody there should be hanging their head in shame for writing such a wicked letter. But of course we all know its the cash that counts and nothing else.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 20:12
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,328
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



John121
This our tiger.
QUOTE (Incandescent @ Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 20:12) *
This is a deeply wicked council and somebody there should be hanging their head in shame for writing such a wicked letter. But of course we all know its the cash that counts and nothing else.

We'll be unleashing him in this case. huh.gif


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John121
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 20:14
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 275
Joined: 9 Jun 2014
Member No.: 71,167



Please find attached the PCN, as well as the other documentation I have.







Please mind my ignorance but I would appreciate if you can advise me in simple terms what I should do? Is it ok to write a letter to head of parking asking them to reconsider this mentioning that the vehicle could not be moved as it was beyond my control?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 20:57
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,952
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



I wouldn't bother writing back to the council, they shouldn't get a chance to cancel before they have to pay the tribunal fee. Their rejection is utter rubbish, by their logic anyone who couldn't move their car from a single red line because they got stabbed in the London Bridge attacks should also cough up the penalty (even though TFL, who are not known for their compassion, did not enforce those PCNs).

This post has been edited by cp8759: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 20:57


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John121
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 21:13
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 275
Joined: 9 Jun 2014
Member No.: 71,167



Exactly - these guys are proper rip off merchants.

If I take this to adjudicator will there be any costs associated with this for me?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 21:14
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,328
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 21:57) *
I wouldn't bother writing back to the council,

+1

QUOTE (John121 @ Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 22:13) *
If I take this to adjudicator will there be any costs associated with this for me?

For you?


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John121
post Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 21:27
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 275
Joined: 9 Jun 2014
Member No.: 71,167



As in would there be any costs associated for us if we were to take to the adjudicator?
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: Saturday, 20th July 2019 - 18:54
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.