PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Appeal PCN 52M - Failing to comply with a prohibition, Appeal PCN in Hainault
Ambamb
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 15:15
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 24 Mar 2020
Member No.: 108,336



Hi there,
This is my first time on the forum. I hope someone can help me thank you.

I received my first PCN today and was wondering I could appeal it. I have attached the letter and blacked out sensitive information. I didn’t know there was a sign there which is slightly up the road for prohibited vehicles but Google maps took my down that route and I didn’t realise unfortunately I made a mistake!

Please can you help?
Thank you
Amber
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 15:15
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 15:25
Post #2


Member


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



OP --as you say the signage is set back and probably not visible to drivers turning into that street.

Signage is on the lamppost :-

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5982158,0.0...3312!8i6656

I would argue that the Council has failed in its duty under LATOR 1996 18(1)(a) to provide adequate signage.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/24...ulation/18/made

Mick

This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 15:26
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 15:32
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,590
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



You must get and post the video and if you can photos of the signs GSV is out of date

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5982429,0...6384!8i8192

Enlarging the PCN as much as I can I cannot make the signs out


--------------------
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
Ambamb
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 15:55
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 24 Mar 2020
Member No.: 108,336



#

This post has been edited by Ambamb: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 16:09
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ambamb
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 16:08
Post #5


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 24 Mar 2020
Member No.: 108,336



Thank you both so such a quick reply! Yes the sign was further back so I didn’t notice that at all. I have attached the image from online, it’s got the restriction image and the timings aren’t very clear of obstruction to be seen from the picture. Is that another point in my case? Thank you and much appreciated!



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 15:25) *
OP --as you say the signage is set back and probably not visible to drivers turning into that street.

Signage is on the lamppost :-

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5982158,0.0...3312!8i6656

I would argue that the Council has failed in its duty under LATOR 1996 18(1)(a) to provide adequate signage.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/24...ulation/18/made

Mick



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 15:32) *
You must get and post the video and if you can photos of the signs GSV is out of date

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5982429,0...6384!8i8192

Enlarging the PCN as much as I can I cannot make the signs out

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NaughtyBoy12
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 17:51
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22
Joined: 25 Sep 2019
Member No.: 105,909



Here are this afternoons photos. I think the trap has sprung too early. The cynic in me says it’s part of the testing phase to see how many people pay up.
https://ibb.co/qdSF5s5
https://ibb.co/8YBBHtP
https://ibb.co/2trX7jq
https://ibb.co/ysCR0FD
https://ibb.co/3Cv8NhV
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 18:02
Post #7


Member


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



That is very helpful and hands the OP a win IMO.

The Notice is here:-

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3375759

A school clean air zone. Was the school even open?

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 19:17
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,590
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



Apart from the signs being covered, what you can see of them is a pedestrian and cycle zone sign so should be code 53. I am thinking of the Nottingham HC case that distinguished between a pedestrian zone and motor vehicle prohibited for support


--------------------
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
NaughtyBoy12
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 19:43
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22
Joined: 25 Sep 2019
Member No.: 105,909



I see the Traffic Order came into effect on 29th Sept 2019. The signs and camera are currently wrapped up, however they may not have been last week. Need to see the Council pictures and video from the OP.

I believe the school was open until Friday 20th March. The order applies during “term time”, which might be different to when the school is actually open
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 19:56
Post #10


Member


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



Turn my query around-----the school is shut so they have suspended the restriction with bin liners. So we are back to placement of the restriction signs and their inadequacy.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ambamb
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 20:16
Post #11


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 24 Mar 2020
Member No.: 108,336



Thank you so very much everyone for your posts! I really appreciate it and Naughtyboy12 for taking the time to capture pictures of the road signs!

Do you think it is worth contesting the fine on the grounds of it being placed much further back? The video captured on PCN shows me driving past the sign all the way down the road. I’m not sure if the PCN will be cancelled.

Thanks again everyone!


QUOTE (NaughtyBoy12 @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 17:51) *
Here are this afternoons photos. I think the trap has sprung too early. The cynic in me says it’s part of the testing phase to see how many people pay up.
https://ibb.co/qdSF5s5
https://ibb.co/8YBBHtP
https://ibb.co/2trX7jq
https://ibb.co/ysCR0FD
https://ibb.co/3Cv8NhV



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 18:02) *
That is very helpful and hands the OP a win IMO.

The Notice is here:-

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3375759

A school clean air zone. Was the school even open?

Mick



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 19:17) *
Apart from the signs being covered, what you can see of them is a pedestrian and cycle zone sign so should be code 53. I am thinking of the Nottingham HC case that distinguished between a pedestrian zone and motor vehicle prohibited for support



QUOTE (NaughtyBoy12 @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 19:43) *
I see the Traffic Order came into effect on 29th Sept 2019. The signs and camera are currently wrapped up, however they may not have been last week. Need to see the Council pictures and video from the OP.

I believe the school was open until Friday 20th March. The order applies during “term time”, which might be different to when the school is actually open



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 19:56) *
Turn my query around-----the school is shut so they have suspended the restriction with bin liners. So we are back to placement of the restriction signs and their inadequacy.

Mick

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NaughtyBoy12
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 21:06
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22
Joined: 25 Sep 2019
Member No.: 105,909



OP. If an appeal is made to the Council (Redbridge) and they reject it, a further appeal can be made to London Tribunals.

I can see 2 appeals that have been made to London Tribunals. As the restriction is relatively new there may be others made and yet to be heard. Both were made and refused on the basis of signage. Below are the Reasons by the adjudicator in each case.

Case reference: 2200069948
I have read the appellant explanation about not expecting the signs through which he passed when on his way to collect his daughter.
Having examined the CCTV footage it is clear to me that legally adequate notification of the restriction hours was prominent. These were in force and the Council correctly issued the penalty charge as it did.
The penalty charge is a fixed sum applicable to motorists irrespective of private financial circumstances. I am not able to vary it on account of these.
I have been obliged to record this appeal as refused. The contravention is proved and I have upheld the Council claim for £130. The earlier opportunity for discount is now long expired and cannot be reset by the Adjudicator at this stage.

Case reference: 220007119A
The appellant is a pensioner who had claimed to use this road over the past 50 years. I do not necessarily dispute that the appellant made a genuine mistake as claimed. However, I am satisfied that there is clear and adequate signage denoting that only pedestrians and pedal cycles were permitted between the hours of 8.45am - 9.20am Monday to Friday. I am also satisfied that residents were informed in June 2019 of the proposed restriction, and with effect from 2nd December 2019 the restrictions became effective. Reference to Evidence File "J" identifies the relevant signage in place at the location. There are no valid grounds on which to allow this appeal.


It seems signage may not be your winner even upon appeal.

This post has been edited by NaughtyBoy12: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 21:07
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 21:19
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,590
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



We must see the video


--------------------
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
Ambamb
post Wed, 25 Mar 2020 - 07:56
Post #14


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 24 Mar 2020
Member No.: 108,336



Thank you, I will need to try and work out how to download and show the video

QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 21:19) *
We must see the video

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 25 Mar 2020 - 09:57
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,590
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Ambamb @ Wed, 25 Mar 2020 - 07:56) *
Thank you, I will need to try and work out how to download and show the video

QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 21:19) *
We must see the video



download to youtube and put a link onhere


--------------------
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
stamfordman
post Wed, 25 Mar 2020 - 10:05
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,555
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



If you get stuck with video PM me the details.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ambamb
post Wed, 25 Mar 2020 - 21:27
Post #17


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 24 Mar 2020
Member No.: 108,336



Thank you so much everyone! I finally got the video upload sorted:

https://youtu.be/5tSeKNB6r6Q

Thanks again!


QUOTE (NaughtyBoy12 @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 21:06) *
OP. If an appeal is made to the Council (Redbridge) and they reject it, a further appeal can be made to London Tribunals.

I can see 2 appeals that have been made to London Tribunals. As the restriction is relatively new there may be others made and yet to be heard. Both were made and refused on the basis of signage. Below are the Reasons by the adjudicator in each case.

Case reference: 2200069948
I have read the appellant explanation about not expecting the signs through which he passed when on his way to collect his daughter.
Having examined the CCTV footage it is clear to me that legally adequate notification of the restriction hours was prominent. These were in force and the Council correctly issued the penalty charge as it did.
The penalty charge is a fixed sum applicable to motorists irrespective of private financial circumstances. I am not able to vary it on account of these.
I have been obliged to record this appeal as refused. The contravention is proved and I have upheld the Council claim for £130. The earlier opportunity for discount is now long expired and cannot be reset by the Adjudicator at this stage.

Case reference: 220007119A
The appellant is a pensioner who had claimed to use this road over the past 50 years. I do not necessarily dispute that the appellant made a genuine mistake as claimed. However, I am satisfied that there is clear and adequate signage denoting that only pedestrians and pedal cycles were permitted between the hours of 8.45am - 9.20am Monday to Friday. I am also satisfied that residents were informed in June 2019 of the proposed restriction, and with effect from 2nd December 2019 the restrictions became effective. Reference to Evidence File "J" identifies the relevant signage in place at the location. There are no valid grounds on which to allow this appeal.


It seems signage may not be your winner even upon appeal.



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 24 Mar 2020 - 21:19) *
We must see the video



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Wed, 25 Mar 2020 - 10:05) *
If you get stuck with video PM me the details.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 25 Mar 2020 - 22:29
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,590
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



There is Micks argument re the siting of the signs, but your not slowing at all might hamper that so then there is the argument that code 52 is incorrect. There is a Hc case that ruled that pedestrian zone signs are not the same as prohibited motor vehicle signs but it would be a reverse argument to your case The council will not accept it but an adjudicator could


--------------------
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 Thu, 26 Mar 2020 - 06:52
Post #19


Member


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



I agree. The contravention Code 52M prohibits motor vehicles (all vehicles) which certainly does not correspond with the Notice which allows a host of exemptions. The Council has a permitted route order rather than a pedestrian zone one.

Contravention should have been a Code 53 "Failing to comply with a restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone" which is clear to a motorist from the sign,whereas the contravention given on the PCN is not "Failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle". What types of vehicle?

If PMB can reverse engineer the HC case that would be interesting:-

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2017/430.html

Mick




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Thu, 26 Mar 2020 - 09:46
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,280
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



OP, to clarify:

The signs are clear and placed where they should be i.e. after the turn so as to be visible to a motorist.

The video shows you didn't even read the signs and made no attempt to remedy your error afterwards: you were simply not looking, yes? If I'm wrong, then what did you interpret the signs to mean?

Your defence therefore amounts to procedural issues with the PCN itself which you would have to argue with the adjudicator with the full penalty in play.

And photos show a warning sign as regards a vehicle prohibition, not pedestrian zone.

The video shows a schoolchild getting in to a car, so the school was probably operating.

IMO, you should at least stress the 3.41 v 3.50 issue, plead a mistake and ask for them to exercise discretion on the basis that 'I received my first PCN today'.
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: Sunday, 29th March 2020 - 08:15
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.