PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN for Prohibited Left Turn
medropoto
post Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 15:54
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 1 Aug 2020
Member No.: 109,304



Hi All,

I received a PCN for a prohibited left turn this morning. PCN linked with details redacted. I've also linked the video.

PCN: https://imgur.com/F8j3Qcj

Video: https://imgur.com/vC3o7sA

This is a brand new prohibition, and as far as I can tell there is currently no Traffic Management Order for it on the Wandsworth Borough Council website. I feel it is a very unfair PCN as while I did turn left, I have been driving this particular road for nearly a year (a googlemaps cut through). I believe the signs went up over the weekend of the 25/26th July 2020 (but it may have been one week earlier). According to this link , the order only came into operation on the 23rd July 2020. I assume there is no grace period or warning period for frequent users to adjust rolleyes.gif

I am unsure of whether to contest this, as the video footage does show me turning left, but there a couple of things which stand out.

1. I can't find any TMO for the sign on Wandsworth Borough Councils website.

2. The sign is on a mini-roundabout: being picky: the order states: "The general effect of the Prescribed Routes Order will be that no person causing a vehicle to proceed in an easterly direction in Kimber Road, on reaching the junction with Twilley Street shall cause that vehicle to turn left. This prohibition will not apply to cycles.". ..... Surely this could mean that I could go all the way around the mini-roundabout and continue up Twilley Street? Is there some grounds for a contest based on this?

3. There is a Give Way sign at a mini roundabout, and based on the Traffic Signs Manual (although I know this is not a law, and just a guide): " The GIVE WAY sign to diagram 602 should not be used where a road enters from the left of the approach in question, on the side road approach to a T junction or on any arm of a four way junction, as experience has shown that drivers can be confused into believing they have to give way to traffic approaching from the left.”.... there is a cycle path entering from the left, going against the One Way on Twilley Street, so therefore there is traffic approaching from the left - does this constitute inadequate signage?

Normally I would just cough up the £65, but I've done this 4 times this week without realising and have seen countless others do it, either following behind me or me following them, so this looks like its going to line Wandsworth Council's pockets this week.

Thanks a lot in advance
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 14)
Advertisement
post Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 15:54
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 16:03
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,752
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



It looks unkind not to send out warning PCNs given it only started on 23 July. Maybe reps can be made on this basis.

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


Road Traffic Acts
Wandsworth Borough Council

BANNED TURN AND WAITING RESTRICTIONS

KIMBER ROAD AND TWILLEY STREET, SW18

• THE WANDSWORTH (PRESCRIBED ROUTES) (NO. 2) EXPERIMENTAL ORDER 2020

• THE WANDSWORTH (WAITING AND LOADING RESTRICTION) (SPECIAL PARKING AREAS) (NO. 2) EXPERIMENTAL ORDER 2020

1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Council of the London Borough of Wandsworth on 15 July 2020 made the above-mentioned Orders under sections 9 and 10 of and Part IV of Schedule 9 to the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 as amended by the Local Government Act 1985 and the Traffic Management Act 2004.

2. The general effect of the Prescribed Routes Order will be that no person causing a vehicle to proceed in an easterly direction in Kimber Road, on reaching the junction with Twilley Street shall cause that vehicle to turn left. This prohibition will not apply to cycles.

3. The general effects of the waiting and loading restriction order is to upgrade lengths of single yellow line to double yellow lines (“no waiting at any time”) on the northern side of Kimber Road across the junction of Twilley Street and on the eastern and western sides of Twilley Street at its junction with Kimber Road.

4. Copies of the Orders, which will come into operation on 23 July 2020, and of documents and plans giving more detailed particulars of the Orders, can be inspected during normal office hours on Mondays to Fridays inclusive until the end of a period of six months from the date on which the Orders were made in The Customer Centre, The Town Hall, Wandsworth High Street, London, SW18 2PU or on the Council’s website at https://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/roads-and-tra...nt-orders-tmos/

5. Whilst the Orders remain in force, the Assistant Director – Traffic and Engineering, or some person authorised by him, may modify or suspend the Orders or any provision contained in it if it appears to him or that other person essential in the interests of the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of traffic or of the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on the highway or for preserving or improving the amenities of the area through which any road affected by the Orders runs.

6. The Council will consider in due course whether the provisions of the Orders should be reproduced and continued in force indefinitely by means of Orders under sections 6 and 124 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Any person wishing to object to the making of the Orders for the purpose of such reproduction and continuation may, within the above mentioned period of six months, send a statement in writing of their objection and the grounds on which it is made to the Director of Environment and Community Services at the address below (quoting the reference ES/TMO1807).

7. Any person desiring to question the validity of the Order or of any provision contained in them on the grounds that it is not within the relevant powers of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 or that any of the relevant requirements of that Act or of any relevant regulations made under that Act have not been complied with in relation to the Orders may, within six weeks from the date on which the Orders were made, make application for the purpose to the High Court.

Dated 17 July 2020

PAUL MARTIN, Chief Executive, The Town Hall, Wandsworth SW18 2PU

This post has been edited by stamfordman: Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 16:04
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
medropoto
post Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 16:21
Post #3


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 1 Aug 2020
Member No.: 109,304



Thanks. That was my thought when it arrived and I did a bit of googling. A warning would have been nice - I guess they're short on cash! I feel like I should challenge it at the very least and see what comes of it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 16:50
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,038
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (medropoto @ Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 17:21) *
Thanks. That was my thought when it arrived and I did a bit of googling. A warning would have been nice - I guess they're short on cash! I feel like I should challenge it at the very least and see what comes of it.


The PCN is flawed. The paragraph that is boxed in gives an incorrect date for the service of a CC truncating the time you have to make reps by in this case 4 days


--------------------
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
medropoto
post Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 17:10
Post #5


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 1 Aug 2020
Member No.: 109,304



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 17:50) *
QUOTE (medropoto @ Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 17:21) *
Thanks. That was my thought when it arrived and I did a bit of googling. A warning would have been nice - I guess they're short on cash! I feel like I should challenge it at the very least and see what comes of it.


The PCN is flawed. The paragraph that is boxed in gives an incorrect date for the service of a CC truncating the time you have to make reps by in this case 4 days


Oh really? It was definitely worth posting in here then. Thank you for highlighting this. I will certainly be challenging it based on this and stamfordman's post.

Sorry for sounding like a bit of a newbie, but it's my first time challenging one of these, so is there anything particular that I should be doing at this stage to increase my chances of getting the PCN dismissed? I assume get some photos of the location, and also highlight the flaw on the PCN?

Thank you once again
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 17:16
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,752
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



The PCN wording isn't fatally flawed in my view and it didn't work in this case (or at least was not focused on). But it gives you the wording.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=125829
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 17:23
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,038
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



This case outlines the breach of regulations that the PCN contains. It is also of note that in another case the chief adjudicator confirms that is the correct interpretation

2190464396

The appellant was represented by Mr Dishman. The Enforcement Authority did not attend.

The two grounds of appeal were: (i) the Penalty Charge Notice incorrectly stated that a charge certificate (which increases a Penalty Charge Notice by 50%) could be issued 28 days after the date of the Penalty Charge Notice whereas the correct position in law is that a charge certificate may be issued 28 days after service of the Penalty Charge Notice (see paragraph 5 to Schedule 1 and Section 8 of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003) and (ii) issue was taken as to whether the box junction was compliant with the statutory specification.

In respect of ground one the Enforcement Authority submitted:

“The wording of the PCN is compliant with the TMA (2004) legislation and conveys the timescale to submit a formal representation, and the number of days until further enforcement action is taken if no representation is made. In addition, the Council allow for two extra days when a PCN is sent by post to take account of the two workings days deemed as the date of service, with the date of service confirmed as 18/10/2019 in the case notes. The appellant submitted their formal representation within two calendar days, 17/10/2019, after the PCN was sent by first class post on 15/10/2019. The Charge Certificate would not have been served, as, upon receipt of the formal representation, the case was placed on hold until reviewed and a formal rejection response was sent to the appellant on 17/10/2019.”

The Penalty Charge Notice in this case is governed by the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. Section 4 (8) of the 2003 Act provides:

“A penalty charge notice under this section must (a) state […] (v) that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable;

Paragraph 5 to Schedule 1 of the 2003 Act provides:

“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…”

The Penalty Charge Notice in this case stated:

“If the Penalty Charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period beginning with the date of this notice an increased charge of 50% to £195 may be payable and a Charge Certificate may be served seeking payment of the increased charge.”

Mr Dishman’s analysis is therefore correct. The Penalty Charge Notice in this case incorrectly stated that a charge certificate could be issued 28 days from the date of the Penalty Charge Notice. The Penalty Charge Notice does not accurately state the position in law.

Section 4 (8) states that a Penalty Charge Notice must contain the matters listed therein. This is a mandatory obligation and this Penalty Charge Notice is deficient in that it does not accurately state all the required information.

The next question I must consider is the consequence of the failure.

There is no need for a motorist to establish that prejudice has been caused. In R v. Parking Adjudicator, ex parte LB Barnet the High Court upheld the decision of the Adjudicator that a PCN was invalid because it did not specify the date of issue. At [41] the court held:

"Mr Lewis submits that even if there was non-compliance in this respect, nevertheless no prejudice was caused. PCNs should not be regarded as invalid. I do not accept this submission. Prejudice is irrelevant and does not need to be established. The 1991 Act creates a scheme for the civil enforcement of parking control. Under this scheme, motorists become liable to pay financial penalties when certain specified statutory conditions are met. If the statutory conditions are not met, then the financial liability does not arise.”

I find that the failure in this case renders this Penalty Charge Notice unenforceable.

For these reasons 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
medropoto
post Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 20:39
Post #8


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 1 Aug 2020
Member No.: 109,304



Thank you so much. This is already very helpful. I will write up a letter challenging the PCN and post it here, probably tomorrow. Fingers crossed I don't get anymore PCN's for this same infringement.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 21:05
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,038
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Sat, 1 Aug 2020 - 18:16) *
The PCN wording isn't fatally flawed in my view and it didn't work in this case (or at least was not focused on). But it gives you the wording.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=125829


Strange because the case i quoted was Michael Oliver as well perhaps he had a change of heart in the 10 months between the adjudications


--------------------
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
medropoto
post Sun, 2 Aug 2020 - 11:38
Post #10


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 1 Aug 2020
Member No.: 109,304



Thanks again for your help already on this. I've drafted up a letter for a challenge, and will go and get some photos later on today.

Here's a draft and really welcome any feedback:

Ref: PCN AA12345656

Vehicle Registration: <<AB12CDE>>

<<NAme
Address,
Postcode>>

I wish to appeal against the PCN on the following grounds:

1) The PCN states that if payment is not made by the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of notice then the penalty will increase and a charge certificate may be served. The regulations do not provide for representations against a charge certificate. They do however require that a charge certificate may only be served after the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the PCN, some four days later. I am thus denied four days of the time allowed for representations, rendering the enforcement a nullity.

2) The contravention order only came into operation on 23 July 2020 whilst the alleged contravention occurred on the 27 July 2020. This, combined with only a single sign, does not provide regular users time to become aware of the new requirements.

3)A prohibited left turn on a mini-roundabout implies that a driver can simply turn right around the mini-roundabout and continue to proceed along Twilley Street. This is further enforced by the wording of the THE WANDSWORTH (PRESCRIBED ROUTES) (NO. 2) EXPERIMENTAL ORDER 2020 which states: “The general effect of the Prescribed Routes Order will be that no person causing a vehicle to proceed in an easterly direction in Kimber Road, on reaching the junction with Twilley Street shall cause that vehicle to turn left. This prohibition will not apply to cycles.”. This contravention order encourages a potentially dangerous manoeuvre.

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

Obviously point 3, I think I might be clutching at straws with, but I don't recall ever having seen a prohibited turn on a mini-roundabout, but of course willing to be corrected. (there's no no-entry signs on any of the four junctions)

Thanks again in advance!


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 2 Aug 2020 - 13:50
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,873
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Drop point 3, and I'd reword point 2 to be more akin to mitigation / a plea for discretion than an actual challenge, as legally the signage is adequate and they'd be entitled to enforce it, harsh as that may seem. Post a revised draft for final tweaks.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Sun, 2 Aug 2020 - 13:50


--------------------
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
medropoto
post Sun, 2 Aug 2020 - 19:40
Post #12


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 1 Aug 2020
Member No.: 109,304



Ref: PCN AA12345656

Vehicle Registration: <<AB12CDE>>

<<NAme
Address,
Postcode>>

I wish to appeal against the PCN on the following grounds:

1) The PCN states that if payment is not made by the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of notice then the penalty will increase and a charge certificate may be served. The regulations do not provide for representations against a charge certificate. They do however require that a charge certificate may only be served after the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the PCN, some four days later. I am thus denied four days of the time allowed for representations, rendering the enforcement a nullity.

2) The contravention order only came into operation on 23 July 2020 whilst the alleged contravention occurred on the 27 July 2020. This only gave me only a small window of time in which to take note of the new restrictions. In light of this, I would hope that the PCN would be dropped and would serve as a warning for the future. I understand the reasons for the implementation of this prohibited left turn and will adhere to the signage.

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

Thanks for the feedback.

Not entirely sure of how to word it short of saying "please nicely I wasn't aware of it blush.gif " .

Thanks

This post has been edited by medropoto: Sun, 2 Aug 2020 - 19:40
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
medropoto
post Mon, 3 Aug 2020 - 12:31
Post #13


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 1 Aug 2020
Member No.: 109,304



Hi all,

Got some photos and videos from the area today. Turns out there is no permanent camera there, so it must have been the sort that's either in a car, or that they strap to a lampost when they're short of cash.

images: https://ibb.co/album/XXPDTV

(nice RS5 cool.gif )

video: https://imgur.com/zKhJcu1


Standing there for 5 minutes we counted at least 20 cars doing the same left turn. Not sure if this adds anything to the case...doubt it though. Got a short video with 3 cars doing it, plus in the photos there's another car doing it. I'm sure if you sit there all day you'll find probably 1000 cars doing it.

Is it worth adding these to the challenge?

Again, sorry for all the questions and really appreciate the help thus far

Cheers!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 3 Aug 2020 - 17:48
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,873
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



I would just add "... will adhere to the signage in future". there's not much else you can add. I don't think the photos or videos really help.


--------------------
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
medropoto
post Tue, 4 Aug 2020 - 08:32
Post #15


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 1 Aug 2020
Member No.: 109,304



Great, thanks. Will do the challenge form tonight.

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: Thursday, 6th August 2020 - 16:20
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.