PCN issues in Ciry of Westminster Sunday 23rd Dec |
PCN issues in Ciry of Westminster Sunday 23rd Dec |
Thu, 24 Jan 2008 - 13:37
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 24 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,866 |
Hello
My wife was issued with a PCN – Mount Street, Westminster on Sunday 23rd December. The car was parked in a residents bay. We appealed because the text on the parking sign read as follows. Resident Permit Holder Or Pay at machine <== Display ticket Max stay 4 hours No return Within 1 hour =========== Mon-sat 08:30am – 6:30pm City of Westminster rejected the appeal stating that Resident permit holders at any time. Do we stand a chance in hell re this ? Many thanks indeed for reading Regards Edited because formatting looked odd. This post has been edited by richardhudson: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 - 13:40 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 24 Jan 2008 - 13:37
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 24 Jan 2008 - 15:13
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 934 Joined: 25 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,319 |
Hello My wife was issued with a PCN – Mount Street, Westminster on Sunday 23rd December. The car was parked in a residents bay. We appealed because the text on the parking sign read as follows. Resident Permit Holder Or Pay at machine <== Display ticket Max stay 4 hours No return Within 1 hour =========== Mon-sat 08:30am – 6:30pm City of Westminster rejected the appeal stating that Resident permit holders at any time. Do we stand a chance in hell re this ? Many thanks indeed for reading Regards Edited because formatting looked odd. You can park by buying a p&d ticket during the times indicated. All other times (including Sundays) are residents permit only. Which part of the sign did you not understand? |
|
|
Thu, 24 Jan 2008 - 15:53
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 449 Joined: 19 Jan 2007 Member No.: 10,168 |
Hello My wife was issued with a PCN – Mount Street, Westminster on Sunday 23rd December. The car was parked in a residents bay. We appealed because the text on the parking sign read as follows. Resident Permit Holder Or Pay at machine <== Display ticket Max stay 4 hours No return Within 1 hour =========== Mon-sat 08:30am – 6:30pm City of Westminster rejected the appeal stating that Resident permit holders at any time. Do we stand a chance in hell re this ? Many thanks indeed for reading Regards Edited because formatting looked odd. You can park by buying a p&d ticket during the times indicated. All other times (including Sundays) are residents permit only. Which part of the sign did you not understand? What a rude and offensive response to a perfectly legitimate query. The obvious question is the Mon-sat 08:30am – 6:30pm Who says that this doesn't apply to any and all parking there? If the OP parked on Sunday, why was this unacceptable? |
|
|
Thu, 24 Jan 2008 - 16:21
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41 Joined: 24 Dec 2007 From: Milton Keynes Member No.: 16,240 |
Hello My wife was issued with a PCN – Mount Street, Westminster on Sunday 23rd December. The car was parked in a residents bay. We appealed because the text on the parking sign read as follows. Resident Permit Holder Or Pay at machine <== Display ticket Max stay 4 hours No return Within 1 hour =========== Mon-sat 08:30am – 6:30pm City of Westminster rejected the appeal stating that Resident permit holders at any time. Do we stand a chance in hell re this ? Many thanks indeed for reading Regards Edited because formatting looked odd. You can park by buying a p&d ticket during the times indicated. All other times (including Sundays) are residents permit only. Which part of the sign did you not understand? What a rude and offensive response to a perfectly legitimate query. The obvious question is the Mon-sat 08:30am – 6:30pm Who says that this doesn't apply to any and all parking there? If the OP parked on Sunday, why was this unacceptable? That is the problem with the written word. There is no inflection. I must have read the reply differently. I see it as an interpretation of the sign followed by a genuine question as to which part of the sign was not understood. Still It would help if we could see a picture of the sign. Can the OP put up a photo. |
|
|
Thu, 24 Jan 2008 - 16:45
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,167 Joined: 5 Aug 2006 Member No.: 6,999 |
The question is whether the time applies to the P&D only or the whole restriction - a photo may make it clearer. Were the times clearly associated only with the P&D section of the sign?
Whether or not it was in a cpz, and the times of that cpz may also be a factor, as these times would dictate the operating time of a sign that didn't have any explicit times stated. I'd have thought that it should have 'at any time' on the residents part of the sign to make it apply on a Sunday |
|
|
Thu, 24 Jan 2008 - 19:55
Post
#6
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 24 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,866 |
Right thanks for the feedback, I have images, which I probably should have posted initially.
The first is a map of mount street (between Park Lane and Berkley Square, incidently Jack Barclay had a Bug Veyron on display which looked fab). The restriction sign was about 20foot behind the car but on the same side of the road. I have attached two pics because SWMBO managed to blur one which shows the entire sign. Feedback neg or otherwise is appreciated as I am now unsure of my comprehension of the basics of my native tongue |
|
|
Thu, 24 Jan 2008 - 20:06
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,167 Joined: 5 Aug 2006 Member No.: 6,999 |
IMO The position of the horizontal bar clearly indicates that the hours apply to both restrictions, not just the P&D, and therefore not restricted on Sundays, so no contravention.
I can't see any argument that the hours could only apply to the P&D - even a notice on the P&D machine would not be relevant as you would have no reason to look at the machine based on the sign. |
|
|
Thu, 24 Jan 2008 - 23:34
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,332 Joined: 10 Mar 2007 From: Midlands Member No.: 11,071 |
the signage does seem confusing but i would have expected that the times apply to everyone (residents or parkers) and outside of them there are no restrictions.
-------------------- NOTICE The content of this post and of any replies to it may assist in or relate to the formulation of strategy tactics etcetera in a legal action. This post and any replies to it should therefore be assumed to be legally privileged and therefore must not be disclosed, copied, quoted, discussed, used or referred to outside of the PePiPoo forum on which it was originally posted additionally it must not be disclosed, copied, quoted, discussed, used or referred to by any person or organisation other than a member of PePiPoo appropriately paid up and in full compliance with the PePiPoo terms of use for the forum on which it was originally posted. The PePiPoo terms of use can be found at http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=boardrules. For the avoidance of doubt, if you are reading this material in any form other than an on-line HTML resource directly and legitimately accessed via a URL commencing "http://forums.pepipoo.com" then it has been obtained by improper means and you are probably reading it in breach of legal privilege. If the material you are reading does not include this notice then it has been obtained improperly and you are probably reading it in breach of legal privilege. Your attention is drawn to the Written Standards for the Conduct of Professional Work issued by the Bar Standards Board particularly under heading 7, "Documents".
Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved" and do not constitute legal advice. Liability for application lies with the reader. |
|
|
Fri, 25 Jan 2008 - 00:01
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 274 Joined: 13 Jun 2006 From: London Member No.: 6,124 |
Agree with Whitewing and Axeman- restrictions only apply at times stated therefore no contravention
|
|
|
Fri, 25 Jan 2008 - 00:13
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 449 Joined: 19 Jan 2007 Member No.: 10,168 |
I agree entirely.
I believe spaceman owes you an apology. |
|
|
Fri, 25 Jan 2008 - 02:13
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,200 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
For what its worth, that is the assumption I cam to (before reading your comments) however the way it was first posted was ambiguous as the nature of the line was unclear, although the responce was a little terse to say the least.
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 |
|
|
Fri, 25 Jan 2008 - 14:23
Post
#12
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 24 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,866 |
Many thanks
So there is general agreement that I have not contravened parking restrictions. The letter from City of Westminster states I have 14 days to pay at the discounted rate or Make a formal representation. They conclude with standard boilerprint “I can assure you that your informal challenge against the issue of the PCN has been fully considered. Any new evidence can be presented with the formal Representation.” What do I do next? Sorry if this sounds idiotic but I have managed to avoid a parking ticket for over 20 years now. |
|
|
Fri, 25 Jan 2008 - 14:37
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 358 Joined: 18 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,598 |
Personally I would write back and enclose a copy of the photograph and ask them to explain how the sign fits in with their description.
I would advise them of your intention to appeal, if necessary to the independent adjudicator and that if your appeal is successful at a PATAS hearing you will be making an application for costs based on their vexatious defence. Otherwise you will have to wait until they send you a NTO and you do have the risk then of the undiscounted penalty. This post has been edited by Bernie the Bolt: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 - 14:37 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 12:02 |