Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Red route parking
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
jojostern
I parked in a 20 min loading bay and I got a PCN, so I sent in a Invoice that I was picking up stuff, so I was loading.

Than I get a letter saying as there was no date on the invoice they rejected the representation (pls see the letter attached), what do I do now?

Letter attached.

Click to view attachment
John U.K.
1) letter dated 16th June so you've lost the discount and nothing to lose (providing you keep to deadlines) by taking thing this further. Any reason for late delivery of letter or have you had it since 18th.June? Date on postmark?

2) In th paragraph beginning "WE acknowledge the comments made ..... " they imply that they would have accepted a dated invoice. You can rectify this with a dated statement from the company.

3) in the same paragraph they say " you were inside purchasing...." What exactly did you write in your challenge? We need to see what you wrote.

4) When they wrote "Please be advised that we have decided to reject the representation on this occasion because we believe the mitigating circumstances you describe are not acceptable, and we are unable to exercise discretion ...." the mis-directed themsellves as to the law. Loading is an exemption, not a mitigating circumstance, and if proved exempts: there is no discretion to be exercised.
Chaseman
Agree with John. I am surprised the letter did not pick up on the fact that you had apparently described your actions as purchasing rather than loading. You can use a loading bay to collect pre-ordered goods but you can't go inside to shop for them. If you press this (and there is nothing now to be lost by going to the formal appeal stage) then describe your actions as collection of pre-ordered goods rather than purchasing, if true.

If you want any chance of success at the formal stage go back to RMR and see if you can get a dated letter/invoice.

John has picked up the "we are unable to exercise discretion" point. I come at it from a different angle - authorities can exercise discretion at any point in the process and irrespective of whether discretion is appropriate (or whether you have an exemption that is watertight) for them to say they are UNABLE to exercise discretion amounts to a Procedural Impropriety. Suggest you search this site for "fettered discretion".

Can you also show us the PCN (redacted), your informal challenge, and the RMR invoice/letter?
John U.K.
+1 to Chaseman's comments.

As an aside on the pre-ordering question, I wonder if ringing to check the items were in stock, and asking them to put them on one side, or even in these days of websites, checking their website to ascertain stock levels, would count as 'pre-ordering'?
Chaseman
QUOTE (John U.K. @ Fri, 8 Jul 2016 - 17:40) *
+1 to Chaseman's comments.

As an aside on the pre-ordering question, I wonder if ringing to check the items were in stock, and asking them to put them on one side, or even in these days of websites, checking their website to ascertain stock levels, would count as 'pre-ordering'?


I am not sure there is case law on this one, but it seems to me that there is a big difference between knowing what you are going off to collect as against browsing the alternatives in store before making a selection. Whether one pays online in advance, rings the retailer and gives a c/c number over the phone, or alternatively having confirmed that the desired goods are in stock and will be put aside, you present your c/c in store, I don't think makes a lot of difference.

Going and parking your car in a loading bay, spending 15 mins deciding what you want to buy and then a further 5 mins paying and carrying goods to your car, puts you the wrong side of a loading exemption IMO.
PASTMYBEST
This one puts a slightly different slant on it

2160237781


The Appellant attended this hearing.

The Appellant explained that his wife had parked in this red route loading bay to collect a large turkey; she needed the vehicle to do this because of the size and weight of the turkey and because of her physical impairment at the time. I accept that even if the Appellant did not have such impairment it would still be difficult to transport the turkey by hand on public transport and to that extent a vehicle was necessary.

The Appellant truthfully disclosed that whilst waiting to pay for the turkey his wife picked up other items; in my view this was incidental to the purpose of her trip and did not materially increase the time the vehicle was in the loading bay and it was not there longer than necessary to collect the turkey.

I find that the vehicle was being loaded while parked in this loading bay.
jojostern
Any draft letter?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.