Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Parking fine recieved today west yorkshire
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Guyverx
Hi Gang,

I was hoping somebody could help, today i received the dreaded yellow sticker sad.gif

Iv'e parked in this spot as other for the best part of a month...never received any sort of ticket before so i really am stumped. im also careful not to park close to the yellow line...
car behind me did not receive any sort of ticket either! where would i stand on this? there are no yellow lines where i am parked, hardly any traffic flow, secluded street etc etc


do leeds council take pictures, would i be able to view them online?


parking fine front

http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=XaTRJm...xc#.V9AqnpgrKhc

or if it works






back

http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=XaTRJm...xc#.V9AriZgrKhc

or





where i was parked

http://tinypic.com/m/jimcsg/1

or




or link on google

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7886407,-...3312!8i6656

so guys on what grounds to i defend this case on?

any help/advice would be really appreciated!

thanks in advance!
Mad Mick V
We've had cases in this street before with cars in the same location. There is no SYL running through that "bay" IIRC so it is unrestricted--that's the principal ground of appeal.

Second the PCN is seriously defective-- search for Leeds on this site and you will get chapter and verse.

Mick
Guyverx
QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Wed, 7 Sep 2016 - 16:29) *
We've had cases in this street before with cars in the same location. There is no SYL running through that "bay" IIRC so it is unrestricted--that's the principal ground of appeal.

Second the PCN is seriously defective-- search for Leeds on this site and you will get chapter and verse.

Mick


woah that was quick thanks so much mick! i will have a gander!
Guyverx
any more advice?

thanks!
hcandersen
The photo does not show your car and can only be an approximation of your position.

There is a yellow line in the first part of the bay, so the question is whether a more than trivial part of your car was on this. Your account would suggest not because you refer to a car behind you not having a ticket.

What's needed is the authority's photos to give a definitive answer. If you can't obtain these then you would challenge on the basis that you were not parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours because no road marking in the form of a yellow line was adjacent to any part of your car, the prior yellow line having been terminated a few metres behind you.

You would also add that being parked in a restricted street - the grounds given in the PCN - does not in law give rise to a contravention anyway, this would only occur if parking took place during prescribed hours, but this is not stated in the grounds and may not be implied but stated explicitly.
Guyverx
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 16:28) *
The photo does not show your car and can only be an approximation of your position.

There is a yellow line in the first part of the bay, so the question is whether a more than trivial part of your car was on this. Your account would suggest not because you refer to a car behind you not having a ticket.

What's needed is the authority's photos to give a definitive answer. If you can't obtain these then you would challenge on the basis that you were not parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours because no road marking in the form of a yellow line was adjacent to any part of your car, the prior yellow line having been terminated a few metres behind you.

You would also add that being parked in a restricted street - the grounds given in the PCN - does not in law give rise to a contravention anyway, this would only occur if parking took place during prescribed hours, but this is not stated in the grounds and may not be implied but stated explicitly.



thanks hcandersen! I will edit that into my appeal!!

PASTMYBEST
This is a CPZ the fact that there is an area they seek to enforce that is not marked by yellow lines is unlawful A la Herron

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7878145,-...3312!8i6656
Guyverx
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 16:41) *
This is a CPZ the fact that there is an area they seek to enforce that is not marked by yellow lines is unlawful A la Herron

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7878145,-...3312!8i6656



thanks Pastmybest!! i will incorporate this as well!!
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (Guyverx @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 16:44) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 16:41) *
This is a CPZ the fact that there is an area they seek to enforce that is not marked by yellow lines is unlawful A la Herron

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7878145,-...3312!8i6656



thanks Pastmybest!! i will incorporate this as well!!



I would be inclined , to stick with no yellow lines where parked and if they consider that the yellow line following the kerb applies then there is no time plate indicating the restriction
Guyverx
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 16:51) *
QUOTE (Guyverx @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 16:44) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 16:41) *
This is a CPZ the fact that there is an area they seek to enforce that is not marked by yellow lines is unlawful A la Herron

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7878145,-...3312!8i6656



thanks Pastmybest!! i will incorporate this as well!!



I would be inclined , to stick with no yellow lines where parked and if they consider that the yellow line following the kerb applies then there is no time plate indicating the restriction


thankyou smile.gif
Guyverx
i've created this draft using the information i found on the forum.. hopefully its not the worst letter you have laid your eyes on.. any changes? >.<


Dear Sir or Madam,

Your PCN is null and void and, therefore, unenforceable as it does not comply with the legislation as follows:

The alleged contravention did not occur

The PCN states the contravention as:

01 Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours

There are no signs in the area indicating that Sweet Street is a restricted street or what hours the restrictions are in force. Parking restrictions must be clearly signed for them to apply.

There is no yellow line where I parked and I have attached photographs that clearly show this.

Additionally, the PCN alleges “parked on a restricted street”, the grounds given by the PCN issued does not in law give rise to a contravention. This would occur if parking took place during prescribed hours. However this is not stated on the PCN.

Furthermore, I would like to state the following as the PCN is seriously defective:

1. Uses will rather than may:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/34...ulation/21/made

Charge Certificates--

21(1) Where a notice to owner is served on any person and the penalty charge to which it relates is not paid before the end of the relevant period, the authority serving the notice may serve on that person a statement (a “charge certificate”) to the effect that the penalty charge in question is increased by the amount of the applicable surcharge.

Also, at that stage you make formal representations. These are either accepted or rejected!

rely upon the following PATAS decisions2110072817, 2100649871 & 2110415753

2. The second statement completely and utterly jumps several stages in the process, again in a most intimidating manner, making a sweeping threat which is wholly non-compliant with the law.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/34...ulation/22/made

Enforcement of charge certificate

22. Where a charge certificate has been served on any person and the increased penalty charge provided for in the certificate is not paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date on which the certificate is served, the enforcement authority may, if a county court so orders, recover the increased charge as if it were payable under a county court order.

Additionally, I am challenging the PCN to be seriously defective on the grounds that it fails to comply with the mandatory requirements of paragraph 1(e) to the Schedule to the General Regulations in that the grounds on which the CEO believes that a penalty charge is payable do not comply with the mandatory provisions of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (Guidelines on Levels of Charges) (England) Order 2007.
These provisions are mandatory whether the PCN is produced by a machine or handwritten, as in this case, and therefore the PCN must be cancelled.

Also I would like to point out the PCN;

1. Has to indicate the £ amount of the discount;
2. Misses 3.2(b) of the Appeal Regulation i.e;

(b) that, if representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified for the purpose before a notice to owner is served—

(i) those representations will be considered;

(ii) but that, if a notice to owner is served notwithstanding those representations, representations against the penalty charge must be made in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner





I require you to cancel it forthwith and with immediate effect.

Yours faithfully
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (Guyverx @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 17:25) *
i've created this draft using the information i found on the forum.. hopefully its not the worst letter you have laid your eyes on.. any changes? >.<


Dear Sir or Madam,

Your PCN is null and void and, therefore, unenforceable as it does not comply with the legislation as follows:

The alleged contravention did not occur

The PCN states the contravention as:

01 Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours

There are no signs in the area indicating that Sweet Street is a restricted street or what hours the restrictions are in force. Parking restrictions must be clearly signed for them to apply.

There is no yellow line where I parked and I have attached photographs that clearly show this.

Additionally, the PCN alleges “parked on a restricted street”, the grounds given by the PCN issued does not in law give rise to a contravention. This would occur if parking took place during prescribed hours. However this is not stated on the PCN.

Furthermore, I would like to state the following as the PCN is seriously defective:

1. Uses will rather than may:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/34...ulation/21/made

Charge Certificates--

21(1) Where a notice to owner is served on any person and the penalty charge to which it relates is not paid before the end of the relevant period, the authority serving the notice may serve on that person a statement (a “charge certificate”) to the effect that the penalty charge in question is increased by the amount of the applicable surcharge.

Also, at that stage you make formal representations. These are either accepted or rejected!

rely upon the following PATAS decisions2110072817, 2100649871 & 2110415753

2. The second statement completely and utterly jumps several stages in the process, again in a most intimidating manner, making a sweeping threat which is wholly non-compliant with the law.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/34...ulation/22/made

Enforcement of charge certificate

22. Where a charge certificate has been served on any person and the increased penalty charge provided for in the certificate is not paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date on which the certificate is served, the enforcement authority may, if a county court so orders, recover the increased charge as if it were payable under a county court order.

Additionally, I am challenging the PCN to be seriously defective on the grounds that it fails to comply with the mandatory requirements of paragraph 1(e) to the Schedule to the General Regulations in that the grounds on which the CEO believes that a penalty charge is payable do not comply with the mandatory provisions of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (Guidelines on Levels of Charges) (England) Order 2007.
These provisions are mandatory whether the PCN is produced by a machine or handwritten, as in this case, and therefore the PCN must be cancelled.

Also I would like to point out the PCN;

1. Has to indicate the £ amount of the discount;
2. Misses 3.2(b) of the Appeal Regulation i.e;

(b) that, if representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified for the purpose before a notice to owner is served—

(i) those representations will be considered;

(ii) but that, if a notice to owner is served notwithstanding those representations, representations against the penalty charge must be made in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner





I require you to cancel it forthwith and with immediate effect.

Yours faithfully



Dump the bit in red, ifs not relevant at this stage, Next document will be a notice to owner
hcandersen
OP, focus on the key points. Referring to adjudication decisions is all well and good, but they are not binding whereas the law is, so start with the law.

1. The contravention did not occur
a.As a participating council of the Joint Committee of England and Wales for the civil enforcement of Parking and Traffic Regulations Outside London (PATROL) you are bound to use the contravention descriptions approved by that body which are also set out in the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (Guidelines on Levels of Charges) (England) Order 2007.

The authority have not in the case of this PCN.

The Order prescribes the following:

Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours, whereas the PCN states 'Parked in a restricted street'.

1. No contravention arises in law for being parked in a restricted street, and
2. The penalty may not be sought in relation to any description other than that prescribed under the Order or approved by PATROL.

The CEO made a mistake and I hope that the authority will not compound, and effectively condone, this by rejecting these grounds of challenge.

b. My vehicle was not parked on a road marking indicating a waiting restriction and therefore even if the description was correct the penalty would not be recoverable because the road markings prescribed to indicate this contravention were not in place.

c. Even if the contravention was correct and the road marking was in place and my vehicle was parked on it the penalty would not be recoverable because the prescribed traffic signs advising of the extent of the part-time restriction were not in place.

If the authority reject the above then they must provide evidence of their lawful authority to depart from the prescribed grounds of contravention, evidence that my vehicle was situated on a no waiting road marking and evidence of the necessary traffic sign in the vicnity.


... procedural bits.....
Guyverx
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 20:38) *
QUOTE (Guyverx @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 17:25) *
i've created this draft using the information i found on the forum.. hopefully its not the worst letter you have laid your eyes on.. any changes? >.<


Dear Sir or Madam,

Your PCN is null and void and, therefore, unenforceable as it does not comply with the legislation as follows:

The alleged contravention did not occur

The PCN states the contravention as:

01 Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours

There are no signs in the area indicating that Sweet Street is a restricted street or what hours the restrictions are in force. Parking restrictions must be clearly signed for them to apply.

There is no yellow line where I parked and I have attached photographs that clearly show this.

Additionally, the PCN alleges “parked on a restricted street”, the grounds given by the PCN issued does not in law give rise to a contravention. This would occur if parking took place during prescribed hours. However this is not stated on the PCN.



Furthermore, I would like to state the following as the PCN is seriously defective:

1. Uses will rather than may:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/34...ulation/21/made

Charge Certificates--

21(1) Where a notice to owner is served on any person and the penalty charge to which it relates is not paid before the end of the relevant period, the authority serving the notice may serve on that person a statement (a “charge certificate”) to the effect that the penalty charge in question is increased by the amount of the applicable surcharge.

Also, at that stage you make formal representations. These are either accepted or rejected!

rely upon the following PATAS decisions2110072817, 2100649871 & 2110415753

2. The second statement completely and utterly jumps several stages in the process, again in a most intimidating manner, making a sweeping threat which is wholly non-compliant with the law.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/34...ulation/22/made

Enforcement of charge certificate

22. Where a charge certificate has been served on any person and the increased penalty charge provided for in the certificate is not paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date on which the certificate is served, the enforcement authority may, if a county court so orders, recover the increased charge as if it were payable under a county court order.

Additionally, I am challenging the PCN to be seriously defective on the grounds that it fails to comply with the mandatory requirements of paragraph 1(e) to the Schedule to the General Regulations in that the grounds on which the CEO believes that a penalty charge is payable do not comply with the mandatory provisions of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (Guidelines on Levels of Charges) (England) Order 2007.
These provisions are mandatory whether the PCN is produced by a machine or handwritten, as in this case, and therefore the PCN must be cancelled.

Also I would like to point out the PCN;

1. Has to indicate the £ amount of the discount;
2. Misses 3.2(b) of the Appeal Regulation i.e;

(b) that, if representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified for the purpose before a notice to owner is served—

(i) those representations will be considered;

(ii) but that, if a notice to owner is served notwithstanding those representations, representations against the penalty charge must be made in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner





I require you to cancel it forthwith and with immediate effect.

Yours faithfully



Dump the bit in red, ifs not relevant at this stage, Next document will be a notice to owner


Thanks again!!


QUOTE (hcandersen @ Thu, 8 Sep 2016 - 23:13) *
OP, focus on the key points. Referring to adjudication decisions is all well and good, but they are not binding whereas the law is, so start with the law.

1. The contravention did not occur
a.As a participating council of the Joint Committee of England and Wales for the civil enforcement of Parking and Traffic Regulations Outside London (PATROL) you are bound to use the contravention descriptions approved by that body which are also set out in the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (Guidelines on Levels of Charges) (England) Order 2007.

The authority have not in the case of this PCN.

The Order prescribes the following:

Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours, whereas the PCN states 'Parked in a restricted street'.

1. No contravention arises in law for being parked in a restricted street, and
2. The penalty may not be sought in relation to any description other than that prescribed under the Order or approved by PATROL.

The CEO made a mistake and I hope that the authority will not compound, and effectively condone, this by rejecting these grounds of challenge.

b. My vehicle was not parked on a road marking indicating a waiting restriction and therefore even if the description was correct the penalty would not be recoverable because the road markings prescribed to indicate this contravention were not in place.

c. Even if the contravention was correct and the road marking was in place and my vehicle was parked on it the penalty would not be recoverable because the prescribed traffic signs advising of the extent of the part-time restriction were not in place.

If the authority reject the above then they must provide evidence of their lawful authority to depart from the prescribed grounds of contravention, evidence that my vehicle was situated on a no waiting road marking and evidence of the necessary traffic sign in the vicnity.


... procedural bits.....


That is so much better thank you!

i will send my appeal in today!

thanks!
Guyverx
thought il put a quick update, emailed my letter off to the council but still not heard anything back!.. so its been 10days.. will update again if i hear anything!
John U.K.
QUOTE
thought il put a quick update, emailed my letter off to the council but still not heard anything back!.. so its been 10days.. will update again if i hear anything!


Councils can be slow . . ..
More importantly, did you print off a hard copy of your e-mail? Printing it off from your 'Sent Items' folder should give you a dated and timed copy.
Was there any kind of auto-acknowledgement?
Guyverx
QUOTE (John U.K. @ Sun, 18 Sep 2016 - 17:28) *
QUOTE
thought il put a quick update, emailed my letter off to the council but still not heard anything back!.. so its been 10days.. will update again if i hear anything!


Councils can be slow . . ..
More importantly, did you print off a hard copy of your e-mail? Printing it off from your 'Sent Items' folder should give you a dated and timed copy.
Was there any kind of auto-acknowledgement?



Hi John, i have received my NTO, and have sent off my response similar to the above letter i will update accordingly!!

thanks for the reply!
Mad Mick V
You might want to add a bit more see here:-

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...t&p=1224134

Not just the will/may issue but taking a procedural step way way before they should.

This refers to the statement that the penalty will be increased by 50% and the baliffs set on you. This relates to the service of a Charge Certificate which should not even be touched on at this stage of the process.

I would appeal on the basis that this represents a procedural impropriety which renders the PCN a nullity and unenforceable. Back this up with this extract from The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 (my bold):-

4(5) In these Regulations “procedural impropriety” means a failure by the enforcement authority to observe any requirement imposed on it by the 2004 Act, by the General Regulations or by these Regulations in relation to the imposition or recovery of a penalty charge or other sum and includes in particular—

(a) the taking of any step, whether or not involving the service of any document, otherwise than—
(i)in accordance with the conditions subject to which; or
(ii)at the time or during the period when,
it is authorised or required by the General Regulations or these Regulations to be taken
;

So Leeds have taken a step long before it is due.

Mick
John U.K.
QUOTE
Hi John, i have received my NTO, and have sent off my response similar to the above letter i will update accordingly!!


Please post NtO here as usual, and your response.
Then we can see if there are any other points you need to raise in addition to Mick's.
Guyverx
QUOTE (John U.K. @ Sat, 12 Nov 2016 - 16:37) *
QUOTE
Hi John, i have received my NTO, and have sent off my response similar to the above letter i will update accordingly!!


Please post NtO here as usual, and your response.
Then we can see if there are any other points you need to raise in addition to Mick's.



Hi,

i received a response from leeds city council "it is no longer possible for you to make an formal response"

i can confirm by email that i did sent a response within the 28 day time scale..?

Im confused with my next step?

any held would be appreciated

thanks
PASTMYBEST
If you made a formal response to the NTO in time they are obliged to consider it and give their response within 56 days, if they do not it is deemed accepted.

the problem is though that at the moment you have no recourse to the TPT, you will need wait for the charge certificate, then order for recovery, swear a witness statement that you made representations to the authority but they did not respond.
This will cancel the CC and OfR and the authority will need refer to the TPT for direction, Normally an appeal.

This should be a hands down win as a procedural impropriety

Another option though out of process may be an e mail to TPT explaining that you made reps in time but the authority have written to say that you are out of time. Include evidence
ask if the will send you an appeal form and here the case, rather than go the SD route

Don't do that yet let others comment
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 © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.