Just wondering if anyone can help me regarding this pcn.
I parked on a dropped curb whilst i unloaded my van of kitchen cabinets to a property opposite.
I have attached pcn and pictures of said location



ceo's pictures:








Here is a GSV of the location (to get a better idea of the road, note the drop curb is not there due to the picture being older): https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4597019,-...#33;6m1!1e1

I thought i was allowed to unload for 20mins regarding where i have parked.

I also noticed in my third picture that the parking bay actually encroaches on to the dropped curb, so if i was parked in that bay i would still have been blocking the dropped curb. This leaves me to assume the dropped curb was only recently made?

I also recognise this dropped curb is not being used as a crossing for pedestrians or cyclists and isn't being used by vehicles.

Any insight regarding where i stand would be greatly appreciated.

Loading is an exemption on DKs
There also seems a big question mark on purpose of the DK but I would leave that till later in the process should they reject the loading.

Tell them what you were doing, where and include some proof such as delivery note or invoice.

Agree with DD. Here's the relevant legislations from RTA 2004:




If you can corroborate your unloading with some evidence, if necessary a confirming letter from the business to which you were delivering, but a Delivery Note better, then you would fall into section 5.

If this fails, then it is necessary for the dropped kerb (not curb) to fall into one of the categories in section 1 and from the photos it does not seem to. If GSV is older and does not show the DK then you may need to revisit and take photos of the other side of the road and along the pavement to confirm that it is not a driveway, pedestrian crossing or cycle access to the carriageway. The best tactic is generally to challenge the LA to say what the purpose of the DK is. If recently installed, can you see what the purpose might be?

Thanks dd and chaseman for the replies.
Yes I do have a delivery note so will attach this in my appeal aswell as include the legislation. Hopefully this is sufficient for them to cancel the Pcn. Will update on the outcome of this.

QUOTE

I do have a delivery note so will attach this in my appeal

Attach a copy, not the original.

Just to update this thread with the outcome.
They have rejected my challenge!

Here was my appeal to them, i also had attached a copy of my delivery note:

"I believe that the Code 27 contravention did not occur, as the lowered kerb in question does not meet any of the statutory tests which
prove the contravention. I was unloading the van with heavy kitchen cabinets and this was the closest safest place to do so. The whole
road was filled with cars and was unable to unload elsewhere other then where i did. I have attached my delivery note which has the
property details and goods being delivered. I fall into section 5 as i was unloading the van, therefore i expect the pcn to be cancelled. 86
Prohibition of parking at dropped footways etc. (1)In a special enforcement area a vehicle must not be parked on the carriageway
adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge where— (a)the footway, cycle track or verge has been lowered to meet the level of the
carriageway for the purpose of— (i)assisting pedestrians crossing the carriageway, (ii)assisting cyclists entering or leaving the
carriageway, or (iii)assisting vehicles entering or leaving the carriageway across the footway, cycle track or verge; or (b)the carriageway
has, for a purpose within paragraph (a)(i) to (iii), been raised to meet the level of the footway, cycle track or verge. This is subject to the
following exceptions. (2)The first exception is where the vehicle is parked wholly within a designated parking place or any other part of
the carriageway where parking is specifically authorised. A “designated parking place” means a parking place designated by order
under section 6, 9, 32(1)(b) or 45 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (c. 27). (3)The second exception is where the vehicle is
parked outside residential premises by or with the consent (but not consent given for reward) of the occupier of the premises. This
exception does not apply in the case of a shared driveway. (4)The third exception is where the vehicle is being used for fire brigade,
ambulance or police purposes. (5)The fourth exception is where— (a)the vehicle is being used for the purposes of delivering goods to, or
collecting goods from, any premises, or is being loaded from or unloaded to any premises, (b)the delivery, collection, loading or
unloading cannot reasonably be carried out in relation to those premises without the vehicle being parked as mentioned in subsection
(1), and ©the vehicle is so parked for no longer than is necessary and for no more than 20 minutes.


Here is their reply:




Just incase anyone does want to see a picture opposite the dk here it is.



My question is, do they have a leg to stand on as this is clearly not a crossing for pedestrians/wheelchair users as its not a crossing point.
In regards to it being an access way for vehicles, it clearly has no such use... as of yet anyway.
Please refer to my previous post of pictures as a parking bay can clearly be seen blocking/interfering with this DK.

If anyone can shed some light i would greatly appreciate it.

Typical reply from Lambeth. Muppets!
Stock reply, clear failure to consider. Please post rest of reply.

Totally ignored the fact that you are claiming a statutory exemption from the DK regulations, so purpose of DK is irrelevant.
(May come in as a secondary point in reps to NtO or appeal to LT.)

I assume they want on to re-offer discount? They want your money.

See what others say, but I'd fight on.

Not only do they ignore the exemption, they deny it exists this is a PI

Although the contravention is different, and there are conditions to the exemption for footway parking. The principal is the same here

2160379571

On 6th October 2016 Mr Miah attended the hearing.
The issue of this appeal is whether the vehicle was parked with one or more wheels on any part of a road other than a carriageway.
The Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 (as amended), section 15, creates the contravention that, "Any person who causes or permits any vehicle to be parked in Greater London with one or more wheels on any part of a road other than a carriageway shall be guilty…." There is no requirement to provide signage to indicate that footway parking is prohibited, only to provide signage indicating where it is permitted.
Section 15(3) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 (as amended) creates certain limited exemptions.
One of these is a loading and unloading exemption. The issue of this arose during the hearing.
The exemption only applies if the loading or unloading of the vehicle could not have been satisfactorily performed if it had not been so parked and the vehicle was not left unattended at any time while it was so parked.
In their notice of rejection dated 15th August 2016 the local authority has stated that there is no loading and unloading exemption for footway parking.
This is incorrect and misleading in what is an important document in these proceedings.
I will therefore allow the appeal.

Others have said it but not only have they ignored, they have flat out denied a statutory exemption exists.

Even at informal stage, this should be a winner of its own once this gets to adjudication.

If you feel like jiggling their elbows a little......

Dear Sirs
Ref PCN ???
Your letter dated ????
I wish to clarify one point, if needed I request that you approach the council legal team for advice on this.
Within the rejection letter you clearly state that loading/unloading is not allowed on dropped kerbs.
This seems in clear contradiction of Traffic Management Act 2004, Section 86, Part 5, detailed as the Fourth Exemption.
Please explain why this exemption has been explicitly denied in a manner that seems calculated to mislead motorists who expect you, as the enforcement authority, to be au fait with the legalities of parking contravention and who have a specific duty to act fairly and to consider representations on their merits.
I look forward to either a clear explanation of cancelation on the grounds of Procedural Impropriety
Hugs and kisses

Or wait for the Notice to Owner.
But don't pay this one, between the exemption and their muppetry, cannot see you ever needing to.
Just don't miss deadlines.