Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Phoenix Way (Services)
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
JayEss
Hi, I have received a PCN in relation to contravention 52J at Phoenix Way (Services). I entered here as I was staying at the Travelodge and the alternative way added an hour to my journey, which had already taken 3 hours with 3 young kids.

Can you please advise how I can appeal. I am still with in the 28 day period but have passed the 14 day discount period as I was away for the last 2 weeks, so just returned home.

Thanks in advance.
cp8759
This is a reasonably straightforward location to win at, because the Traffic Management Order that creates the restriction is flawed. However in the first instance post up the PCN (all sides of all pages) and the video, so we can take a look. Use an external site like imgur.com or imgbb.com to host the picutres, and a site like youtube or vimeo for the video. You can use this https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/f...hlhccpdbc?hl=en to download the video from the council website.
JayEss
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 15:55) *
This is a reasonably straightforward location to win at, because the Traffic Management Order that creates the restriction is flawed. However in the first instance post up the PCN (all sides of all pages) and the video, so we can take a look. Use an external site like imgur.com or imgbb.com to host the picutres, and a site like youtube or vimeo for the video. You can use this https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/f...hlhccpdbc?hl=en to download the video from the council website.


Hi thanks for your reply.

the PCN is saved here:
https://ibb.co/pj0hz0k
https://ibb.co/CnZJGfD
https://ibb.co/nzKnhHY

Will share the video as soon as it is made available.
cp8759
The council will issue a stock rejection letter no matter what you submit, so I'd just send something simple and to the point. Also send them copies of http://bit.ly/2vlXb2t http://bit.ly/2Ds5cYf and http://bit.ly/31yv8L6

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

Dear London Borough of Hounslow,

The alleged contravention did not occur, this is because the signage at the location does not convey the restriction imposed by the Traffic Management Order. I refer you to the decisions in the following cases:

Yadevinder Hothi v London Borough of Hounslow (2180474156, 05 January 2019)
Nisha Patel v London Borough of Hounslow (2190096099, 13 April 2019)
Alistair Kelly v London Borough of Hounslow (2190228928, 05 August 2019)

There is no basis to believe the tribunal would reach a different decision in this case as the facts are the same, in light of this the PCN should be cancelled.
JayEss
I replied as advised and received the rejection letter recently. See here https://ibb.co/6tBxyF9

Is it worth pursing? and could someone please advise what to do next?

Thanks in advance.



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 15 Aug 2019 - 16:43) *
The council will issue a stock rejection letter no matter what you submit, so I'd just send something simple and to the point. Also send them copies of http://bit.ly/2vlXb2t http://bit.ly/2Ds5cYf and http://bit.ly/31yv8L6

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

Dear London Borough of Hounslow,

The alleged contravention did not occur, this is because the signage at the location does not convey the restriction imposed by the Traffic Management Order. I refer you to the decisions in the following cases:

Yadevinder Hothi v London Borough of Hounslow (2180474156, 05 January 2019)
Nisha Patel v London Borough of Hounslow (2190096099, 13 April 2019)
Alistair Kelly v London Borough of Hounslow (2190228928, 05 August 2019)

There is no basis to believe the tribunal would reach a different decision in this case as the facts are the same, in light of this the PCN should be cancelled.

cp8759
This is the new order: https://www.hounslow.gov.uk/download/downlo...-_tmop03219.pdf

The description of the "Length of road" and "Location" is exactly the same as before, so I would carry on. We cannot guarantee success, but so far the tribunal has been very consistent in holding that the location described in the order is wrong. For the council to enforce these signs, the TMO should create a restriction that prohibits motor vehicles from driving on Norwood Road.

As the new order uses the exact same wording as the old order, the previous decisions are obviously relevant. I would suggest you simply register the appeal and write "detailed grounds to follow" in the reasons box, this will force the council to submit its evidence first.
JayEss

Thanks. Which reason for 'Grounds of Appeal' should I use? see here for choices: https://ibb.co/g7y1R0j

And if I put detailed grounds to follow, when would I provide these details?

Thank you

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 5 Oct 2019 - 16:20) *
This is the new order: https://www.hounslow.gov.uk/download/downlo...-_tmop03219.pdf

The description of the "Length of road" and "Location" is exactly the same as before, so I would carry on. We cannot guarantee success, but so far the tribunal has been very consistent in holding that the location described in the order is wrong. For the council to enforce these signs, the TMO should create a restriction that prohibits motor vehicles from driving on Norwood Road.

As the new order uses the exact same wording as the old order, the previous decisions are obviously relevant. I would suggest you simply register the appeal and write "detailed grounds to follow" in the reasons box, this will force the council to submit its evidence first.

cp8759
Register the appeal online, there's no point in wasting time with posting paper forms, the website is https://londontribunals.org.uk/ follow the link to "Create new appeal", you'll need the verification code that's printed on the Notice of Rejection. The statutory ground of appeal is that the alleged contravention did not occur.

Once you've registered the appeal, the tribunal will email you a hearing date, as long as you submit your full appeal wording to the tribunal before that date the adjudicator will take it into account.

Also upload the other page of the Notice of Rejection so we can check for errors.
JayEss
Thanks. Please find the other pages here:

https://ibb.co/fkqG5Jt
https://ibb.co/tXFWDz9
https://ibb.co/0jBPxyp
https://ibb.co/MNw7hdk

Will log it online as advised. Cheers

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 12 Oct 2019 - 12:24) *
Register the appeal online, there's no point in wasting time with posting paper forms, the website is https://londontribunals.org.uk/ follow the link to "Create new appeal", you'll need the verification code that's printed on the Notice of Rejection. The statutory ground of appeal is that the alleged contravention did not occur.

Once you've registered the appeal, the tribunal will email you a hearing date, as long as you submit your full appeal wording to the tribunal before that date the adjudicator will take it into account.

Also upload the other page of the Notice of Rejection so we can check for errors.
JayEss
Hi,

The appeal was registered as advised. Could you please advise what needs to be submitted as evidence.

Thanks,
JayEss


QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 12 Oct 2019 - 12:24) *
Register the appeal online, there's no point in wasting time with posting paper forms, the website is https://londontribunals.org.uk/ follow the link to "Create new appeal", you'll need the verification code that's printed on the Notice of Rejection. The statutory ground of appeal is that the alleged contravention did not occur.

Once you've registered the appeal, the tribunal will email you a hearing date, as long as you submit your full appeal wording to the tribunal before that date the adjudicator will take it into account.

Also upload the other page of the Notice of Rejection so we can check for errors.

cp8759
QUOTE (JayEss @ Mon, 4 Nov 2019 - 16:59) *
Hi,

The appeal was registered as advised. Could you please advise what needs to be submitted as evidence.

Nothing, the council now has 7 days to supply its evidence to the tribunal. Unless/until that happens, you don't need to do a thing.
JayEss
Ok thanks, how will I know if they have done this? The appeal was lodged on about 2 weeks ago now.

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 5 Nov 2019 - 23:12) *
QUOTE (JayEss @ Mon, 4 Nov 2019 - 16:59) *
Hi,

The appeal was registered as advised. Could you please advise what needs to be submitted as evidence.

Nothing, the council now has 7 days to supply its evidence to the tribunal. Unless/until that happens, you don't need to do a thing.

cp8759
QUOTE (JayEss @ Tue, 5 Nov 2019 - 22:37) *
Ok thanks, how will I know if they have done this? The appeal was lodged on about 2 weeks ago now.

Log onto the tribunal appeals portal and have a look, if any evidence has been uploaded, it'll be there. If there's nothing there, take a screenshot.
JayEss
Nothing there other than what I put on - evidence to follow.

https://ibb.co/cyHzK1s
https://ibb.co/xzXDkXp

Does this mean I shouldn’t upload anything further?

Thanks

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 6 Nov 2019 - 18:12) *
QUOTE (JayEss @ Tue, 5 Nov 2019 - 22:37) *
Ok thanks, how will I know if they have done this? The appeal was lodged on about 2 weeks ago now.

Log onto the tribunal appeals portal and have a look, if any evidence has been uploaded, it'll be there. If there's nothing there, take a screenshot.

cp8759
QUOTE (JayEss @ Thu, 7 Nov 2019 - 13:38) *
Nothing there other than what I put on - evidence to follow.

https://ibb.co/cyHzK1s
https://ibb.co/xzXDkXp

Does this mean I shouldn’t upload anything further?

Not yet no. If the council doesn't upload anything, there will be no evidence of anything and you'll automatically win.
JayEss

They have submitted some evidence now. I have until 15/11 to submit anything further. please advise what I should submit. Thanks

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 7 Nov 2019 - 18:32) *
QUOTE (JayEss @ Thu, 7 Nov 2019 - 13:38) *
Nothing there other than what I put on - evidence to follow.

https://ibb.co/cyHzK1s
https://ibb.co/xzXDkXp

Does this mean I shouldn’t upload anything further?

Not yet no. If the council doesn't upload anything, there will be no evidence of anything and you'll automatically win.

cp8759
QUOTE (JayEss @ Tue, 12 Nov 2019 - 11:16) *
They have submitted some evidence now. I have until 15/11 to submit anything further. please advise what I should submit. Thanks

Show us the council's case summary.
JayEss
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 13 Nov 2019 - 02:15) *
QUOTE (JayEss @ Tue, 12 Nov 2019 - 11:16) *
They have submitted some evidence now. I have until 15/11 to submit anything further. please advise what I should submit. Thanks

Show us the council's case summary.


Here is the case summary.

https://ibb.co/m8WxmDr
https://ibb.co/dQrnqLJ

Thanks
cp8759
Here's a draft of your appeal: http://bit.ly/2NKQIIk

You'll have to download this, replace your username with your real name, change the text to black and save as a PDF, before uploading to the tribunal website. Of course I always recommend you read it over before submitting it, it is your appeal after all.

Also upload copies of these decisions:

London Borough of Barnet Council, R (on the application of) v The Parking Adjudicator [2006] EWHC 2357 (Admin) http://bit.ly/2V1utPz
Yadevinder Hothi v London Borough of Hounslow (2180474156, 05 January 2019) http://bit.ly/2vlXb2t
Nisha Patel v London Borough of Hounslow (2190096099, 13 April 2019) http://bit.ly/2Ds5cYf
Alistair Kelly v London Borough of Hounslow (2190228928, 05 August 2019) http://bit.ly/31yv8L6
Neil Freeman v London Borough of Hounslow (2190304425, 30 August 2019) http://bit.ly/2B38vmX
JayEss
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 13 Nov 2019 - 19:59) *
Here's a draft of your appeal: http://bit.ly/2NKQIIk

You'll have to download this, replace your username with your real name, change the text to black and save as a PDF, before uploading to the tribunal website. Of course I always recommend you read it over before submitting it, it is your appeal after all.

Also upload copies of these decisions:

London Borough of Barnet Council, R (on the application of) v The Parking Adjudicator [2006] EWHC 2357 (Admin) http://bit.ly/2V1utPz
Yadevinder Hothi v London Borough of Hounslow (2180474156, 05 January 2019) http://bit.ly/2vlXb2t
Nisha Patel v London Borough of Hounslow (2190096099, 13 April 2019) http://bit.ly/2Ds5cYf
Alistair Kelly v London Borough of Hounslow (2190228928, 05 August 2019) http://bit.ly/31yv8L6
Neil Freeman v London Borough of Hounslow (2190304425, 30 August 2019) http://bit.ly/2B38vmX


Cheekily the council have submitted another file. Please see attached here https://ibb.co/n0PK6zt

Do I need to add anything further? The hearing date is set for tomorrow.
Mad Mick V
OP---- you must contend that the contravention "Failure to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle" bears no relationship with the TRO which prevents vehicles "leaving" a road. Indeed I cannot, for the life of me, see how one prohibition morphs into the other.


You obviously "left" the road but that's not the charge.


Mick
cp8759
Submit this:
-----------
Response to the council's response to ground 1: The prohibition conveyed by diagram 619 is "Motor vehicles prohibited" (see item 12 of the table at Part 2 of Schedule 3 to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016), a sign placed at the start of Norwood Road clearly conveys that motor vehicles are prohibited on Norwood Road. There is no apparent reason why the Highway Authority could not amend the TMO to state that no motor vehicles may be driven on Norwood Road, which is the contravention clearly conveyed by the signs.

Response to the council's response to ground 2: The council appears to be unfamiliar with the provisions of regulation 4(2) of The Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators) (London) Regulations 1993, alternatively the council might be suggesting that those mandatory requirements only apply to the council if the council is prompted to comply with them by the tribunal. In essence, the council appears to be of the view that this particular regulation is irrelevant and can be ignored, there is no reading of the legislation that could possibly support that this was the intent of Parliament when it enacted the regulations.
Illera
QUOTE (JayEss @ Tue, 19 Nov 2019 - 13:30) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 13 Nov 2019 - 19:59) *
Here's a draft of your appeal: http://bit.ly/2NKQIIk

You'll have to download this, replace your username with your real name, change the text to black and save as a PDF, before uploading to the tribunal website. Of course I always recommend you read it over before submitting it, it is your appeal after all.

Also upload copies of these decisions:

London Borough of Barnet Council, R (on the application of) v The Parking Adjudicator [2006] EWHC 2357 (Admin) http://bit.ly/2V1utPz
Yadevinder Hothi v London Borough of Hounslow (2180474156, 05 January 2019) http://bit.ly/2vlXb2t
Nisha Patel v London Borough of Hounslow (2190096099, 13 April 2019) http://bit.ly/2Ds5cYf
Alistair Kelly v London Borough of Hounslow (2190228928, 05 August 2019) http://bit.ly/31yv8L6
Neil Freeman v London Borough of Hounslow (2190304425, 30 August 2019) http://bit.ly/2B38vmX


Cheekily the council have submitted another file. Please see attached here https://ibb.co/n0PK6zt

Do I need to add anything further? The hearing date is set for tomorrow.



How did it go?
Mad Mick V
Looks like it was refused:-

2190452455

The Appellant disputed the contravention on the basis that the signage at the location did not convey the restriction imposed by the Traffic management Order, and relied on a number of decisions made by a number of Adjudicators in this Tribunal.

However unfortunately for the appellant those decisions were made on the previous Traffic Management Order which was not found to be correctly drafted to support the intended restriction.

The local authority amended their Traffic Management Order on the 1st July 2019 to take effect from the 8th July 2019.

The Appellant was issued with a PCN on the 12th July 2019.

On the appellant's own admission the signage at the location is clear to convey the meaning that no motor vehicles or motorcycles are permitted past the location of the signs except for permit holders only, and that the amended Traffic Management Order does now support this restriction.

I am satisfied that the contravention did occur and refuse this appeal.

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




Mick


Mad Mick V
OP---I believe you should ask for a Review since the latest Order (July 2019) does not alter the key wording of the flawed 2018 Order.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&a...f5eOgCZB_-XHw6Q

The Consolidated Decision here is also important:-

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...t&p=1511784

They key part of the 2019 Order is :-

j) No person shall cause any motor vehicle to enter or leave any road specified in
column 2 of Schedule 10 at the location specified in column 3 unless otherwise
stated in column 4 of the said Schedule.

Column 2 of Schedule 10 states:- Phoenix Way, Hounslow at its junction with
Norwood Road. To me the specified road is still Phoenix Way, the location is at the Norwood Road junction i.e. Norwood Road is not a specified road.

The Consolidation Decision indicated that a new 619 sign had been placed at the junction of Cranford Way (sic) and Phoenix Way which indicates a prohibition some 344 yards ahead. That might cause difficulty but not in the location of the contravention nor the contravention given.

My view, regardless of the new sign, is that the Council's position is still as flawed, and their arguments as perverse as noted in the Consolidated Decision.

It is Wednesbury unreasonable to suggest that leaving a specified road translates into a no entry prohibition on an unspecified road. Therefore the contravention given is unsustainable.

Hounslow have got it wrong again.

OP wait for others to chip in.

Mick
JayEss
Thanks for your reply. Any other ideas? How would I ask for a review?
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 © 2001-2020 Invision Power Services, Inc.