Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Cardiff Council PCN
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Djenga
Hi

Thank you all for your help on my previous post. I have now received two more PCN's from Cardiff Council.

I have attached the PCN's that I received in the post on the 20th March.

The vehicle in the PCN is a hire car from Enterprise.

PASTMYBEST
Who are te PCN's addressed to you or enterprise
Djenga
These PCN's have been issued to me, however, I received an email from enterprise on 28th February saying that they have been notified of a traffic violation.
Mad Mick V
We really need to see the current signage in St John Street that's the key.

For instance if I saw the white sign here it would probably cause me to turn right:-

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4814777,-...3312!8i6656

This being Cardiff I would contend that they cannot dun you for a higher level contravention under 12 of the Annex here:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/wsi/2013/1969/schedule/made

There is no contravention of this nature in the TMA 2004 since that section has not been brought into law so the Council's justification is fatuous.

Given that the OP and his brother have several PCNs I would consider whether liability has been properly transferred. Cardiff can send an e-mail to the hirer who probably responds by e-mail that the vehicle was hired to Djenga or his brother. I wonder whether the Council actually sees a copy of the hire document which it should under this:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/2546/schedule/2/made

OP--- check your agreement to see whether it complies. Don't worry about Enterprise their PCNs have been cancelled and cannot be reissued.

Mick
cp8759
Sorry Mick, The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Guidelines on Levels of Charges) (Wales) Order 2013 you posted says at the very bottom of the annex:

12. A moving traffic contravention as described in Part 4 of Schedule 7 to the 2004 Act.

That section of the TMA 2004 has been brought into force in Wales. Also I'm not sure why you'd turn right just because of thishttps://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4814777,-3.1789526,3a,41.6y,270.69h,89.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYo9ZxKqzqoiv-sa8EHeyKA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 after all it's just an advance warning sign for a bus lane.

I think there's two things we need to see:

1) The current signage at the junction
2) The video.

Djenga, if you don't know how to post the video, PM me the PCN details and I'll do it for you.
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Mon, 6 Apr 2020 - 08:18) *
We really need to see the current signage in St John Street that's the key.

For instance if I saw the white sign here it would probably cause me to turn right:-

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4814777,-...3312!8i6656

This being Cardiff I would contend that they cannot dun you for a higher level contravention under 12 of the Annex here:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/wsi/2013/1969/schedule/made

There is no contravention of this nature in the TMA 2004 since that section has not been brought into law so the Council's justification is fatuous.

Given that the OP and his brother have several PCNs I would consider whether liability has been properly transferred. Cardiff can send an e-mail to the hirer who probably responds by e-mail that the vehicle was hired to Djenga or his brother. I wonder whether the Council actually sees a copy of the hire document which it should under this:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/2546/schedule/2/made

OP--- check your agreement to see whether it complies. Don't worry about Enterprise their PCNs have been cancelled and cannot be reissued.

Mick


MTC can be enforced in wales Mick We had a case last year here but the OP never came back to tell us what happened
Mad Mick V
@PMB
Yes I know, what I was trying to explain was that the Council's justification for a higher penalty was based on shaky ground. In other words they can't say we'll charge a higher penalty based on the moving traffic contraventions of the TMA -----because the TMA doesn't have any. Yet!




Mick
cp8759
QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Mon, 6 Apr 2020 - 10:08) *
@PMB
Yes I know, what I was trying to explain was that the Council's justification for a higher penalty was based on shaky ground. In other words they can't say we'll charge a higher penalty based on the moving traffic contraventions of the TMA -----because the TMA doesn't have any. Yet!

Mick the TMA does have higher penalties for moving traffic contraventions, as per the statutory instrument that you yourself posted, see my post above.
Mad Mick V
Agreed. All in the Designation Order:-
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/wsi/2014/2725/note/made
Too many brainf*rts at present--- must be stir crazy.

Mick
cp8759
For the benefit of Djenga, most of the above is just internal discussion, as far as you're concerned there's two things we need to see:

1) The current signage at the junction
2) The video.

If you don't know how to post the video, PM me the PCN details and I'll do it for you.
Djenga
Following is the link for the video:

Council Footage

For the current signage at the junction, I can go and take a few pictures today.

Also, I was wondering if the PCN's served to me are invalid as they are after the 28-day time limit or does the law differ for a hired car?
cp8759
QUOTE (Djenga @ Mon, 6 Apr 2020 - 15:43) *
Also, I was wondering if the PCN's served to me are invalid as they are after the 28-day time limit or does the law differ for a hired car?

There are different rules for hire cars, see https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/36...ulation/10/made

Basically the council gets an extra 4 weeks from the day when it cancelled the PCN issued to the hire company, which is why it's important to find out when the PCN to the hire company was cancelled. Arguably when the council just re-issues the same PCN to another person without cancelling the original one, the whole thing becomes an abuse of process but this is a very complicated / technical thing to argue so don't try it on your own.
PASTMYBEST
From what we can see of the signs a 606 then is the contravention correct? the regs allow when contravention of a s36 sign or contravention of a TRO occur a PCN can be served for either or, but surely they must pick the right one. So with the sign in situ it should be failing to proceed in the direction of an arrow on a blue sign
Djenga
I have attached the photos of the current signage at the junction. I now see the no right turn signage, however, I am not sure they were there at the time of the alleged contravention.
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Mon, 6 Apr 2020 - 20:54) *
From what we can see of the signs a 606 then is the contravention correct? the regs allow when contravention of a s36 sign or contravention of a TRO occur a PCN can be served for either or, but surely they must pick the right one. So with the sign in situ it should be failing to proceed in the direction of an arrow on a blue sign



This argument is out the window thhen
cp8759
What's the speed limit on that road? If it's more than 20 mph, any chance you could pop back in the evening and check whether the sign illumination is working?
Djenga
St John Street/Queen Street does not have a specified speed limit and the speed limit on Duke Street is 30mph. Neither of the signs i.e St Johns and Duke Street is illuminated.
cp8759
QUOTE (Djenga @ Thu, 9 Apr 2020 - 14:37) *
St John Street/Queen Street does not have a specified speed limit and the speed limit on Duke Street is 30mph. Neither of the signs i.e St Johns and Duke Street is illuminated.

Well the signs here appear to have lights just above them: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4815153,-...33;8i4352?hl=en

If you're saying the lights were not working then you may have a strong case, but you'll need to go back there in the evening during your once a day trip for exercise and take a picture.
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.