Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: GOT PCN FOR WAITING IN RESTRICTED ZONE
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
sirkay
hello all,
i got this ticket while i parked to talk to a friend. My engine was running the whole time and i had my parking indicator on as well. I don't think i stayed more than 5min or so and I never got out of the car but he came to the car sat in and left.

Is this a PCN or NTO? (someone said cctv pcn acts as NTO)

Is there any escape for me...pls any help will be appreciated

just thought there might be a way out as I've won a previous appeal with help from this forum smile.gif

here is the PCN.








Scaramouche
PCN acts as NtO. You stopped to talk to a friend on a DYL? Any warning signs of CCTV enforcement?
sirkay
QUOTE (Scaramouche @ Sun, 6 Feb 2011 - 01:14) *
PCN acts as NtO. You stopped to talk to a friend on a DYL? Any warning signs of CCTV enforcement?


tnx
didn't see any CCTV warning signs but i've checked google maps and found that there was a ground sign for no loading and no stopping...i know my chances are slim but was just hoping there might be errors in the wording of the PCN.
Neil B
I'm not getting images cos poor connection.

Location please?
sirkay
QUOTE (Neil B @ Sun, 6 Feb 2011 - 16:06) *
I'm not getting images cos poor connection.

Location please?


its silverton way just in front of canning town station London/Essex.
Bogsy
In any appeal I suggest including the text below, keeping in any bold, italics etc.

It is noted that the penalty charge has been imposed under the provisions of the Traffic Management Act 2004. It is necessary to bring to the council’s attention their statutory duty to have regard to the Secretary of State’s Statutory Guidance. This statutory duty is imposed by section 87 of the Traffic Management Act 2004.

Paragraph 48 in the statutory guidance gives a clear instruction;

The Secretary of State recommends that approved devices are used only where
enforcement is difficult or sensitive and CEO enforcement is not practical
.

In addition, paragraph 50 instructs;

“The primary objective of any camera enforcement system is to ensure the
safe and efficient operation of the road network by deterring motorists from
breaking road traffic restrictions and detecting those that do. To do this, the
system needs to be well publicised and indicated with lawful traffic signs


I find no reason for the council to conclude in the case of this alleged contravention, that enforcement by a CEO was difficult, sensitive or not practical. It is clear that the council simply enforced the restriction by approved device for their own convenience rather than for any of the reasons endorsed by the Secretary of State. It is also appears that the council failed to publicise well that the restriction is enforced by a camera system and failed to indicate the presence of the camera system with lawful traffic signs.

As a council must have regard to the Secretary of State’s statutory guidance, then where no regard to it appears to have been given a council is guilty of a procedural impropriety as defined by regulation 4(5) of the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007;

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—

The council should acknowledge their statutory failing and cancel this penalty charge forthwith rather than drag this matter to adjudication.
sirkay
QUOTE (Bogsy @ Sun, 6 Feb 2011 - 23:12) *
In any appeal I suggest including the text below, keeping in any bold, italics etc.

It is noted that the penalty charge has been imposed under the provisions of the Traffic Management Act 2004. It is necessary to bring to the council’s attention their statutory duty to have regard to the Secretary of State’s Statutory Guidance. This statutory duty is imposed by section 87 of the Traffic Management Act 2004.

Paragraph 48 in the statutory guidance gives a clear instruction;

The Secretary of State recommends that approved devices are used only where
enforcement is difficult or sensitive and CEO enforcement is not practical
.

In addition, paragraph 50 instructs;

“The primary objective of any camera enforcement system is to ensure the
safe and efficient operation of the road network by deterring motorists from
breaking road traffic restrictions and detecting those that do. To do this, the
system needs to be well publicised and indicated with lawful traffic signs


I find no reason for the council to conclude in the case of this alleged contravention, that enforcement by a CEO was difficult, sensitive or not practical. It is clear that the council simply enforced the restriction by approved device for their own convenience rather than for any of the reasons endorsed by the Secretary of State. It is also appears that the council failed to publicise well that the restriction is enforced by a camera system and failed to indicate the presence of the camera system with lawful traffic signs.

As a council must have regard to the Secretary of State’s statutory guidance, then where no regard to it appears to have been given a council is guilty of a procedural impropriety as defined by regulation 4(5) of the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007;

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—

The council should acknowledge their statutory failing and cancel this penalty charge forthwith rather than drag this matter to adjudication.

thanks bogsy
i appreciate this
hcandersen
Pl post the missing pages of the PCN.


HCA
sirkay
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 7 Feb 2011 - 09:20) *
Pl post the missing pages of the PCN.


HCA

I've added the missing pages to my first post
thanks.
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.