Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: PCN FOR REVERSING OUT OF 1-WAY STREET
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Pages: 1, 2, 3
EDW
QUOTE (axminster @ Wed, 12 Sep 2012 - 14:09) *
QUOTE (The Slithy Tove @ Wed, 12 Sep 2012 - 14:06) *
Trying to read through all the jargon, was that a win on the basis of incorrect signage, rather than the road being blocked?


incorrect contravention code



http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/London%20...cncodesv661.pdf
hcandersen
The road being blocked is arguably irrelevant because that would go to the issue of why the OP contravened the sign and prima facie committed the contravention. But as the adj has found that the sign was incorrect and that there wasn't a contravention, the issue of why he did reverse is redundant. But I grant that adjs often refer to other points in reps and either state that there's no need for them to be considered or possibly offer a view. But, as always, the start point for adj has to be: has the council produced sufficient evidence that on the face of it establishes the contravention - and they didn't.


Well done. biggrin.gif


HCA
clark_kent
QUOTE (Bagshot @ Wed, 12 Sep 2012 - 14:33) *
well done, but weird. You got off an a technicality, when he should have thrown it out because the road was blocked. What is the matter with them sometimes. The implication is that if they hadn't cocked up the contravention, you would have lost.

Beau larks.



It wasn't a technicality, as I pointed out way back in post #10 the contravention stated on the PCN didn't occur, thats not a technicality it never happened.
Bagshot
QUOTE (clark_kent @ Sun, 16 Sep 2012 - 08:34) *
QUOTE (Bagshot @ Wed, 12 Sep 2012 - 14:33) *
well done, but weird. You got off an a technicality, when he should have thrown it out because the road was blocked. What is the matter with them sometimes. The implication is that if they hadn't cocked up the contravention, you would have lost.

Beau larks.



It wasn't a technicality, as I pointed out way back in post #10 the contravention stated on the PCN didn't occur, thats not a technicality it never happened.


That IS the technicality. Council accidentally referred to a round sign,when the sign in question was identical but square. OP SHOULD have got off, not because of a silly council mistake, but because the road was blocked and he HAD to reverse.
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.