Hi

Just wanted to say how fantastic this forum has been, opening my eyes to just how much technically unlawful ticketing etc. is going on. I knew when I received my PCN for parking in a red route bay something felt exceedingly unfair about it - what I hadn't considered was the potential for the PCN itself to be wrong.

I came across this post

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...st&p=234663

which bears a striking similarity to my own situation. I've attached an image of the relevant part of the notice. However, because of the difference in dates between that old thread (2008) and today, I was hoping for advice whether the advice is still sound?

Click to view attachment

Essentially, the original post states that a PCN is only valid from the date of the notice, not from the date the notice is served. Is this still the case?

I had originally researched into the road traffic markings for the area in question and based on research I had a feeling the bay markings were invalid. For instance, to the left of the bay, it is dual red lines but these lines are not terminated correctly before the bay starts. Furthermore, after the bay ends it starts a single red line, also unterminated - my understanding was that any time red lines ended they legally required a termination line, with the same being true for a transition from double to single? Please see the street view below for the bay in question (what a damn useful tool Street view is!). It looks like the bay was added when the sign was erected, after the lines were first painted, and they haven't correctly fixed the lines? As I cycle into work I have been checking the lines for other bays and there are a number which do look terminated correctly.

http://g.co/maps/7djq5

I initially found this website - http://www.ticketfighter.co.uk/redroutes.htm

Reading the legislation document at the bottom, it seems like my particular signage was category "P", which relates to V: D1 further down the document.

Sorry, this turned into more of a brain dump than I intended! I believe that my PCN is invalid first and foremost, but I'm also curious if my assessment of the road markings are also correct!

Many thanks & kind regards, any help at all on this would be massively appreciated.

David

Sorry just to add, I emailed TFL asking for a copy of the red route legislation - their reply stated a response time of 15 days.

Does this means that from the date the notice was received (27th Jan) I have 21 days to pay the reduced amount (17th Feb) but if I email in my appeal tomorrow for example, that means they don't need to reply until 15 days later (16th Feb) meaning if they reject my appeal I have one day to pay at reduced rate?

Seems like a ridiculous system - they give you 21 days of reduced rate but will not reply to any letter until 15 days after you contact them which could quite easily mean the act of appealing means you are "accepting" the higher rate?

is it a surprise to you that the procedural dice are loaded in way that favours council revenue.

It's the 16th, not 17th because the period of 21 days begins on the 27th which is therefore day 1; it's therefore 21 days from 26th.

You've not posted the full PCN so we've no way of knowing whether TfL extend the discount and if so under what circumstances. Pl post the full page 1 and all other pages.

They are not obliged to respond to your representations (it's not an appeal, that's what you submit to an adjudicator) other than within 56 days.

HCA

Sorry, I'll photo the rest of it and upload it ASAP. However I was hoping that the wording of the PCN was perhaps evident and flawed from the section I've added above already?

Thanks!

More photos added - the only thing I haven't included is the tear off strip at the bottom with my address and "how I want to pay" section.

Any advice for this would be really appreciated!

Thanks

Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment

Hopefully this is enough info for someone to perhaps offer assistance? If not please let me know and I'll try to get extra ASAP

This is confusing because in the 'similar case' you've linked from 2008, their PCN was issued under the RTA 1991 I think. But your PCN pic doesn't show the top so we can't see what Act it was issued under. If it's TMA 2004 then the 'served' wording is correct I would say.

But when appealing you could add information you can glean from this Report excerpt:

http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php?topic=867.0

as there are several angles you can use when appealing a CCTV issued parking PCN. Read the link and include the points upon which others have won appeals, in a draft appeal of your own. Post the draft here of what you want to say in your appeal, for comments before sending it.

It isn't -- but you've managed to flag up something interesting.

That PCN, very old as you said, was issued under LLA 2000 and incorporating RTA 1991 (with crucial adjustment).

It does not apply in any way to your case so you can safely forget it. TMA became live just 2 1/2 months after that PCN.

---

However - the interesting bit. ALL of the advice from here AND the Adjudicator -- was wrong and the appeal should not have won for the reasons stated.

C'est la vie

It seems clear that this is a standard TMA reg 10 (postal) PCN which also acts as a Notice to Owner. The periods for payment and making reps look fine.

The Traffic Signs Manual, pages 83-84, deals with marking:

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/...tsmchapter3.pdf

There might be a point regarding markings.

Bays are marked in 2 colours, red and white. These have distinct and separate significance. White bays indicate that the restriction is for exactly the same period as the prevailing red line restriction whereas red bays indicate restrictions for only part of the period of operation of the red route. The point in this case is: what's the period of operation of the red route?

As you approach, the restriction is 24/7 and this is not terminated. After the bay it's a lesser period (presumably Mon-Sat 7am - 7pm). Perhaps there's a progressive change from 24/7 to 7-7 within the bay? Where were you stopped? It might have been Mon-Sat 5.57am - 6.64pm at that point!!

Clearly the bay is wrongly marked whatever the restriction and as a principle loading bays should not link two separate waiting restrictions.

But whether that's enough for a successful reps/appeal, I don't know. You can certainly argue the case though. (IMO, I wouldn't argue what it should have been, stick to the fact that it's clearly wrong as this configuration of coloured bay between different waiting restrictions is not permissible.)

HCA

Very interesting replies, thank you VERY much!

Just to make sure my understanding of the markings point is correct, summarising in bullet points -

The road leading up to the white marked bay is double red lined, with a sign clearly visible on street view saying "No stopping at any time"

The white bay connects the double red line section to a single red line section - i.e. a portion of no stopping 24/7 road - with a section that legally requires another sign detailing the period of operation. The bay itself is signed, no stopping bar loading etc. from 7-7. The time I was filmed was 12:44, so within that period technically.

However, by rights the single red line section ought to be signposted too - detailing the period of operation. I have checked that on streetview but aside from one potential item below, there are NO clearly marked signs.

http://g.co/maps/nhjvg

It is impossible to tell what this sign says, it's not visible from the road - however considering streetview is 2008, I am going back to the scene to verify this. However if

a) this sign is the times of usage for the single red line section but turned the wrong way
and/or
b) it is NOT the sign for the single red line section

Does the fact we have a white bay leading into an unsigned single line area invalidate the bay perhaps?

However, having said that the point that the double red line section is not terminated, leading into the bay, which leads into the unterminated single line section. So I could argue that the PCN is invalid as the road markings themselves are in an illegal configuration?

Sorry, you've missed the key point which is the colour of the bay markings.

The bay in question was marked in white which has the unique meaning of "Parking or loading bay always available for a specified class of user
during the period of operation of a red route".

However, the period of operation of the red route is unclear because on the one hand there's a double red line indicating no stopping at any time on the approach to the bay and on the other there's a single red line leading from the bay. Consequently the period of operation of the red route at the location of the bay is unclear. It could be either 24 hours in accordance with the DRL or Mon-Sat 7am - 7pm in accordance with the SRL. To add further to this confusion, neither the DRL nor the SRL is terminated correctly.

TFL is under a duty to place legal and clear markings and signs, and this confusion proves that it has not done so.


HCA

Ah I see - so though the bay notice itself seems relatively clear as to what it says, it's modifying the behaviour of a red route which is most certainly NOT clear. And the open question being "does that invalidate the ticket"?

Which I guess is what is massively difficult for people to answer Anyone care to offer odds? Although I suspect my wife will say unless we are highly certain we will win she'll want to pay the smaller fee.

Still, I will confirm by taking more photos tionight to see if the current route matches that of streetview.

Thanks again.