Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: PCN Code 27 (Redbridge Council)
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
rafa123
Hi,

My wife found the attached ticket on our car on Friday at a place where we have parked for a couple of years. The car was parked in front of a dipped pavement - no yellow lines, resident parking or signage. The car was not blocking access to the garage door but was parked in front of a wall. Across the road there is no dipped pavement.

Location from Google Maps: Atholl Road
My car was where the blue Peugot is parked.

Attached PCN - barely readable due to the rain !

Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment


Any assistance appreciated.

Thanks
Hippocrates
Could we see the other page of the PCN and do you have council's photos?
rafa123
QUOTE (Hippocrates @ Mon, 23 Apr 2012 - 23:07) *
Could we see the other page of the PCN and do you have council's photos?


Hi - other side of PCN has been added to original post but I do not have council photos. Below is a picture taken at the scene:

Click to view attachment

Thanks
SchoolRunMum
That looks like a new brick wall - perhaps built where another garage used to be? The bricks are not original and not joined to the garage next to it.

So the appeal point would be that this is not a dropped kerb as defined in the regulations - others may expand on this or if not please read other Code 27 threads on the first few pages of this forum, you will find others have used this appeal.
rafa123
Hi,

Received the following rejection via email:

Thank you for your letter regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice, your comments are noted. The details of the notice have been checked and I conclude that the notice was issued correctly.

The dropped kerb that your vehicle blocked is used for wheelchair/pram user to cross the road. The Highway Code clearly states that you must not block a dropped kerb that has been lowered to help wheelchair users (page 82, section 243). I have enclosed the CEO pocket book and pictures. The other point’s that you have requested under the Freedom of Information act will be separately from the relevant department. However, on this basis the Penalty Charge must be paid, if paid within fourteen days from the date on this letter the reduced rate of £55.00 will be accepted. After this point the full charge of £110.00 will become due.

If you do not wish to accept this decision you are able to appeal further to the Councils Parking Appeals section. To do this you must wait for a Notice to Owner to be sent to the registered keeper of the vehicle at the full charge of £110.00. Once this has been received you will be required to follow the instructions given to make a formal representation.

Should your representation be rejected you will be sent a form to appeal to the Independent Adjudicator, whose decision is final.
eccyman
Just a thought - if PCN is rain damaged, this suggests it was not put in a plastic envelope. If so was it not properly served?
Neil B
QUOTE (rafa123 @ Fri, 8 Jun 2012 - 08:31) *
The dropped kerb that your vehicle blocked is used for wheelchair/pram user to cross the road.


Are they feckin' real?! Do they mean 'cross into the road'?

That's a typical - didn't actually look -- response and constitutes a failure to consider IMO. It's quite simply a lie.

It is also very helpful because if anything at all the DK you might have encroached upon is for vehicle access, clearly -- and then, according to your description, you would have been across only an unused portion.

Did they send pics and CEO notes? Did you ask for them in challenge?
rafa123
Below are links to the CEO notes and pics:











I am in 2 minds whether to wait for NTO or pay - but it definitely NOT a dropped kerb for pedestrian/wheelchair use ! Picture of "dropped kerb":



Thanks
hcandersen
Why would you want to pay?

You have a solid defence, strengthened by the council's reply, and yet you're still considering paying.

Do you have the patience and confidence to carry on? If not, then pay, it's your money.

I only ask because you'll get another "nyet" from the council when you submit your reps and so you'll have to register an appeal with the adj. Easy peasy, no problem, so don't be deterred. But can you be bothered?

If yes, then read on.

The council's compromised itself by its reference to wheelchair/pram users.

The key issue with a DK is the purpose for which it was installed. So what do we have here?

The council's statement that it is used by wheelchair etc. users. (we didn't see your challenge - did you refer to "purpose"?). We'll infer from this that it was installed for this purpose.
Your statement that
QUOTE
Across the road there is no dipped pavement.


So we have a council which plans that wheelchair users can access the carriageway here but not exit. We therefore have the spectre of wheelchairs stuck in Atholl desperately trying to get off the carriageway. Good for motorists - what's the current score for hitting a wheelchair user? But then that would only involve one person - better to make it a mother with pram and baby.

And you still consider paying!

HCA
rafa123
Thanks for the response. My original appeal is below:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to make an informal challenge against the above PCN. This representation is made within the 14 days beginning with the date of the notice (20th April 2012). Therefore the penalty charge is to be held at the discount amount whilst you consider this representation.



I believe this PCN is invalid, hence there was no breach of the regulations and the contravention did not occur. I have parked at this location for a number of years (as have many hundreds of other people) without issue. The Traffic Management Act 2004 Section 86 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/18/section/86) states:



Prohibition of parking at dropped footways etc.(1)In a special enforcement area a vehicle must not be parked on the carriageway adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge where—

(a )the footway, cycle track or verge has been lowered to meet the level of the carriageway for the purpose of—

(i) assisting pedestrians crossing the carriageway,

(ii )assisting cyclists entering or leaving the carriageway, or

(iii )assisting vehicles entering or leaving the carriageway across the footway, cycle track or verge; or

(b)the carriageway has, for a purpose within paragraph (a)(i) to (iii), been raised to meet the level of the footway, cycle track or verge.

From the pictures enclosed of the location and where my car was parked it can be seen that this dropped kerb does

  • NOT provide assistance in pedestrians crossing the carriageway
  • NOT provide assistance to cyclists
  • NOT provide access to a driveway
Google Streetview of location http://g.co/maps/u7pt8



Under the Data Protection Act and Freedom of Information act, I would like to request the following:

  • A full electronic copy of the traffic order you believe has been contravened
  • All photographic evidence showing the car allegedly contravening the Traffic Order
  • A copy of the Traffic Wardens Log Book and the CEO's notes.
  • Confirmation that the signs in this CPZ comply with the TSRGD or that they have special authorisation from the DfT
  • Confirmation and evidence of the purpose of the dropped kerb
  • Confirmation and evidence of the height of the dropped kerb and that it meets all relevant regulations
  • Confirmation and evidence that this carriageway is a controlled parking zone.
SchoolRunMum
Why on earth would you be deterred just because as clerk at the Council has pressed a button to issue a template 'computer says no' email response to almost all informal appeals, yours included? Your appeal was a good one IMHO except for the last paragraph where for some reason you've decided to ask 'under FOI' for info that, in the main, they are supposed to just send you.

Never mind, you can still ask for that information now, just reply to the email saying something like:

''I have realised that none of the info I asked for actually meets the requirements of having to be an FOI request - as I am sure your FOI team will realise and confirm to you. Please email the information not yet supplied, to me by return or send it by of post. Clearly the final paragraph formed an integral part of my informal appeal and must be considered and replied to properly, and having received only the CEO's notes and photos there are still matters outstanding which cannot be delayed by the Council by applying the FOI Act unnecessarily. ''
rafa123
Got a response for my question via FOI:

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - INFORMATION REQUEST

Your request for information has now been considered by Highways and Cleansing Services and the information requested is detailed below.

Q1) A full electronic copy of the traffic order you believe has been contravened
A) Please note a TMO or signage is not required for a dropped kerb offence.
Q2) All photographic evidence showing the car allegedly contravening the Traffic Order
A) Photographic evidence showing alleged contravention was sent with the challenge response on 28/05/12.
Q3) A copy of the Traffic Wardens Log Book and the CEO's notes.
A) Copy of Traffic Wardens Pocket Book was sent with the challenge response on 28/05/12.
Q4) Confirmation that the signs in this CPZ comply with the TSRGD or that they have special authorisation from the DfT
A) This area does not form part of a Controlled Parking Zone. However, where traffic signs are provided they are done so in accordance with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions

Q5) Confirmation and evidence of the purpose of the dropped kerb
A) The original drop kerb present which was to provide access to a garage or property at 21 Eastwood Road has been made redundant as the owners have now built a brick wall across the access.

Q6) Confirmation and evidence of the height of the dropped kerb and that it meets all relevant regulations
A) The crossing or drop kerb meets the standard for providing a vehicle access. We would reinstate the footway when carrying out future footway refurbishment at that location.

Q7) Confirmation and evidence that this carriageway is a controlled parking zone.
A) This area does not form part of a Controlled Parking Zone.
hcandersen
QUOTE
Q5) Confirmation and evidence of the purpose of the dropped kerb
A) The original drop kerb present which was to provide access to a garage or property at 21 Eastwood Road has been made redundant as the owners have now built a brick wall across the access.


That's the council's evidence.

The definition of a DK is clear and as the original purpose no longer persists, then IMO it cannot be enforced. The council cannot substitute other so-called purposes for the original one because it's not lawful and they're also spurious (as we've shown, it's not possible to exit the carriageway on the opposite side).

Another example of an ignorant authority that thinks that lowered kerb (for whatever reason) = enforceable contravention.

HCA
bama
the wild and wacky world of CPE !

QUOTE
The (original) drop kerb .... has been made redundant

A nice document for the adjudication pack !
rafa123
After reply with the following on 08/06/2012:



Dear Sir/Madam,

I have realised that none of the info I asked for actually meets the requirements of having to be an FOI request - as I am sure your FOI team will realise and confirm to you. Please email the information not yet supplied, to me by return or send it by of post. Clearly the final paragraph formed an integral part of my informal appeal and must be considered and replied to properly, and having received only the CEO's notes and photos there are still matters outstanding which cannot be delayed by the Council by applying the FOI Act unnecessarily.



I received the following email on 10/07/2012:

Dear Sir/Madam
Thank you for your letter concerning the issue of the above Penalty Charge Notice.

Your query has now been investigated further and as a result it is considered that there are sufficient grounds for the above notice and penalty charge to be cancelled. No further action will be taken.

Yours sincerely





Thanks for everyone's advice. thumbsup.gif


bama
of course they canceled it. they dealt you the winning hand themselves !
Incandescent
The sheer venality and obfuscation by councils operating CPE beggars belief. Very well done !!
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 © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.