Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: help with nto please
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Pages: 1, 2, 3
pottsygsxr
hi guys.

I`m filling my nto for parking in a disabled bay. I genuinely didn`t think that i was in a disabled bay and the road markings are a bit confusing. Judging by the pictures can anyone be of any help. I am contesting it cos they are confusing but just wondered what other peoples thought were or ideas. thanks
Incandescent
As usual post the PCN, all sides, with PCN Number and car details blanked out. Leave everything else in. A GSV reference would be better, if it is up-to-date. There is no road marking, and no sign visible, but I see the end of double-yellow lines in the 3rd photo, with the black car clear of them. If it is a disabled bay, there should be a sign next to it.
pottsygsxr
i have a couple more pictures which will help. There is a sign on the street. I will try and get the rest uploaded.

picture
Mad Mick V
Scarborough:-

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.2824372,-...#33;6m1!1e1

The GSV shows 3 disabled bays stretching from outside the Bank to the edge of the crossover entrance to the side of Henry Dell's.

All depends what the sign says; the disabled marking can be omitted but the bays must be properly delineated (need double traverse lines at each end of the bays).

As per Incandescent, need to see the docs.

Mick
Incandescent
Bad bay markings, but your last photo has what looks like a sign for disabled parking, plus a marking on the carriageway. However, zooming the picture doesn't show the text on the sign. Until the sign is seen final advice cannot be give, but I have to say you look bang-to-rights, frankly.
pottsygsxr
nto pictures


sign has the P sign at the top left then to the right of it ...says,,,disabled badge holders only.

the below the P there is the picture of a whelchair...beside that 3 hours

and text at the bottom says no return within 1 hour.

hope thats of a bit help

I would say it is prob the correct sign.?

can I not say something about the poor road markings?? and are the road markings correct?
DancingDad
Looks like signs etc look okay
Not checked all of nto but contravention right.
Tell us some more details?
Was a pcn stuck on the motor?
How long were you stopped?
Any details may help
pottsygsxr
yes the ticket was on the windscreen when we got back to the car. We were prob only away for about 20 mins as we went to the shops but they weren`t open yet as it was sunday morning. I think my only arguement may be about the poor road markings. I did honestly think it was just a normal parking bay and not part of the disabled bay.
DancingDad
Did you challenge the PCN?
If so how and what reply ?
pottsygsxr
i sent several emails challenging it. replies are basically whats below.









I refer to your enquiry regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice.

The Notice was issued because your vehicle was parked in a bay reserved for disabled badge holders only. The bay is signposted and marked in accordance with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002. The sign plate and disabled road marking are adjacent to the bay, therefore the disabled badge holders only restriction is in force until the end of bay marking which was behind your vehicle.

Notes made by the Civil Enforcement Officer at the time of the Penalty Charge Notice was issued show that a disabled badge was not displayed.

It is the motorist's responsibility to ensure they have adhered to the regulations that are in place before they leave their vehicle.

I note your comments that you were only parked for around 10 minutes, but would advise you that a vehicle is not permitted to use a disabled bay for any purpose unless displaying a valid disabled persons badge.

In view of this, I have decided not to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and your payment of £35.00 should be sent to Parking Services, Town Hall, St Nicholas Street, Scarborough, YO11 2HG within 14 days. Your cheque or postal order should be made payable to 'Scarborough Borough Council'. Alternatively, you may pay by debit or credit card (with the exception of American Express) over the telephone, by ringing 0800 0830493 or 01723 232323 (Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday 8.30am to 5.00 pm and Wednesday 9.30am to 5pm) or online at www.scarborough.gov.uk/pcn at any time. Any photographs relating to your case can also be viewed on the above website. Please do not pay the PCN if you intend to pursue the challenge further as your case will then be closed.

If payment is not received as detailed, I shall assume that you wish to pursue the matter and shall arrange for a Notice to Owner to be sent to the registered keeper of the vehicle so that formal representations may be made. Should these be rejected, the registered keeper of the vehicle will then be afforded the opportunity to appeal to the Parking Adjudicator.

I should point out that, should you decide to take this course of action, after the discount period has expired, you will forfeit the right to pay the Penalty Charge at the lower rate and the full charge of £70.00 will be due.

If you are not the registered keeper of the vehicle e.g. the vehicle is a company or lease/hire vehicle, or being used with the owner's consent, I suggest you advise the keeper that a Notice to Owner will be issued.


Yours sincerely

Levi Dargue









in the first paragraph she says the end of the bay is behind my vehicle....do the road markings say that???
qafqa
A copy of both sides of the PCN may help.
the disabled marking can be omitted but the bays must be properly delineated (need double traverse lines at each end of the bays).
Can you respond to this comment by Mad Mick V.
StreetView (2008) showed a broken white line adjacent to the double-yellows, it isn't shown in the photograph of the black car.*
If it supports your case include a comment about how the dark tarmac/bitumen gives the impression that it is used to delineate the disabled parking place.

The text of the allegation is incomplete on the NTO and the
penalty charge is overprinted, for more details about the
problem search PePiPoo for Wandsworth overprinted.

*Just read your post above, is the part in bold text correct.
therefore the disabled badge holders only restriction is in force until the end of bay marking which was behind your vehicle.

Just read your post above - again.
in the first paragraph she says the end of the bay is behind my vehicle....do the road markings say that???
What road markings, it's looking good for you, invisible
road markings are unlikely to be considered enforceable
by an adjudicator.

Were the photographs of the black Ford taken when the PCN
was issued?
pottsygsxr
i have mentioned in my letter i`m going to send that the new road markings give you the impression that that particular part is the bay. i`ll check if i have uploaded the photo of just behind the car....Unfortunately i dont have any pics of futher back. In front of the white vehicle vehicle are the road markings correct there??



....if you look in the last picture in my first post ( with buggy in) those are the markings behind my car...are these ok??
DancingDad
The end of bay markings as in your photos leave a lot to be desired.
It can be inferred from the Double Yellows but so can the end being the "new" tarmac and that the disabled legend on the road seems more adjacent to that.

Not the strongest argument IMO but not weak either, coupled with credibility in front of an adjudicator when you say, as you have here, that you genuinely did not know it was a disabled bay.
And you may as well take it forward to an adjudicator, there is no extra cost in doing so and nothing to lose.
But first we need to challenge the NTO
pottsygsxr
everyones help is very much appreciated. thank you very much. Is it just a case of writing a letter and saying that the road markings are not very clear and i genuinely thought it wasn`t a disabled bay.? Is there anything specific i should/should not say?

...oh and i live miles away from where it happened , do i then have to travel down there to see the adjudicator ?
DancingDad
Draft up a letter in your words, post it up and we can tune it, this sort of case, your words will add credibility.

Adjudicator. In this case will be TPT, Traffic Penalty Tribunal. They hold hearings across the country in all major cities and many towns
List of venues, you can decide which one suits you best.
http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/d.../hearing_venues
Some way off yet but will do no harm to browse their site and get some idea how it happens.
Hearings are relatively informal and the adjudicators (TPT) usually polite and human, can be quite helpful as well.
qafqa
If you want to check the official guidance for lines and signs
here are links to the DfT manuals.
There is a recommended minimum width for the bay and advice
about repeating the Disabled legend on the road.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...-chapter-03.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...-chapter-05.pdf
pottsygsxr
i found this the other day or is this not really relevant? It will take me a bit to type out what i`ve written as i`ve don it by hand.
pottsygsxr
here is a rough copy of what i`ll send...just ignore the speling mistakes etc.

Dear sir/madam

I am writing to you to dispute the parking ticket I received and to ask you to please cancel it. I feel it is very unfair and cannot be properly enforced.

I believe that there cannot be a CPZ because the road markinhgs are not clear enough and are misleading. By law all road markings must meet all the requirements of prescribed traffic markings for a CPZ. The road markings do not meer such requirements. Road markings should be clear and of a minimum size/lenght. Restrictions need to be made clear through appropriate signs and road markings. The bay is not clearly enough defined and the new road markings are confusing and make you think that the part where the white vehicle is parked, is the bay. ALso the positioning of the sign on the pole is right beside this new marked bay also giving you the idea that this bit is the bay.

It was sunday morning and there were lots of spaces available. We had stopped there to go to wh smiths to buy some books for my daughter. I didn`t kniow that the shops were closed. We were probably only there for abpout 10 mins. The reason I parked there was because we thought it was a normal parking space otherwise i would have parkedsomewhere else. I even asked my partner if she thought it was ok to park there and she also thoght it was a normal parking space. We then went to peasholm park where i managed to ask a parking attendant what he thought and he also thought that the road markings were confusing and unclear what was reqwuired of the mototrist. We are not from the area and were only there on hiiday, nor are we parking attendants. We find it very unfair that we have been given a fine. We would ask that you please cancel this fine.
pottsygsxr
what do you mean by this also..

The text of the allegation is incomplete on the NTO and the
penalty charge is overprinted, for more details about the
problem search PePiPoo for Wandsworth overprinted.


Is it any grounds to argue against?
hcandersen
GSV is neither here nor there, it's not the authority's evidence.

Pl post their evidence. Not your pics at this stage, just theirs. For example, we've not seen their pic of the sign, all we've got is your narrative.

When we can see which pics are contemporaneous and therefore are able to discard those which are not I suspect matters will be clearer.

GSV is neither here nor there, it's not the authority's evidence.

Pl post their evidence. Not your pics at this stage, just theirs. For example, we've not seen their pic of the sign, all we've got is your narrative.

When we can see which pics are contemporaneous and therefore are able to discard those which are not I suspect matters will be clearer.
pottsygsxr
hope this link works

https://parking.scarborough.gov.uk/ViewEvidence.asp

...doesnt work. i could just give you the reg and pcn number and you could just put it in as i can`t download the pics. will that be of any use?? the link before doesnt work.

https://parking.scarborough.gov.uk

reg is da53 zdu

pcn number YN02807663

sorry for the longwinded way but cant get the pics up
qafqa
QUOTE
what do you mean by this also..

The text of the allegation is incomplete on the NTO and the
penalty charge is overprinted, for more details about the
problem search PePiPoo for Wandsworth overprinted.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=+site%3Af...0JejH8geo-IH4CA



Scarborough are on the list of participating councils at PATROL.
The list of codes and the full description of the alleged offence
that they should use is here, http://www.patrol-uk.info/patrol/info/1/pa...vention_codes/2
pottsygsxr
the code is right that they have mentioned . what does the overprint bit mean then???
pottsygsxr
the code is right that they have mentioned . what does the overprint bit mean then???
pottsygsxr
does anyone have any more info they could share. thanks
DancingDad
What qafqa means is that the exact words of the contravention are not on your NtO, missing "persons badge" at the end.

And as the regulations require that the NTO states the grounds on which a CEO believes the contravention occurred, they have failed.
Parking in a disabled bay is not unlawful unless you fail to display what??? A disabled Elephant! (my maths teacher used to scream elephants whenever we gave an answer without units)
As they have failed to provide grounds there can be no contravention.
There is also the question of correct penalty. As higher or lower is sanctified by the patrol agreement, using non-sanctioned words means they cannot apply any penalty. In that respect, the penalty exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case.

These are solid grounds that may win with an adjudicator.
I'd suggest that you phrase any challenge along the lines of
I parked where it was not clear that it was a disabled bay. Markings were very faded, invisible and although I could see the disabled legend on the road, I assumed that this applied to the dark tarmac and had no information to believe different.
Without clear markings, there can be no contravention.
Further to above, having looked at the NTO and the regulations, especially the General Regulations 2007 S19, the NTO fails to advise of the grounds that a CEO believed existed. There is no information regarding what should have been displayed and parking in a Disabled Bay is not automatically unlawful.
In that respect the contravention cited is unsafe and the PCN should be cancelled.
There is also the question of correct penalty. As higher or lower is sanctified by the Patrol agreement, using non-sanctioned words means that a penalty cannot be applied. In that respect, the penalty exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case.
I would also ask that you consider Other Compelling Reasons should you decide that enforcement continue. This was an honest mistake at worst. I truly believed that this was a normal parking bay. Absent of clear markings, this is an understandable error. In this respect I ask you to apply your discretion and cancel the PCN.
pottsygsxr
ahhhh...with you now . call me thick if you want, i didn`t even notice that.!!( lessons to be learned there!!).

I will get something printed up tonight along the lines of what you suggest. Your help ( and others) have been really really helpful. I will keep you posted and see how I get on. Your time and patience is greatly appreciated.

thanks again
DancingDad
QUOTE (pottsygsxr @ Mon, 13 Oct 2014 - 16:43) *
ahhhh...with you now . call me thick if you want, i didn`t even notice that.!!( lessons to be learned there!!).

I will get something printed up tonight along the lines of what you suggest. Your help ( and others) have been really really helpful. I will keep you posted and see how I get on. Your time and patience is greatly appreciated.

thanks again


Nor did I till Qafqa pointed it out biggrin.gif
pottsygsxr
Hello again. I received a reply today and they are refusing to cancel it. What`s best to do now. They have sent the form for appeal . I will hopefully attach some photos



oh and ive run out of space to upload pictures?? any help?
pottsygsxr
pics atached
DancingDad
Could do with clearer versions of those, host them on a free picture hosting site like photobucket or tiny pics and link em back here please.

Please also confirm what you sent to them.?
pottsygsxr
http://i1383.photobucket.com/albums/ah283/...zps70359e18.jpg


http://i1383.photobucket.com/albums/ah283/...zpsf37c42ba.jpg



I sent them pretty much sent them what you had said in your previous statement dancing dad.
qafqa
PATROL Contravention Codes On-Street Parking
40 Parked in a designated disabled person's parking place without
displaying a valid disabled person's badge.

http://www.patrol-uk.info/patrol/info/1/pa...vention_codes/2


Click the image above for full page view

DancingDad
Well, it's off to TPT which is really no great surprise.

Assuming you used my words, they failed to address the issue of signage/worn lines, failed to address the defective NTO contravention and cited the highway code in defence.
So an appeal will include both earlier points and failing to consider both those and other compelling reasons..

Did you send them a copy of the front page of the NTO with contravention highlighted?
Pretty much my words or exactly my words? Which is why we'd like a copy of them.
qafqa
+1 for a copy of the challenge.

Their belief about the code description and the Secretary of State is possibly misplaced.
Operational Guidance to Local Authorities: Parking Policy and Enforcement Traffic Management Act 2004
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...forcepolicy.pdf
8.34 The Secretary of State expects all applications for designation orders to confirm that the enforcement authority will use the standard contravention code list issued by the London Councils. This is revised from time to time and available on their website. All authorities operating CPE will be told of any changes or additions, as long as they have given London Councils their contact details.
45 Authorities need to make sure that they keep London Councils up-to-date with their contact details. Authorities should exclude from their list any codes that are not relevant to their area (for example, because they have no free parking bays, or a particular contravention is not covered by any order in the authority’s area). They should not change the code numbers.

Leads to:
London Councils Contravention code list
http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/policylob...ioncodelist.htm
The codes and descriptions for higher level parking contraventions also apply in Wales however higher level contraventions for English local authorities outside London are set in The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (Guidelines on Levels of Charges) (England) Order 2007, which can be found at
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/3487/contents/made
Leads to:
The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (Guidelines on Levels of Charges) (England) Order 2007
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/34...aragraph/2/made
40 Parked in a designated disabled person’s parking place without clearly displaying a valid disabled person’s badge

Which matches the PATROL description.
pottsygsxr
I used exactly your words as you had put. I didn't send them a copy of the page highlighting the missing words, no.
qafqa
QUOTE
I used exactly your words as you had put.

Good.
Further to above, having looked at the NTO and the regulations, especially the General Regulations 2007 S19, the NTO fails to advise of the grounds that a CEO believed existed.
In the quote above, taken from the challenge, Dancing Dad referred to the 2007 Regulations, as you know, their description of the contravention doesn't comply.
In the NOR they inform you that the council uses the standard contravention codes, according to the 2007 Act they haven't, therefore they don't follow the guidance from the Secretary of State.
pottsygsxr
So in the form for the appeal adjudicator should I just point that out or what else should I add. All your help is hugely appreciated by the way!
DancingDad
QUOTE (pottsygsxr @ Sun, 19 Oct 2014 - 10:05) *
I used exactly your words as you had put. I didn't send them a copy of the page highlighting the missing words, no.


Scratch that one from the failure to consider list then, they could not hope to understand without the "evidence" of the mistake.

Okay, what's done is done and it is still a valid point.

Please follow instructions (we did say on the other thread where you were querying what to send and how)

More later when I got time.
pottsygsxr
Ok thanks. Surely they have a copy of what they send.? I intend to use the one I have as evidence with the independent adjudicator.
DancingDad
No, electronic copies generated from a database is what they will have. And no guarantee that the same misprint will occur.
Hence vital that you keep your original and why they would have been a bit bemused and took a flying guess at what was meant.

My fault as much as anyone's for not spelling out the error in the challenge more clearly.

However, TPT form.
Decide whether phone or personal hearing, both are better then relying on postal as with those the adjudicator can make a judgement on your credibility.
Important with points like bay markings confused or misled.
I would recommend personal, they are relatively informal and nothing to be scared of. It isn't the high court with wigs and gowns.

Tick boxes Contravention did not Occur, Procedural Impropriety and Penalty exceeds.

Dear Sirs.
I parked in what I thought was a normal parking bay with two Disabled Bays in front of my vehicle.

Contravention Did Not Occur.
I parked where it was not clear that it was a disabled bay. Markings were very faded, invisible and although I could see the disabled legend on the road, I assumed that this applied to the dark tarmac and had no information to believe different.
Without clear markings, there can be no contravention.

Procedural Impropriety.
The Notice to Owner must amongst other things state the contravention. The General Regulations 2007 S19 applies. The NTO fails to advise of the grounds that a CEO believed existed. There is no information regarding what should have been displayed and parking in a Disabled Bay is not automatically unlawful.
In that respect the contravention cited is unclear and fails to impart the information required.

Procedural Impropriety
In not following standard codes that are prescribed in both PATROL listings and Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (Guidelines on Levels of Charges) (England) Order 2007 the enforcement authority have failed to have regard to guidance set by the Secretary of State and that they have agreed to in signing up to the PATROL system. Failing to have regard means that they have failed in a statutory duty and as such is a Procedural Impropriety.

The Penalty Exceeds the Amount Due.
Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (Guidelines on Levels of Charges) (England) Order 2007 enables councils to set penalties against prescribed levels and standard wording. Failing to use standard wording removes the authority to use Higher Level Penalties, thus the penalty exceeds the amount due.

Procedural Impropriety.
In the Notice of Rejection, the council simply cited why the PCN was served, ignoring that I had pointed out the confusion with worn and illegible markings coupled with an obvious "marked " area of dark tarmac that I assumed was the disabled bay.
They failed to consider that the wording on the NTO was deficient, choosing that I was somehow claiming that I lacked knowledge of disabled bays and citing the relevant parts of the Highway code.
In closing my formal challenge I specifically asked for mitigation to be considered if nothing else.
The Appeals Regulations 2007 S5(2) imposes a duty on enforcement authorities to consider any representation made against a Notice to Owner.
I do not believe that any consideration was carried out beyond a cursory look at the PCN contravention and CEO notes. There is no evidence within the Notice of Rejection that any of my points has been considered. This includes not considering mitigation and the exercise of discretion.
I accept that mitigation offered may not be compelling and that discretion is solely for the enforcement authority but this not excuse them from the duty to consider.
Hugs and kisses

See what others think
pottsygsxr
Thats great thanks dancingdad!! Ill be bck on later on this aft and will see what else is added but to me it looks like a winner!! It will mean travelling to newcastle but will hopefully be worth it. I`ll have a proper read after. Thanks again for your help. mucha appreciated.
pottsygsxr
Thanks for that dancingdad. I will get that typed up exactly as you have put it and attach it to the TPT and get it sent off. I will just opt for a face to face as you have suggested and see how it goes there. I think I will print out the photos that I took as well to take along with me. Do you have any other tips that I should possibly say when there?
thank you.
DancingDad
Put a COPY of your NTO, first page, with the appeal. Highlight with a ring, not across, the contravention. (If they scan or photocopy the highlight comes out as black so do not obscure what you are showing.)

Once you get a date back from TPT, come back and we can check for anything else and make plans for hearing itself.
pottsygsxr
Thanks for that. I will hopefully get it all done tomorrow. I will photocopy the nto and circle EXACTLY around the .." who had reason to believe that the following contravention had occurres and a penalty charge was payable"....section. Obviously i will make sure the .."40 parked in a designated disabled persons parking place without displaying a valid disabled " is exactly marked too.

Hope that makes sense.
pottsygsxr
Just a quick update for those involved.

Dear Mr Potts,
Michael Potts v North Yorkshire County Council (with Scarborough)
YN02807663
Thank you for your completed Notice of Appeal. Your case has been registered and the
Council have been notified.
If the Council choose to contest the case, they will send written representations and supporting
evidence to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, with a copy to you. You should expect to receive this
on or around 13 November 2014.
In addition to the items already sent, if there is any other information you wish the Adjudicator
to consider please ensure it is received here by 20 November 2014. The Adjudicator is an
independent solicitor or barrister appointed to decide cases referred to this Tribunal.
You indicated a preference for an oral hearing. We will contact you once the council have sent
their evidence to arrange this.
I am the Appeals Coordinator who will be dealing with your case. If you have any questions
please do not hesitate to contact me on the above telephone number.
Yours sincerely

I filled in the application so its registered. I also added all the photos that I had taken and took a scan of the front page of the NTO and highlighted the part where it fails to notify of the exact contravention.
I will keep you posted when I receive a date back to the tribunal....hope all looks fine so far oh and I have until the 20th nov to add anything else to the case.

thanks for all your help everyone.
pottsygsxr
Hi guys.

latest update. got an email from the tribunal saying "I have received a bundle of evidence and submissions from the Council in relation to your case;
a copy should have been sent to you by the Council....etc. I will receive the info in a day or two hopefuly and see what they are replying with and will post up to see what you think.

I`m not quite sure what "a bundle" of evidence is but will wait and see.!!

Just a thought but if I say that they haven`t displayed correctly on the NTO about what I should have displayed will they not just say that it was displayed on the parking ticket when I first got it??


thanks, Michael
DancingDad
Bundle of evidence is exactly that, maybe 50 or 60 pages that should include copies of the PCN and NTO, CEO notes, relevant photos, PCN history (dates of notices) what you sent to them, Traffic Order. Let us know when you get it.

Contravention on PCN and NTO.
There is an difference between who is liable and who deals with either the PCN and NTO.
PCN is the driver's responsibility and they are expected to pay or challenge.
After 28 days, the liability shifts to the owner via the NTO. It is now nothing to do with the driver and there is no assumption that the owner and driver will be the same person.
The owner may have no knowledge of the PCN. So the NTO has to show exactly what the contravention is.
pottsygsxr
Thanks for that dancing dad.. Envelope had arrived today so when I'm home I'll see what's in it. Is there anything specific I should put up on here?
pottsygsxr
well I have the case summary the council have sent. Is there anything specific you need to see?? Hope the photbucket picture works. link below


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.