DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 1966--------------------------------------------------
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: July 26, 2023, 4:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If you wait for the Notice to Owner and make formal
representations within 14 days of the date of issue, they will
re-offer the 50% discount even if they reject, so it's arguable
that you might as well have another go. If you're lucky, they
might make a procedural error along the way.
#Post#: 1968--------------------------------------------------
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
DIR By: Hodor51
Date: July 26, 2023, 5:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ok thank you
#Post#: 3038--------------------------------------------------
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
DIR By: Hodor51
Date: August 10, 2023, 10:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> If you wait for the Notice to Owner and make formal
representations within 14 days of the date of issue, they will
re-offer the 50% discount even if they reject, so it's arguable
that you might as well have another go. If you're lucky, they
might make a procedural error along the way.
>
--- End Quote ---
Hi there,
Just to update that I received the notice to owner in the post
this afternoon. Please can you advise on next steps?
I realised that in my original representations, I requested
evidence that signage was present on the day in which the
alleged contravention occurred. No such evidence was provided
and the photo you have obtained was taken on a different date.
Does this hold any substance at all or would I request the
evidence again in my next formal representations or make note
that no such evidence was provided on request?
Thanks
#Post#: 3039--------------------------------------------------
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: August 10, 2023, 10:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Please post up all sides of the NtO, so it can be checked for
errors.
#Post#: 3040--------------------------------------------------
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
DIR By: guest179
Date: August 10, 2023, 10:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, you posted:
I requested evidence that signage was present on the day in
which the alleged contravention occurred. No such evidence was
provided and the photo you have obtained was taken on a
different date.
Are you saying that the signs are at the location where you
entered the CPZ? If so, the fact that they have taken them on a
different day is to their credit, isn't it, because this means
they have given drivers ample notice. Let's be clear, an
adjudicator would find on the balance of probabilities that
because they were there on or about 4 May then they were there
on 14 May. The burden of showing they were not would fall to you
IMO.
#Post#: 3065--------------------------------------------------
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
DIR By: Hodor51
Date: August 11, 2023, 3:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Please see notice to owner in link below:
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JIhjW8asWG-zf_sZSkzfRymynUGFiGQi/view?usp=drivesdk
#Post#: 3091--------------------------------------------------
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
DIR By: Hodor51
Date: August 11, 2023, 9:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ugly duckling link ---
>
> OP, you posted:
> I requested evidence that signage was present on the day in
which the alleged contravention occurred. No such evidence was
provided and the photo you have obtained was taken on a
different date.
>
> Are you saying that the signs are at the location where you
entered the CPZ? If so, the fact that they have taken them on a
different day is to their credit, isn't it, because this means
they have given drivers ample notice. Let's be clear, an
adjudicator would find on the balance of probabilities that
because they were there on or about 4 May then they were there
on 14 May. The burden of showing they were not would fall to you
IMO.
>
--- End Quote ---
No, not at all. On the evidence the council has provided me
directly on the PCN, there is no evidence that there was signage
present on the day. Only that the sign they've take a picture of
stated that it was a controlled zone on Sundays from Noon-430pm
on event days. Nothing to say (on the evidence they've provided
me) that it was in fact an event day.
My argument is (and I'm no legal expert so please correct me I'm
wrong), for the PCN to be enforced, that they need to provide
evidence that the correct signage was present upon entry to the
zone, on the date in which the PCN was issued, not 10 days prior
to the alleged incident. Who's to say that the sign could have
been removed within those 10 days?
Additionally, the only evidence they've provided is that they've
said in the letter that there was signage. Do we just take them
on their word for this?
#Post#: 3111--------------------------------------------------
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: August 11, 2023, 3:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hodor51 link ---
>
> [quote author=Ugly duckling link=topic=105.msg3040#msg3040
date=1691682258]
> OP, you posted:
> I requested evidence that signage was present on the day in
which the alleged contravention occurred. No such evidence was
provided and the photo you have obtained was taken on a
different date.
>
> Are you saying that the signs are at the location where you
entered the CPZ? If so, the fact that they have taken them on a
different day is to their credit, isn't it, because this means
they have given drivers ample notice. Let's be clear, an
adjudicator would find on the balance of probabilities that
because they were there on or about 4 May then they were there
on 14 May. The burden of showing they were not would fall to you
IMO.
>
--- End Quote ---
No, not at all. On the evidence the council has provided me
directly on the PCN, there is no evidence that there was signage
present on the day. Only that the sign they've take a picture of
stated that it was a controlled zone on Sundays from Noon-430pm
on event days. Nothing to say (on the evidence they've provided
me) that it was in fact an event day.
My argument is (and I'm no legal expert so please correct me I'm
wrong), for the PCN to be enforced, that they need to provide
evidence that the correct signage was present upon entry to the
zone, on the date in which the PCN was issued, not 10 days prior
to the alleged incident. Who's to say that the sign could have
been removed within those 10 days?
Additionally, the only evidence they've provided is that they've
said in the letter that there was signage. Do we just take them
on their word for this?
[/quote]
You are saying that for every event day the council must take a
photo of all the signs referring to event days just in case
somebody gets a PCN. Frankly you just won't get this argument
accepted. The adjudicator judges on "the balance of
probabilities", so if the council submits library photos of the
signs with a signed statement these signs are present and
correct that is all they need to do.
#Post#: 3147--------------------------------------------------
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
DIR By: Hodor51
Date: August 12, 2023, 12:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> [quote author=Hodor51 link=topic=105.msg3091#msg3091
date=1691765024]
> [quote author=Ugly duckling link=topic=105.msg3040#msg3040
date=1691682258]
> OP, you posted:
> I requested evidence that signage was present on the day in
which the alleged contravention occurred. No such evidence was
provided and the photo you have obtained was taken on a
different date.
>
> Are you saying that the signs are at the location where you
entered the CPZ? If so, the fact that they have taken them on a
different day is to their credit, isn't it, because this means
they have given drivers ample notice. Let's be clear, an
adjudicator would find on the balance of probabilities that
because they were there on or about 4 May then they were there
on 14 May. The burden of showing they were not would fall to you
IMO.
>
--- End Quote ---
No, not at all. On the evidence the council has provided me
directly on the PCN, there is no evidence that there was signage
present on the day. Only that the sign they've take a picture of
stated that it was a controlled zone on Sundays from Noon-430pm
on event days. Nothing to say (on the evidence they've provided
me) that it was in fact an event day.
My argument is (and I'm no legal expert so please correct me I'm
wrong), for the PCN to be enforced, that they need to provide
evidence that the correct signage was present upon entry to the
zone, on the date in which the PCN was issued, not 10 days prior
to the alleged incident. Who's to say that the sign could have
been removed within those 10 days?
Additionally, the only evidence they've provided is that they've
said in the letter that there was signage. Do we just take them
on their word for this?
[/quote]
You are saying that for every event day the council must take a
photo of all the signs referring to event days just in case
somebody gets a PCN. Frankly you just won't get this argument
accepted. The adjudicator judges on "the balance of
probabilities", so if the council submits library photos of the
signs with a signed statement these signs are present and
correct that is all they need to do.
[/quote]
Not what I'm saying. When issuing the PCN, surely there should
be a picture of the sign which states its a event day alongside
the picture of the sign that says parking restrictions are in
force on event days as part of the evidence?
Regardless, would like some advice on next steps regarding the
appeal against the notice to owner please?
#Post#: 3153--------------------------------------------------
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: August 12, 2023, 3:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> Not what I'm saying. When issuing the PCN, surely there should
be a picture of the sign which states its a event day alongside
the picture of the sign that says parking restrictions are in
force on event days as part of the evidence?
--- End Quote ---
Except you are saying this is what they would have to do,
because the event day signs are at all the entrances to the
applicable zone yet the location of the contravention is
somewhere within the zone so which sign was passed is unknown.
Indeed, there is actually no legal requirement for any photos at
all. So if you claim the sign didn't show it was an event day,
it would be up to you to demonstrate this. Remember, the
criminal standard of proof is not followed, it is the civil test
of "on the balance of probabilities".
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 6
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page