DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 16252--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: February 25, 2024, 4:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't see how any adjudicator would consider this de-minimis,
if it were an exit from a motorway slip road it would be
prosecuted by the police and I don't see that de-minimis would
get you anywhere. A no entry sign is an absolute prohibition and
I wouldn't run a de-minimis argument on this one.
The only angle I can see here is an attack on the wording of the
notice, specifically on the basis that the ground that you're
not the owner suggests it is mandatory to supply the information
on who you bought the vehicle from or who you sold it to, while
the law says you only have to supply this information if you
have it. The notice could mislead you into thinking that if
you're recently bought or sold the vehicle but no longer have
the buyer's or seller's details then you can't make
representations, which is misleading.
[member=7]mrmustard[/member] you've previously mentioned the
Lopez decision on this point but I don't have the case number?
The council will inevitably reject so this would require risking
the full amount at the tribunal.
[member=68]antman40[/member] you need to decide if you want to
risk the full penalty on a technical argument, if you want to
give it a go I'm happy to draft a representation for you.
#Post#: 16263--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: mrmustard
Date: February 25, 2024, 5:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Have sent you a copy of the Lopez decision but it doesn't help
here as the buyer/seller information is stated on the PCN as to
be provided only if in his possession. I think the PCN is ok. I
think many councils have started to improve their wordings
because we keep picking holes in them and winning.
The outcome of this at the tribunal will all depend which
adjudicator decides it and if the council manage to put in
photos of the no entry signs or not.
#Post#: 16275--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: February 25, 2024, 7:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
OK, I hear what is said, but this PCN is just venal
money-grubbing. A minor street with almost no traffic at all;
crazy ! But then who am I to counter the council money-making
apparatus !
#Post#: 16277--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: February 26, 2024, 3:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: mrmustard link ---
>
> Have sent you a copy of the Lopez decision but it doesn't help
here as the buyer/seller information is stated on the PCN as to
be provided only if in his possession. I think the PCN is ok. I
think many councils have started to improve their wordings
because we keep picking holes in them and winning.
>
> The outcome of this at the tribunal will all depend which
adjudicator decides it and if the council manage to put in
photos of the no entry signs or not.
>
--- End Quote ---
2230172323 is the Lopez decision.
I agree that the PCN is ok. The only reason I suggested de
minimis is to write some kind of representation for their
response. One argument did work in October 2022 re the wording;
but, it is now otiose.
Re photos: and if they produce dated or undated photos which
will have no evidential value. All a gamble in my view. But,
let's see what they say first.
#Post#: 16279--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: February 26, 2024, 3:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Re de minimis, with respect the wrong signs are being looked at.
While the 'zone end' signs draw the eye, the No Entry signs are
actually separate and sit further forward, in fact almost in
line with the road markings.
Virtually the complete van was in contravention. De minimis is a
no-hoper.
Also, GSV is only 1 year old and shows the No Entry signs and
IMO and adjudicator would accept this evidence, which they could
find for themselves, as proving that these signs were in situ
using the balance of probabilities test.
What the hell the end of Pedestrian Zone signs refer to, I've no
idea. I cannot find else anything which corresponds, but it's
not germane to the OP's case.
#Post#: 16558--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: February 29, 2024, 2:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> OK, I hear what is said, but this PCN is just venal
money-grubbing.
>
--- End Quote ---
That's not a ground of appeal and not helpful either. One
adjudicator has previously remarked that he could get CCTV from
TFL of a vehicle stopping in a bay 30 seconds before the
permitted time and he might think "what the heck" but he can't
allow an appeal based on that, he needs me or Mr Mustard to give
him a legal point to allow the appeal.
I think this is one for the strategy of last resort described
here
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/l-b-waltham-forest-50r-performing-a-prohibited-turn/msg7581/#msg7581,<br
/>but [member=68]antman40[/member] would need to come up with
some
meaningful mitigation (unrelated to the contravention) that we
could use to construct the representation.
#Post#: 16565--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: February 29, 2024, 4:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, but I do get a bit cross in the late evenings when I see
things like this. Back when "I were a lad", such things like
this would have never been prosecuted. Current use of CCTV has
now got to the "Telescreens" stage.
#Post#: 16588--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: antman40
Date: March 1, 2024, 6:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=68]antman40[/member] you need to decide if you want to
risk the full penalty on a technical argument, if you want to
give it a go I'm happy to draft a representation for you.
I would like to take you up on your offer for a draft
representation
#Post#: 16603--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 1, 2024, 8:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The link/click idea now doesn't work as per one recent decision?
I would just submit as many reasonable representations as
possible and make them work for their £130.
#Post#: 16697--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: BigBazz45
Date: March 2, 2024, 9:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
> What the hell the end of Pedestrian Zone signs refer to, I've
no idea. I cannot find else anything which corresponds, but it's
not germane to the OP's case.
--- End Quote ---
Verulam Avenue and Tudor Court are included in a School Street
zone for St. Saviour's Church of England Primary School.
Details can be found here.
HTML https://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/parking-roads-and-travel/parking-permits-and-suspensions/school-streets
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page