DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 17425--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leeds City Council PCN Sunday Disabled bay Time clock
"wrong"
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: March 17, 2024, 7:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If you have time, look at what seems to be a blizzard of loading
bay/BB threads which are currently being processed.
I was taken by an adjudicator's comment in one of the cases
cited in support that this is a complex area and NOT one where
adjudicators' decisions form anything like a consensus. It's
further complicated by the facts in each case:
24/7 restriction or not;
Traffic order requires display of disc or not;
Was BB displayed with or without a disc;
Was this set correctly?
I do not think that it's possible, nor do I think it's prudent,
to take an absolutist view and be prepared to go to the
barricades armed with nothing more than this argument.
#Post#: 17433--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leeds City Council PCN Sunday Disabled bay Time clock
"wrong"
DIR By: Fowler1981
Date: March 17, 2024, 8:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Is that a joke rep?? How do they expect CEO's to know every
drivers personal circumstances??
And as far as I know CEO's aren't 'incentivized' at all. Makes
no difference to them whether they issue one or fifty.
Surely that rep can't end up being a winner.
#Post#: 17441--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leeds City Council PCN Sunday Disabled bay Time clock
"wrong"
DIR By: UKdave
Date: March 17, 2024, 9:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Fowler1981 link ---
>
> How do they expect CEO's to know every drivers personal
circumstances?
>
> And as far as I know CEO's aren't 'incentivized' at all. Makes
no difference to them whether they issue one or fifty.
>
>
--- End Quote ---
Exactly, CEO's CANT know individual circumstances, and
therefore, mitigating personal circumstances are a valid retort
Oh, and the use of "rarely" as opposed to "never" in the
[public-facing] information below, clearly indicates this
absolutely DOES happen
HTML https://dixontechno.com/images/2024-03-17_13-47-03.jpg
#Post#: 17445--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leeds City Council PCN Sunday Disabled bay Time clock
"wrong"
DIR By: UKdave
Date: March 17, 2024, 9:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> If you have time, look at what seems to be a blizzard of
loading bay/BB threads which are currently being processed.
>
> I was taken by an adjudicator's comment in one of the cases
cited in support that this is a complex area and NOT one where
adjudicators' decisions form anything like a consensus. It's
further complicated by the facts in each case:
>
> 24/7 restriction or not;
> Traffic order requires display of disc or not;
> Was BB displayed with or without a disc;
> Was this set correctly?
>
> I do not think that it's possible, nor do I think it's
prudent, to take an absolutist view and be prepared to go to the
barricades armed with nothing more than this argument.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thank You. Would you be kind enough to drop a direct link to [or
title & date of] the comment thread from which you conclude that
adjudicators' decisions often indicate anything but a consensus
Thank You
#Post#: 17453--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leeds City Council PCN Sunday Disabled bay Time clock
"wrong"
DIR By: Fowler1981
Date: March 17, 2024, 9:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE: Exactly, CEO's CANT know individual circumstances, and
therefore, mitigating personal circumstances are a valid retort
Nah, that would make the clock absolutely pointless in every
case due to CEO's having to assume every driver struggled with
the time. I can see that argument being given very short shrift
indeed. Presumably if you were going for that argument then you
would need proof, like medical records for example.
#Post#: 17707--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leeds City Council PCN Sunday Disabled bay Time clock
"wrong"
DIR By: Daim456
Date: March 19, 2024, 10:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: UKdave link ---
>
> [quote author=Daim456 link=topic=1420.msg17358#msg17358
date=1710608285]
> The Blue Badge parking clock is only legally required for
yellow lines only but not for time limit bay - disabled bay or
not.
>
--- End Quote ---
Hi there. I appreciate your input. Can you please copy & paste
the exact traffic order you are quoting?
THANK YOU
[/quote]
You can see the legislation below stating that a parking clock
is required for parking on yellow lines.
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/683/regulation/8/made
But this one do not require parking clock for parking in a
parking place beyond waiting limit
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/683/regulation/7/made
#Post#: 17717--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leeds City Council PCN Sunday Disabled bay Time clock
"wrong"
DIR By: UKdave
Date: March 19, 2024, 11:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
>
>
> You can see the legislation below stating that a parking clock
is required for parking on yellow lines.
>
>
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/683/regulation/8/made
>
> But this one do not require parking clock for parking in a
parking place beyond waiting limit
>
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/683/regulation/7/made
>
--- End Quote ---
THANK YOU SIR
I really appreciate that
#Post#: 17720--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leeds City Council PCN Sunday Disabled bay Time clock
"wrong"
DIR By: Phantomcrusader
Date: March 19, 2024, 12:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It's important to note that the 2000 regulations do not apply in
your case. The parking place is set aside specifically for
disabled badge holders and therefore no exemption is being
sought by the display of a disabled persons badge (you don't
need an exemption if the parking place is provided for your
use!). The 2000 regulations may have a part to play though if
the applicable traffic regulation order that regulates the
parking place refers to them for definition purposes.
I gave you in post 6, good reasons why the penalty charge should
be cancelled. Chiefly that the penalty charge exceeds the
applicable amount. This is a limited waiting parking place and
therefore the contravention should be code 30 parked for longer
than permitted which is a lower £50.00 penalty. The 2nd main
reason is that the alleged contravention did not occur because
your disabled person's badge was valid. Just because the clock
indicated you overstayed does not invalidate your badge. This is
not a case of relying upon an exemption (such as parking on a
double yellow line) given where a badge and clock must be
displayed.
If you need help putting these points into a coherent written
argument just say and I'll assist.
#Post#: 17810--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leeds City Council PCN Sunday Disabled bay Time clock
"wrong"
DIR By: Phantomcrusader
Date: March 20, 2024, 7:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What tosh HCA. I recall you saying similar tosh to CP8759 and
the case succeeded at adjudication.
A disc clock set to the wrong arrival time does not invalidate
the disabled person's badge. Therefore a code 40 PCN is
nonsense. If you disagree, state the regulation that says
failure to set the clock correctly invalidates the displayed
badge. Due to the clock indicating that the vehicle had been
parked for longer than allowed, the correct conclusion for the
CEO to draw is that the vehicle had been parked for longer than
permitted. Consequently a lower penalty of £50 was applicable
not a higher £70 penalty. Don't lose sight of the fact that it
is a limited waiting parking place albeit for a specific user
type. The badge showed that the driver was entitled to park but
by the driver not setting the clock correctly it was reasonable
for the CEO to issue a code 30 PCN not a code 40 one.This is not
a case where the 2000 TRO regulations apply. No exemption is
being claimed by the display of the badge and clock.
#Post#: 17819--------------------------------------------------
Re: Leeds City Council PCN Sunday Disabled bay Time clock
"wrong"
DIR By: Phantomcrusader
Date: March 20, 2024, 8:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=1303]UKdave[/member] here are my points that you can
copy and paste.
I concede that when I parked in the disabled badge
holder’s only limited waiting parking place I failed to
set the parking disc clock to show my correct time of arrival. I
can advise that in reality I had not parked for longer than the
permitted 4 hours when the PCN was issued. I apologise for this
oversight and acknowledge that by displaying an incorrect time
of arrival it gave ground for your CEO to issue a penalty
charge.
However, the incorrectly set parking disc clock did not
invalidate the disabled person’s badge as alleged by the
PCN. The parking place is for disabled badge holder use and
therefore The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Exemptions for
Disabled Persons) (England) Regulations 2000 are not applicable
here because I was not claiming any exemption. I do not need
exemption to park in a parking place that is specifically
provided for my use as a disabled badge holder. A wrongly set
parking disc clock does not invalidate the disabled
person’s badge that was displayed. The Local Authorities'
Traffic Orders (Exemptions for Disabled Persons) (England)
Regulations 2000 under regulation 3 identifies a disabled
person’s badge and parking disc clock as being independent
items and no where do these regulations stipulate that any
failing with setting the clock invalidates the disabled
person’s badge. Consequently, the alleged contravention
did not occur as my disabled person’s badge was not
invalid.
Furthermore, by issuing a code 40 PCN the penalty charge exceeds
the amount applicable in the circumstances. The parking place is
a limited waiting parking albeit that only disabled badge
holders can park within it. Due to the parking disc clock
displaying an incorrect time of arrival it would have been
appropriate for your CEO to issue a code 30 PCN for being parked
for longer than permitted. The parked for longer than permitted
fact is acknowledged by your office in the rejection notice sent
in response to my informal challenge. This contravention is a
lower penalty charge of £50.00. The wrong contravention
description was used and consequently the council is wrongly
seeking £70.00 from me.
There is also an Equality Act 2010 issue that the Council has a
duty to consider. Regular limited waiting bays don't require the
display of a parking disc clock. By making disabled people set
and display a clock is treating them different to able bodied
people who park in a regular limited waiting bay and it creates
a situation where disabled people have a higher chance of making
an error such as the clock falling off or being set incorrectly.
Timings should be based on CEO observations the same as a
regular limited waiting bay. There is no need to give the
disabled the extra burden of setting and displaying a clock. I
believe that the Council is unlawfully treating disabled people
differently from able bodied people and I ask you to reconsider
your approach to disabled badge holders only limited waiting
parking places.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page