DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 19638--------------------------------------------------
Tower Hamlets, code 28 Parked on road raised to pavement level,
Ashfield Street
DIR By: elucidate
Date: April 13, 2024, 11:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
(Original Pepipoo thread:
HTML http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=153925
)
Hello everyone,
I got done on a code 28 "Parked in a special enforcement area on
part of the carriageway raised to meet the level of a footway,
cycle track or verge" contravention in Tower Hamlets. The entire
length of the raised carriageway has single yellow lines on both
sides, and those lines continue into the non-raised portion of
the road. In the absence of a yellow timeplate, I assumed I can
park there outside of the CPZ's enforcement period of Mon-Fri
8:30am-5:30pm, as long as I left enough space for cars to
overtake me on the carriageway. I thought to myself, "If you're
not allowed to park here at all, they'd either have put no
lines, or used double yellow." I made sure I parked well away
from the tactile tiles, and I happened to have a bollard
adjacent to the mid-point of my car.
So I was very surprised to find myself issued a PCN when I
arrived back to my car.
Having perused the forum, I guess my best defence is to
reference Tribunal case 2110067442?
Link to folder containing CEO images and PCN (use Incognito mode
if you don't want to log in):
HTML https://1drv.ms/f/s!AhJd2Q4uph3xgcVj-xeNopDepVsEOQ?e=2QOh95
Link to GSV:
HTML https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5167192,-0.059358,3a,75y,110.81h,61.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGwApPZTCz-hbyKrxXCZSJw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Today is the final day of discounted price so any advice that
can be given today would be appreciated.
HTML https://i.imgur.com/TB62Hro.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/TNuxkmQ.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/sFsDJhh.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/fGtRcky.png
#Post#: 19657--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets, code 28 Parked on road raised to pavement
level, Ashfield Street
DIR By: Pastmybest
Date: April 14, 2024, 5:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
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.
The law. I would say rather than one of the designated reasons
the road has been raised as a traffic calming measure
#Post#: 19689--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets, code 28 Parked on road raised to pavement
level, Ashfield Street
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: April 14, 2024, 2:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Pastmybest link ---
>
> 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.
>
> The law. I would say rather than one of the designated reasons
the road has been raised as a traffic calming measure
>
--- End Quote ---
So somebody in the Highways Dept had the gumption to realise
that the raised section was not for the statutory purpose so had
yellow lines put in. It seems clear the raised section does not
match any of the statutory reasons.
#Post#: 20124--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets, code 28 Parked on road raised to pavement
level, Ashfield Street
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: April 21, 2024, 5:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I agree there is an arguable case on the purpose for which the
kerb has been raised, though it could be argued that's it served
a dual-purpose. It's definitely worth taking it at least to the
notice to owner stage, though the notice to owner must be
challenged within 14 days to preserve the discount.
[member=1498]elucidate[/member] have you made a representation?
#Post#: 20129--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets, code 28 Parked on road raised to pavement
level, Ashfield Street
DIR By: elucidate
Date: April 21, 2024, 6:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I made a representation on the day I started this topic, so
that I can preserve the discount at the informal stage. I argued
on the basis of the case I mentioned in the OP.
I genuinely thought the raised carriageway was for aesthetic
reasons. When I came back to the car I saw a gaggle of cars
queuing up to leave the private grounds on the southern side of
the carriageway but they were blocked by the cars who parked up
behind me. They were blocked also by me to a certain extent but
I did have bollards next to me unlike the other motorists.
Turns out they designed the grounds to look like it's for
pedestrians only but vehicles can and do enter it via the raised
carriageway:
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/DEYtvFwASaeDMp6q9
#Post#: 22958--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets, code 28 Parked on road raised to pavement
level, Ashfield Street
DIR By: elucidate
Date: May 18, 2024, 5:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi everyone,
So I've just received the rejection letter from TH, attached to
this post.
I never knew they can instantly remove the discount if your
formal challenge is rejected!
I've also just come across these interesting documents:
HTML https://democracy.cityoflondon.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=55339
HTML https://i.imgur.com/RL0I9Ob.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/v6tcnwO.png
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 23006--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets, code 28 Parked on road raised to pavement
level, Ashfield Street
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: May 18, 2024, 1:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Have you read the letter, or just skimmed it ? They have
re-offered the discount (£65) for 14 days from date of service
of letter. In addition this is a rejection of informal
representation, because it is a response to reps made against
the PCN. Formal reps are submitted against a Notice to Owner
which is the next step in the process.
#Post#: 23012--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets, code 28 Parked on road raised to pavement
level, Ashfield Street
DIR By: elucidate
Date: May 18, 2024, 3:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
No need to be so incandescent! :D I was referring to the bit
where it says "I must advise you that if you make a
representation and we reject it you will be liable for the full
charge ..."
#Post#: 23015--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets, code 28 Parked on road raised to pavement
level, Ashfield Street
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: May 18, 2024, 4:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: elucidate link ---
>
> No need to be so incandescent! :D I was referring to the bit
where it says "I must advise you that if you make a
representation and we reject it you will be liable for the full
charge ..."
>
--- End Quote ---
OK, but it wasn't clear. They are correct, in that if you wait
for the Notice to Owner and submit formal representations, you
would be liable for the full PCN penalty if they refuse such
reps. Of course they can re-offer the discount despite their
statement, because if they don't, it becomes a total no-brainer
for the appellant to appeal to the adjudicators, because the
penalty remains the same and there are no additional costs. So
they may re-offer the discount if you decide to go to Notice to
Owner stage. I have my doubts that you would win, though. Others
on here may disagree so wait and see what they say. At the
moment you are liable to pay £65. If you don't take up their
offer it will be £130
#Post#: 23037--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower Hamlets, code 28 Parked on road raised to pavement
level, Ashfield Street
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: May 19, 2024, 5:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, have you looked at the council report which you posted, in
particular Appendix 2, Raised Carriageway Locations?
Is your location on this plan?
If so, then IMO an adjudicator would accept that the purpose of
the raised carriageway is for one or more of the statutory
purposes because this is what's stated in the report.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page