DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 23312--------------------------------------------------
Re: Disabled Bay - Notice to Owner
DIR By: guest17
Date: May 21, 2024, 2:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ground 3
The sign governing the bay is not contained within The Traffic
Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 nor have the
Council obtained DfT permission to use it. There is no provision
within the legislation to use the term "Residents" nor a permit
identifier for anything other than a dedicated bay reserved for
an individual disabled person.Therefore the traffic sign is a
nullity and cannot be enforced, making the PCN invalid.
Ground 4
The Council's intention of reserving disabled bays for residents
only is discriminatory (against non-resident disabled people)
and I would refer you to both the Equality Act 2010 and moreso
to The Equality Act 2010 (Amendment) Regulations 2023.
Therefore the traffic management rationale giving rise to the
TMO is fatally flawed to the extent that the Council actions are
ultra vires. In such circumstances enforcement of this bay
cannot proceed.
Mike
#Post#: 23329--------------------------------------------------
Re: Disabled Bay - Notice to Owner
DIR By: LondonTraveller84
Date: May 21, 2024, 3:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Mike! let me send the amended Groundds 3 & 4 in addition
to my 1 & 2 across now.. and see what they come back with,
fairly confident it'll be rejected then independant adjudicator
it is.
Groudn 4 surely they'll just laught it off, while it makes sense
however to them they don't even consider such things and will
see this as a null point assuming as would the adjudicator?
#Post#: 23339--------------------------------------------------
Re: Disabled Bay - Notice to Owner
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: May 21, 2024, 4:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Date of Service is defined in law as two working days from date
of posting which is assumed to be date of letter unless
rebutted.
When sending reps online make sure you keep a copy and also a
copy of the receipt/automated acknowledgement.
#Post#: 23350--------------------------------------------------
Re: Disabled Bay - Notice to Owner
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: May 21, 2024, 4:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
With respect, I disagree and I'll set out my thinking.
There is no ISA (wheelchair) symbol on the sign, therefore it is
not a 'parking place reserved for disabled badge holders.'
Instead, there is the standard 'P' and it is a 'Parking place' -
see item 2 of the Part 4 Sign Table -
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/4/made
(the bay also looks like it doesn't meet the min. size
requirements for a disabled bay)
IMO, it is a permit bay and the type of user and permit
identifier are Disabled Resident Permit Holder E.
The other way of looking at the issue would be that if it was a
dedicated disabled bay then as it doesn't carry the ISA symbol
(column 3) then this wins on its own and it's not necessary to
explore column 4 issues.
OP, the car was parked without displaying or holding the
required permit. If you are going to rely upon an exemption, in
this case loading, then it is your legal burden to prove your
entitlement.
The CEO's photo shows an unattended vehicle.
You claim that you were in the process of '..loading at premises
adjacent to the parking place in which the vehicle is waiting
and the vehicle does not wait for such purpose for more than
twenty minutes or for such longer period as a parking attendant
may approve.'
So, IMO you need something like:
On ** I had been visiting ** who lives at no. *** which is a
property adjacent to the parking place in question....and then
your account. I suggest you start with this because as regards
the facts regarding what you were doing, you're the only one who
knows and there are very important matters which as yet haven't
been aired. Your reps leap straight into legal matters when, if
you are entitled to the exemption, the only issue is to set out
why you are entitled.
For example:
Looking at your photo, there's enough luggage etc. for an army.
If it's yours, then you must have been stating..in which case if
you only moved your car into the parking place at the time of
loading, where was it until then and why couldn't loading have
waited until another parking place was free etc. etc.
'Adjacent', which I think is key, is not defined and therefore
subjective. Here's one I saw online:
Adjacent means close to or near something. You may consider the
people up and down your street to be neighbors, but your
next-door neighbor is the person who lives in the house or
apartment adjacent to yours. Adjacent can refer to two things
that touch each other or have the same wall or border.
#Post#: 23361--------------------------------------------------
Re: Disabled Bay - Notice to Owner
DIR By: guest17
Date: May 21, 2024, 5:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
@hca
The contravention is a Code 16 with the suffix "5" "dedicated
disabled bay"; the sign reads "Disabled Resident Permit Holders
Only"; the road marking reads "Disabled", all of which, I
believe, is sufficient to identify what we are dealing with.
That's without the clear steer from the TMO.
The Council were given permission to dispense with the
wheelchair logo here:-
HTML https://assets.dft.gov.uk/trafficauths/case-3311.pdf
In other words the sign at "Q" has the same meaning as a Diagram
661A here:-
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/schedule/2/made
Mike
#Post#: 23397--------------------------------------------------
Re: Disabled Bay - Notice to Owner
DIR By: LondonTraveller84
Date: May 21, 2024, 8:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HC Anderson, so are we not to use Grounds 3 and 4, sorry all
this goes way above my head yet am trying my best to make sense
of it. - If you and Mike can give me some direction on what to
do around the points of contention, do I add both points..
As for the Ground 1, which was the core point I'm relying on, so
the property on xx, is my parents and I live there with them,
teh car is also my parents with me a named driver, and we were
loading the car as we were going up north.
"On X date I had bought my car around from the next road where
it was parked to where we/parents live at no. ***, which is a
property adjacent to the parking place in question....and then
your we started loading the car?
I can check if my ring camera has recordings showing how long it
was parked?
Good question, from what I remember I had bought the car from a
car wash, so had not been parked, prior to this it was parked on
a different road, which would have made it very difficult to
carry the luggage across. I could have waited for a spare space,
but this could be minutes or hours, and that too no garauntee
it'll be near or at the end of the road. So in a nut shell I
guess I would be saying
And based on waht John said around service, does that give me
another day or so to place with although have had bads
experience, so am keen to get this across today - asume for the
intial PCN appeal to teh council this concept doesn't apply
right?
#Post#: 23398--------------------------------------------------
Re: Disabled Bay - Notice to Owner
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: May 21, 2024, 8:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> my parents and I live there with them, teh car is also [b]my
parents[/b] with me a named driver
--- End Quote ---
The reps against the NtO must be in the name of the person named
on the NtO (should = registered keeper).
#Post#: 23402--------------------------------------------------
Re: Disabled Bay - Notice to Owner
DIR By: LondonTraveller84
Date: May 21, 2024, 8:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: John U.K. link ---
>
> [quote]my parents and I live there with them, teh car is also
[b]my parents[/b] with me a named driver
--- End Quote ---
The reps against the NtO must be in the name of the person named
on the NtO (should = registered keeper).
[/quote]
Okay in that case do i have to act on behlaf of my father purely
because the NtO is in the reigstered keepers name, going forward
when it goes to adjudication, would I be able to take it forward
or he will have to, even though I was teh driver ?
Or does this change what I say, I should it be said my son had
driven the car and was loading etc?
#Post#: 23408--------------------------------------------------
Re: Disabled Bay - Notice to Owner
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: May 21, 2024, 9:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: LondonTraveller84 link ---
>
> [quote author=John U.K. link=topic=1954.msg23398#msg23398
date=1716297799]
> [quote]my parents and I live there with them, teh car is also
[b]my parents[/b] with me a named driver
--- End Quote ---
The reps against the NtO must be in the name of the person named
on the NtO (should = registered keeper).
[/quote]
Okay in that case do i have to act on behlaf of my father purely
because the NtO is in the reigstered keepers name, going forward
when it goes to adjudication, would I be able to take it forward
or he will have to, even though I was teh driver ?
Or does this change what I say, I should it be said my son had
driven the car and was loading etc?
[/quote]
He can certainly give you written authority to act for him at
adjudication: I thinkl (but am not certain) he can to the same
for reps against NtO. Probably simpler (as you're online) to
write the reps as from him.
#Post#: 23411--------------------------------------------------
Re: Disabled Bay - Notice to Owner
DIR By: LondonTraveller84
Date: May 21, 2024, 10:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: John U.K. link ---
>
> [quote author=LondonTraveller84
link=topic=1954.msg23402#msg23402 date=1716298748]
> [quote author=John U.K. link=topic=1954.msg23398#msg23398
date=1716297799]
> [quote]my parents and I live there with them, teh car is also
[b]my parents[/b] with me a named driver
--- End Quote ---
The reps against the NtO must be in the name of the person named
on the NtO (should = registered keeper).
[/quote]
Okay in that case do i have to act on behlaf of my father purely
because the NtO is in the reigstered keepers name, going forward
when it goes to adjudication, would I be able to take it forward
or he will have to, even though I was teh driver ?
Or does this change what I say, I should it be said my son had
driven the car and was loading etc?
[/quote]
He can certainly give you written authority to act for him at
adjudication: I thinkl (but am not certain) he can to the same
for reps against NtO. Probably simpler (as you're online) to
write the reps as from him.
[/quote]
Sure I'll do the rep as from him, but I guess in temrs of the
incident I should refer to myself as my son was parked and
loading correct? as the initial appeal I wrote from myself and
said I was loading?
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page