DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 23627--------------------------------------------------
Dagenham - Contravention Code 30, parked too long, Holgate Road
DIR By: george74
Date: May 22, 2024, 5:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
My wife got the same ticket as I did here
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/dagenham-contravention-code-30-parked-too-long/.<br
/>
At the time, from the comments of the previous thread, I said
she is allowed to park there due to being a blue badge holder
and having a virtual/courtesy blue badge. As advised by
Pastbybest, she can park there but only with the blue badge
visible as the virtual permit only allows parking in resident or
disabled bays in the CPZ - she did not have the blue badge on
display.
I challenged using the one written up previously by Pastmybest:
--- Quote ---
>
> I make representations against the above mentioned PCN under
the statutory ground that.
> The contravention did not occur.
> The vehicle in question VRM EN 72 WYS is a Motability vehicle
leased to me/ my wife I/she holds a valid Blue Badge giving the
exemptions available under regulation 7 of the Local
Authorities' Traffic Orders (Exemptions for Disabled Persons)
(England) Regulations 2000
>
> I/my wife also holds a permit issued by Barking and Dagenham
council exempting the display of the Blue badge. This exemption
permit is valid within the HW zone. Heathway in Dagenham is
squarely within the HW zone and as such the Exemption afforded
by the above regulation allows parking without time limit, the
exemption from display of the BB permit affords just such
exemption from the display of the BB and as a consequence the
contravention did not occur and the PCN should now be cancelled
>
--- End Quote ---
and they rejected (attached) - this time they said the permit
cannot be used to park in a limited waiting bay for longer than
permitted, so they have addressed the usage of the permit this
time.
I think I don't have a challenge with regards to the permit and
will have to rely on the PCN and maybe the rejection response
for errors.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 23645--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dagenham - Contravention Code 30, parked too long, Holgate
Road
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: May 23, 2024, 3:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The PCN omits a key piece of mandatory information.
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2022/9780348232752/part/2/chapter/1
Regulation 3 (1)(c) is missing. This is a key piece of info,
because it warns the recipient that if he has submitted reps
against the PCN, and an NtO is served without any response to
those reps, that he must respond to the NtO. This is because an
NtO must be paid or reps submitted, and any reps sent against
the original PCN don't count.
#Post#: 23655--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dagenham - Contravention Code 30, parked too long, Holgate
Road
DIR By: Pastmybest
Date: May 23, 2024, 8:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You cannot rely on the permit argument but you have the wording
error on the PCN and if you like a gamble perhaps they will omit
the TMO again other arguments may well arise as you go on
#Post#: 24074--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dagenham - Contravention Code 30, parked too long, Holgate
Road
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: May 27, 2024, 12:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
For reference the traffic order is The London Borough of Barking
and Dagenham (Free Parking Places, Loading Places and Waiting,
Loading and Stopping Restrictions) Consolidation Order 2016
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vKi38zVJNDgqqVknEpxKMPKCLDZkJqbd/view,<br
/>map tile here
HTML https://store.traffweb.app/barking-dagenham/documents/parkmap/msched/X14_rv4_1.pdf.
It's definitely worth getting at least to the formal notice of
rejection, because at that point the discount will still be in
play (as long as the NTO is challenged within 14 days of the
date of issue) and they may well mess up along the way.
#Post#: 26876--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dagenham - Contravention Code 30, parked too long, Holgate
Road
DIR By: george74
Date: June 20, 2024, 6:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have received the NTO.
According to the cancellation guidance,
--- Quote ---
>
> MC13: Where the motorist is a Blue Badge holder/transporting a
Blue Badge holder and they did not have their Blue Badge and/or
clock on display or could not be read or had expired If it can
be established that this is the motorist’s first contravention
of this type and they can provide evidence that they are a Blue
badge holder or were transporting a Blue Badge holder. If the
motorist has previously had a PCN cancelled for the same
contravention and has been warned to display a valid badge/time
clock, correctly in the future If the motorist was parked on a
waiting restriction beyond the 3-hour time limit permitted by
the Blue Badge Scheme, or on another restriction for which the
Blue Badge does not provide an exemption.
>
--- End Quote ---
I've had this contravention before but it was cancelled for
different reasons.
I'm wondering if I can request they cancel it for not displaying
BB and it being the first time they cancel it for this type of
contravention?
#Post#: 27239--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dagenham - Contravention Code 30, parked too long, Holgate
Road
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: June 23, 2024, 7:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: george74 link ---
>
> I'm wondering if I can request they cancel it for not
displaying BB and it being the first time they cancel it for
this type of contravention?
>
--- End Quote ---
It's definitely worth having a go, write a draft and put it on
here for review.
#Post#: 32752--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dagenham - Contravention Code 30, parked too long, Holgate
Road
DIR By: george74
Date: August 8, 2024, 7:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I had my tribunal yesterday - this PCN has been cancelled. He
accepted that the PCN was missing info required by legislation
and that the council did not attach my challenge in full.
I argued that the courtesy blue badge terms and conditions are
not clear, even on the permit itself. I feel like he agreed with
this, but irrelevant because we discussed if the blue badge was
even exempt from the time limit. I did reference the legislation
as well as provide that as evidence - he did not tell me in the
call if he agreed or not but in the reasons, he said it fails.
--- Quote ---
>
> The Appellant has attended his appeal by telephone.
>
> The Authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was
parked for longer than permitted when in Holgate Road on 18
April 2024 at 13.55.
> The Appellant's case is advanced on three grounds.
>
> First, that it is unclear from the evidence that the Authority
is correct in stating that a blue badge and a courtesy blue
badge does not provide an exemption from the limited 1 hour time
restriction allowed in this timed bay in Barking and Dagenham.
> Second that the Authority has omitted from the reverse of the
PCN the requirement to record paragraph 3. (1) (c) of The Civil
Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions(Representations and
Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022, which is as follows:
>
> (c) that if a notice to owner is served despite the
representations mentioned in sub-paragraph (b), representations
against the penalty charge must be made to the enforcement
authority in the form and manner and at the time specified in
the notice to owner. (my emphasis)
>
> Third, that the Authority has failed to include all the
evidence in support of the Appellant's formal representations as
required by the 2022 Appeals Regulations.
>
> I have considered the evidence in this case and I find that
ground 1 of the Appellant's submission fails, because I find
that the time limitation of 1 hour applies to blue badge and
courtesy blue badge holders in Barking and Dagenham.
>
> However, I find the omission from the PCN to record the effect
paragraph 3. (1) (c) of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic
Contraventions(Representations and Appeals) (England)
Regulations 2022, to be a procedural impropriety.
>
> Further, I have accepted the Appellant's evidence that he
submitted further evidence with his formal representations, and
that the Authority has failed to produce it in evidence to the
Tribunal. I find that this is also a procedural impropriety.
>
> Accordingly, I am satisfied that the Appellant's second and
third grounds of appeal are well founded and this appeal must in
such circumstances be allowed.
>
> The appeal is allowed.
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 32756--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dagenham - Contravention Code 30, parked too long, Holgate
Road
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: August 9, 2024, 2:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Well done :)
#Post#: 32768--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dagenham - Contravention Code 30, parked too long, Holgate
Road
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: August 9, 2024, 3:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
At last an adjudicator recognises the importance of paragraph 3.
(1) (c) of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic
Contraventions(Representations and Appeals) (England)
Regulations 2022, and its absence makes the PCN void.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1