DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 36511--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, London - Code 40 parked in a disabled badge holder
only bay - East Avenue E12
DIR By: IHateUnfairPCNs
Date: September 11, 2024, 1:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Well since I didn't park in contravention and there was also a
clear and obvious CEO Error on the PCN that they don't want to
acknowledge, I don't want to pay. I'll happily pay if I was
liable and at fault.
#Post#: 36516--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, London - Code 40 parked in a disabled badge holder
only bay - East Avenue E12
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: September 11, 2024, 1:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Well, their informal challenge portal is not very helpful in
terms of giving you any of the statutory grounds. Let's see what
happens when the Notice to Owner is received. And if the grounds
are irrelevant, wrong or incomplete on the website, then that is
winnable at the Tribunal.
HTML https://bit.ly/2ALghSS
Adjudications - key cases
629 ff.
#Post#: 36537--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, London - Code 40 parked in a disabled badge holder
only bay - East Avenue E12
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: September 12, 2024, 1:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The discounted sum of £65 is actually on offer until 24th Sept.
#Post#: 36554--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, London - Code 40 parked in a disabled badge holder
only bay - East Avenue E12
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: September 12, 2024, 4:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It sounds like they will reconsider when presented with 'hard
evidence' so I would go back to them with medical info, note
from imam?, pic of person concerned maybe.
#Post#: 36602--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, London - Code 40 parked in a disabled badge holder
only bay - East Avenue E12
DIR By: IHateUnfairPCNs
Date: September 12, 2024, 8:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So, in terms of assisted boarding and that only, what hard
evidence would be suitable? I don't think I can get a note from
the imam as he wasn't involved. However, I can definitely get
medical evidence to prove that he needed help with boarding, and
I had to leave my car parked for 2 minutes to do so. The
question is, what medical evidence would be suitable as it isn't
clear... he did have diarrhea that day. Don't know if that is
excusable.
Would a sick note be sufficient, or what about a witness
statement signed by the person I was picking up, my dad's
friend...
It's very hard to think of 'hard evidence' that they would
require.
Either way, the CEO didn't observe my car for the 2 minutes that
I was gone to assist him in boarding. I mentioned assisted
boarding without evidence as I didn't think it would be needed,
and wasn't clear on what exact evidence was needed to prove my
version of events. But I want to mainly try appeal from the
technicality of incorrect observation time, as if the CEO
observed as per Newham policy, I would have made clear my
circumstances to him and I wouldn't have got the ticket in the
first place.
#Post#: 36610--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, London - Code 40 parked in a disabled badge holder
only bay - East Avenue E12
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: September 12, 2024, 9:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Get all you can.
#Post#: 36617--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, London - Code 40 parked in a disabled badge holder
only bay - East Avenue E12
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: September 12, 2024, 10:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The key is to provide evidence of difficulty in walking as that
means assistance is needed. A note from any authority they will
take notice of is what should work, and that could be a doctor
(obviously), friend/family member with professional credentials,
the imam etc.
#Post#: 40716--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, London - Code 40 parked in a disabled badge holder
only bay - East Avenue E12
DIR By: IHateUnfairPCNs
Date: October 14, 2024, 11:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have received the NtO. I have posted it via Imgur, please view
if need be. I will by today, submit formal reps under the first
ground for appeal: 'The contravention didn't occur' as I am
arguing under the exemption: 'Assisted boarding' and also CEO
Error
I also have obtained a fit note from the GP of the person I had
picked up on that day, stating that he had diarrhea which
necessitated him needing a pick-uo from the mosque. He has also
written, by hand, a witness statement for me on that day which
he has signed. As far as 'hard evidence' goes, I think in my
opinion that is suitable enough (see previous, fob off rejection
letter)
Also, CEO gave incorrect observation time contrary to Newham
policy (which is 2 minutes), so I will mention that point in
there too. I really don't want to go to Tribunals, as I got one
ticket that is at that stage and quite frankly, it is super
long-winded. I will attempt to refute their fob off letter
precisely, as they did state they require hard evidence, which I
have got.
Hopefully this is the end of it. If there is any other 'hard
evidence' types that I have not considered to authenticate my
circumstances, please let me know.
Any helpful advice regarding, including potentially a draft of
formal reps given my previous replies in this thread would be
hugely appreciated :)
HTML https://i.imgur.com/T22Dtxu.jpeg
#Post#: 43521--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, London - Code 40 parked in a disabled badge holder
only bay - East Avenue E12
DIR By: IHateUnfairPCNs
Date: November 1, 2024, 10:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Well, after supplying hard evidence in the form of a medical fit
note issued by the GP of the elderly person which clearly stated
he had diarrhea on the day of the alleged contravention, as well
as further evidence showing that Newham's policy with
observation periods/assisted boarding meant that my PCN should
be cancelled... I have received this (lazy) notice of rejection.
I explained it correctly and made valid points, included the
original PCN slip which showed 0 minutes observation time as
well as what the standard observation time for code 40 etc...
The 1st point they mention is just lazy and absolutely factually
incorrect. Newham's own policy state that picking up/setting
down or assisted boarding can be done ANYWHERE except for bus
stops, school keep-clears, pedestrian zig-zag markings and
footway parking. There is no mention of disabled bays (whether
they be for residents or for public use). This exemption applies
for up to 2 minutes, and if longer than hard evidence must be
supplied (I did so). No mention of the requirement for a valid
disabled badge is found in the document/policy nor is it even
hinted at, whether the assisted boarding took place in a
disabled bay or anywhere else except the aforementioned.
The 2nd point is also false, as the serious offences they refer
to are the one's mentioned above. Also, the serious offences
which do not require an observation period and are subject to
immediate enforcement are clearly distinguished in Appendix C of
newhamparkingpolicyprocedures.pdf i.e those with 0 minutes and
'on-street'. An example of this which I did not mentioned above,
is parking adjacent to a dropped footway i.e blocking a
driveway. Surely my alleged offence under code 40 is not
serious, as it has a observation time of 2 minutes. If it was
serious, it would be stated as 0 minutes accordingly and then
that point/paragraph would make sense.
I have a feeling that they did not even bother with looking at
my evidence and just skimmed over what I wrote in my formal
appeal. Also, they are offering me a discount at the rejection
of formal representation stage, which is not normal from them.
Would this win at the Tribunals or should I just pay to secure
the discount, even though I am fully of the belief that I did
NOT commit any contravention due to exemption.
It has got me starting to wonder why they are so biased in their
judgement of appeals at these early stages.
HTML https://i.imgur.com/CgnwAfD.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/RWfXPCF.jpeg
#Post#: 43528--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, London - Code 40 parked in a disabled badge holder
only bay - East Avenue E12
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: November 1, 2024, 11:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Can you direct us to what you say is the council's policy on
assisted boarding pl. You keep referring to 2 minutes and twice
the council have responded in the NOR that there is no such
requirement for BB bays.
Also, IMO I was picking up an elderly person from a local
mosque, who was having a medical bowel incontinence emergency,
does not meet the conditions for assisted boarding. I'm going to
be direct because we don't have time to dance around matters.
You seem to have lost sight of what you need to present to meet
the conditions for the assisted boarding exception, assuming it
even applied.
You scoped:
Elderly;
Incontinence;
2 minutes observation;
'a friend of my father who has significant trouble with
walking'.
I know which aspect I'd focus on because it bears directly on
the conditions.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page