DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 43798--------------------------------------------------
Lambeth - 01 - Parked in restricted street (single yellow) -
Outside Jurisdiction
DIR By: theeagleman
Date: November 3, 2024, 2:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi All,
Lambeth gave a PCN for being parked in a single yellow. The
vehicle was being used for loading purpose for business.
However, the location at which the PCN was issued is Southwark.
Initial PCN + Evidence
HTML https://i.ibb.co/ssLvwB1/PCN-Front-edit.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/sjtfVf2/PCN-Image-1-edit.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/prsCMr1/Pcn-Image-2.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/mNgMptC/Pcn-Image-3-edit.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/hM4v74t/Time-Plate.jpg
Initial Representation
HTML https://i.ibb.co/bm5Fgcs/Initial-Appeal-edit.jpg
Notice of Rejection
HTML https://i.ibb.co/Wf3CRVt/NoR.jpg
Notice to Owner
HTML https://i.ibb.co/3fTWXtm/NTO-1-edit.jpg
Formal Represenations
The appeal for the above PCN is on the basis the contravention
never occurred, for the below reasons.
Procedural Impropriety – Outside Jurisdiction
The exact location at which the PCN was issued, is part of
Southwark (please see image below and also reflected in the
evidence from the CEO – Evidence #1). The failure of Lambeth to
provide evidence to that assertion on the initial informal
appeal, indicates that there is no agreement with Southwark.
This is further proven by an email from Southwark (Evidence #2)
who categorically claim no other local authority has any
agreement to issue PCNs on their behalf. As such the PCN issued
by Lambeth is invalid and unenforceable.
Evidence #1 – Border of Lambeth and Southwark – Vehicle was
categorically in Southwark (data from
HTML https://boroughs.dpope.uk/)
HTML https://i.ibb.co/YBFR6Mg/Lambeth-Boundary.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/Qdtkh07/Southwark.jpg
Evidence #2 – Email from Southwark Parking Department – 10th
October 2024
HTML https://i.ibb.co/8MQN0QH/Southwark-Email.jpg
Procedural Impropriety – Failure to Consider
Lambeth was clearly asked to provide an agreement with
Southwark, which allows them issue PCNs on behalf of them. This
was not considered or provided, and instead asserted that the
CEO issued the PCN correctly, as a boilerplate response.
I would like draw attention to the following case: 2210280742
The Authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was parked
in a residents' or shared use parking place or zone without a
valid virtual permit or clearly displaying a valid physical
permit or voucher or pay and display ticket issued for that
place where required, or without payment of the parking charge
when in Orford Road on 2 December 2020 at 14.01.
I have considered the evidence in this case and I have allowed
this appeal, after some consideration, because I find that the
Authority's Notice of Rejection does not consider the
Appellant's representations and respond accordingly.
I find that the mere assertion that the contravention has been
committed is insufficient.
To that extent I am not satisfied that the enforcement authority
has discharged its duty under regulation 5(2)(b) of the Civil
Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations
and Appeals Regulations 2007, which is to consider the
representations and any supporting evidence by the person making
them.
In my judgment an Appellant is entitled to have the points they
raise properly considered by the Enforcement Authority pursuant
to its duty under regulation 5(2)(b). On this occasion the
authority has failed to do this.
Regulation 4(4) of the Civil Enforcement of Parking
Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations
2007 provides the grounds on which representations may be made
against a Notice to Owner.
Regulation 4(4)(f) states:
'that there has been a procedural impropriety on the part of the
enforcement authority'
"Procedural impropriety" in this context means a failure by the
enforcement authority to observe any requirement imposed by the
Traffic Management Act 2004 or the General Regulations or
Representations and Appeals Regulations. This includes, pursuant
to Regulation 4(5)(a) of the Civil Enforcement of Parking
Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations
2007 the taking of any step, whether or not involving the
service of any document, otherwise than in accordance with the
conditions subject to which; or at the time or during the period
when, it is authorised or required to be taken.
I find that the failure to consider the representations of the
Appellant, to be a procedural impropriety as so defined.
Regulation 7(2) of the Civil Enforcement of Parking
Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations
2007 provides that if the Adjudicator concludes that a ground
specified in Regulation 4(4) above applies, "he shall allow the
appeal".
In light of this finding I am not required to determine any
other matters in issue.
Loading/Unloading Restrictions
At the time of the alleged contravention, a large prepaid order
was being loaded onto the car and a redacted invoice was
provided to for the purpose of the business. The invoice was
redacted for Data Protection purposes. For the purposes of
specific appeal, we do not wish to reveal the details of the
customer for this order, however we shall do so at the tribunal
to provide evidence, should you choose to reject this appeal on
above grounds.
I ask you cancel this PCN.
Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
#Post#: 43808--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 01 - Parked in restricted street (single yellow) -
Outside Jurisdiction
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: November 3, 2024, 4:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As you now have a Notice to Owner, the discount option has gone,
and say you can prove the vehicle was parked in a different
council area, it is a total no-brainer to take them all the way
to London Tribunal as the penalty remains the same and there are
no additional costs.
#Post#: 43814--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 01 - Parked in restricted street (single yellow) -
Outside Jurisdiction
DIR By: theeagleman
Date: November 3, 2024, 5:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> As you now have a Notice to Owner, the discount option has
gone, and say you can prove the vehicle was parked in a
different council area, it is a total no-brainer to take them
all the way to London Tribunal as the penalty remains the same
and there are no additional costs.
>
--- End Quote ---
Yep, I am prepared to take this all the way, and have
irrefutable proof. Had my fair share of dealing with London
Tribunals (for myself and others), and thankfully so far it has
been reasonably successful (11/12 success) :)
Lambeth know themselves as well this is outside of their
jurisdiction and their evidence clearly points to it.
Furthermore, I do have proof of loading, and it was very
convinient, the CEO took photos of the front seating, but not of
the back seating...
But I would want to use the outside jurisdiction matter as the
main point of contention.
#Post#: 43839--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 01 - Parked in restricted street (single yellow) -
Outside Jurisdiction
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: November 4, 2024, 3:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think you're home and dry on jurisdiction but I've noticed
something odd from the mapping data.
The first shot is Lambeth showing the boundary and traffic
orders only on the west side and not where you were so all good.
The big block is the bus stop.
The second shot is Southwark showing double yellow lines but the
single yellow you were on is just not there. The blocked out
side roads indicate adopted highway and it occurs to me that
Gipsy Hill being on the boundary may belong to Lambeth but I
don't know how boundary roads are apportioned. The order for the
Southwark double yellows reference the side roads not Gipsy
Hill.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/ZN1w1sF/Screenshot-2024-11-04-at-09-39-25.png
HTML https://i.ibb.co/gm9P8Hv/Screenshot-2024-11-04-at-09-27-00.png
#Post#: 43976--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 01 - Parked in restricted street (single yellow) -
Outside Jurisdiction
DIR By: theeagleman
Date: November 4, 2024, 2:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The side where the PCN was issued, Southwark deal with the
maintance. This includes the bins taken, streets cleaned and
street lamps (where the time plate is placed) fixed. In the
past, Southwark have given PCNs at this location also.
Interesting mention of the double yellows, which are on the side
roads, but no mention of a single yellow at all. This single
yellow has been in place for over 15 years now though, from my
understanding.
There was no restrictions prior to that.
Does that mean the SYL is potentially invalid ? ;)
#Post#: 43986--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 01 - Parked in restricted street (single yellow) -
Outside Jurisdiction
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: November 4, 2024, 3:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Don't confuse geographical and municipal boundaries with the
badge of who appears to be providing services.
It's standard practice where boundaries are common for one
authority to provide services for another on a contracted
basis(sometimes quite loose). Lambeth may clean Southwark
streets on behalf of Southwark and vice versa. Similarly with
parking enforcement.
HOWEVER, a PCN issued under an agency agreement must state who
is the enforcement authority. There is no suggestion here that
Lambeth are acting on behalf of Southwark, therefore municipal
boundaries are the key.
#Post#: 43991--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 01 - Parked in restricted street (single yellow) -
Outside Jurisdiction
DIR By: theeagleman
Date: November 4, 2024, 4:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> Don't confuse geographical and municipal boundaries with the
badge of who appears to be providing services.
>
> It's standard practice where boundaries are common for one
authority to provide services for another on a contracted
basis(sometimes quite loose). Lambeth may clean Southwark
streets on behalf of Southwark and vice versa. Similarly with
parking enforcement.
>
> HOWEVER, a PCN issued under an agency agreement must state who
is the enforcement authority. There is no suggestion here that
Lambeth are acting on behalf of Southwark, therefore municipal
boundaries are the key.
>
--- End Quote ---
Got it, thanks.
Lambeth believe (as per the informal NoR) that it indeed within
their jurisdiction, but the munipical boundaries are clear (at
least for me).
#Post#: 43993--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 01 - Parked in restricted street (single yellow) -
Outside Jurisdiction
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: November 4, 2024, 4:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The mapping sites I got the info from are geographic information
systems run by Lambeth and Southwark. But they are general
systems and we much prefer the dedicated traffic systems
(Traffweb) that we can access for some authorities (eg Barnet,
Hackney, Lewisham).
So they may not be complete/up to date. You may find out in
going on if Lambeth does in fact 'own' that yellow line. Or more
likely they don't/can't find anything and you win.
#Post#: 43995--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 01 - Parked in restricted street (single yellow) -
Outside Jurisdiction
DIR By: theeagleman
Date: November 4, 2024, 4:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: stamfordman link ---
>
> The mapping sites I got the info from are geographic
information systems run by Lambeth and Southwark. But they are
general systems and we much prefer the dedicated traffic systems
(Traffweb) that we can access for some authorities (eg Barnet,
Hackney, Lewisham).
>
> So they may not be complete/up to date. You may find out in
going on if Lambeth does in fact 'own' that yellow line. Or more
likely they don't/can't find anything and you win.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am hoping it is indeed the latter.
Also, it would certainly be strange that Lambeth 'own' that
line, but do not own the DYL which they attach onto, on the same
side.
Also, there is a loading exemption also in play - as a redacted
(address redacted, but company letter headed) invoice was
provided from the business, but a full one can be provided if
need be.
#Post#: 43998--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 01 - Parked in restricted street (single yellow) -
Outside Jurisdiction
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: November 4, 2024, 4:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As I said Gipsy Hill is not an adopted road and the double
yellow are not assigned to Gipsy Hill but to the adopted side
roads.
The systems:
HTML https://geomap.southwark.gov.uk/connect/analyst/mobile/#/main
HTML https://streets.appyway.com/lambeth
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page