DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 51948--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: January 5, 2025, 3:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, you posted: do i need to respond by post or via email ?
You have the options of post, online and email.
The instructions are in the NTO. Post is the least favoured
option.
Make sure you keep a copy of what you send.
As regards 'Why is GBP 70 on NTO ? It is almost as if the PCN
and PCN challenge never happened', with respect can we get off
this subject. Yours is no different to many other threads we see
and your reaction is in keeping with many OPs i.e. post goes
astray (and therefore the re-offered discount period lapses) and
then it's conspiracy on the authority's part rather than a
c**k-up on the (Royal Mail) admin. front.
Just stay with procedure and submit your reps pl.
We can't access Bedford's online system for your PCN because we
don't have the info. But you can. Have you checked to see if
they display a PCN's progress online?
#Post#: 51993--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: January 5, 2025, 7:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=3347]seanjean123[/member] I would add the map you've
posted in reply 17, and the following text under the heading
"The contravention did not occur":
[indent]
In any event my car was not parked on The Embankment nor was it
parked on a road at all: my car was parked in the private car
park of the Swann Hotel, which is not a highway nor is it a road
to which the public have a right to pass and re-pass, it is
private land. While the council may own the freehold title to
the grass surrounding the car park, the grass surrounding the
car park is not a highway or road either.
It may well be that there is some local bylaw prohibiting
parking on grassed areas, but that cannot be enforceable by
means of a code 62 PCN unless the grassed area in question is
part of a road within the meaning of section 142 of the Road
Traffic Regulation Act 1984, which cannot possibly be the case
in the circumstances.
It follows that even if my car had been parked further forwards
with all four wheels on the grass, the contravention alleged
could not have possibly occurred.
[/indent]
Do not send a letter by post, that causes no end of problems,
the best option is to send a representation via the council
website and also take a timed / dated screenshot of the
confirmation page. If the text doesn't fit in the
representations box, put the representation in a PDF file and in
the representations box just say "see attached representation",
do not cut down the text of the representation to make it fit in
the box.
Having had a good look at your thread, my view is that you
basically cannot lose based on the point I have articulated
above, but Bedford are a bit thick and may well force this to
the tribunal. As you have a winning appeal, the discount is
somewhat irrelevant at this point.
#Post#: 52043--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: seanjean123
Date: January 5, 2025, 2:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> [member=3347]seanjean123[/member] I would add the map you've
posted in reply 17, and the following text under the heading
"The contravention did not occur":
>
> [indent]
> In any event my car was not parked on The Embankment nor was
it parked on a road at all: my car was parked in the private car
park of the Swann Hotel, which is not a highway nor is it a road
to which the public have a right to pass and re-pass, it is
private land. While the council may own the freehold title to
the grass surrounding the car park, the grass surrounding the
car park is not a highway or road either.
>
> It may well be that there is some local bylaw prohibiting
parking on grassed areas, but that cannot be enforceable by
means of a code 62 PCN unless the grassed area in question is
part of a road within the meaning of section 142 of the Road
Traffic Regulation Act 1984, which cannot possibly be the case
in the circumstances.
>
> It follows that even if my car had been parked further
forwards with all four wheels on the grass, the contravention
alleged could not have possibly occurred.
> [/indent]
>
>
> Do not send a letter by post, that causes no end of problems,
the best option is to send a representation via the council
website and also take a timed / dated screenshot of the
confirmation page. If the text doesn't fit in the
representations box, put the representation in a PDF file and in
the representations box just say "see attached representation",
do not cut down the text of the representation to make it fit in
the box.
>
> Having had a good look at your thread, my view is that you
basically cannot lose based on the point I have articulated
above, but Bedford are a bit thick and may well force this to
the tribunal. As you have a winning appeal, the discount is
somewhat irrelevant at this point.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks for this. Please is this what you mean ?
1. The Contravention Did Not Occur
a) Vehicle Was Not Parked on a Footway or Verge
The council’s photographic evidence shows that my vehicle was
parked entirely on the tarmac hardstanding of the Swan Hotel’s
car park. None of the wheels were fully positioned on a footway,
verge, or non-carriageway area.
b) De Minimis Encroachment
Even if the council contends that a portion of the vehicle
(e.g., bumper or part of a wheel) marginally overhung the verge
or grassed area, this is a minor encroachment falling under the
principle of de minimis non curat lex ("the law does not concern
itself with trifles"). Such a trivial encroachment caused no
obstruction or harm and cannot reasonably justify enforcement.
c) Ambiguity in Boundaries and Signage
The "No Parking on Verge" sign visible in the council's
photographs applies to the grassed areas beyond the sign, not
the tarmac where my vehicle was parked.
There is no clear demarcation between the hotel’s private car
park and council-controlled land.
The sign does not indicate that parking on the tarmac before the
sign is prohibited.
This lack of clarity makes enforcement unreasonable and the
contravention unenforceable.
d) Misapplication of Contravention Code
The alleged contravention under Code 62 applies specifically to
parking with wheels fully on a footway, verge, or
non-carriageway area. This code does not apply to the location
in question, as my vehicle was parked predominantly on tarmac.
If the council believed a different restriction applied, a
different contravention code should have been used.
In any event my car was not parked on The Embankment nor was it
parked on a road at all: my car was parked in the private car
park of the Swann Hotel, which is not a highway nor is it a road
to which the public have a right to pass and re-pass, it is
private land. While the council may own the freehold title to
the grass surrounding the car park, the grass surrounding the
car park is not a highway or road either.
It may well be that there is some local bylaw prohibiting
parking on grassed areas, but that cannot be enforceable by
means of a code 62 PCN unless the grassed area in question is
part of a road within the meaning of section 142 of the Road
Traffic Regulation Act 1984, which cannot possibly be the case
in the circumstances.
It follows that even if my car had been parked further forwards
with all four wheels on the grass, the contravention alleged
could not have possibly occurred.
#Post#: 52060--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: January 5, 2025, 5:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=3347]seanjean123[/member] yes that will do.
#Post#: 54987--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: seanjean123
Date: January 25, 2025, 2:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I received a notice of rejection of representation from Bedford
borough council.
Reason was
The photgraphy of the contravention, which may be viewed on
bedford borough council website, show that your vehicle was
parked partly on the grass verge
Signs are displayed in this area informing motorists that
parking is not permitted on the verge or footway. Please find
the enclosed copy of the plan showing the extent of the verge
and footway prohibition in this area.
We note the comments made in your represenations. However the
photographs show that only one wheel of your vehicle was on the
paved/roadway area. In your representations you refer to a
tarmacked area. Please be aware that the roadway in this area
does not have a tarmac surface.
We also confirm that the details of registered keeper of the
vehicle, used on the Notice to Owner were provided by DVLA.
The council is satisfied that the contravention did occur and
there is insufficient mitigation to enable the Penalty Charge
Notice (PCN) to be cancelled.
Please how best to proceed ? I am being asked to either pay GBP
70 which is against the initial PCN which said if i challenge
the PCN, the 50% discount would be provided if it was
unsuccessful. So they amount due should be GBP 35. I was told
after 28 days it will become GBP 105. I was told i could appeal
to a trafficpenaltytrobunal as well
#Post#: 54988--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: January 25, 2025, 2:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Disappointing, but par for the course.
Please post up the Notice of Rejection (redacting only yr name &
address) and the plan.
#Post#: 54994--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: seanjean123
Date: January 25, 2025, 2:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
rejection of representation letter
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 54997--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: January 25, 2025, 3:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What was the date on the NoR - you've cut it off!
Did you post reps as per Reply#52?
#Post#: 55000--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: seanjean123
Date: January 25, 2025, 3:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: John U.K. link ---
>
> What was the date on the NoR - you've cut it off!
>
> Did you post reps as per Reply#52?
>
--- End Quote ---
NOR date = 16/01/2025
Yes i used reply 47 and 52.
#Post#: 55011--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: January 25, 2025, 5:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=3347]seanjean123[/member] well the discount is not on
offer so the obvious next step is to appeal, I'll drop you a PM
in case you'd like me to represent you. I think you might even
get a costs order against the council.
*****************************************************
Page 6 of 7
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page