DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 51091--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth code 52 – Failing to comply with a prohibition –
Stockwell Terrace, SW9 0QD
DIR By: AFMAC
Date: December 27, 2024, 9:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have finally received (forwarded in Christmas post) the
rejection notice sent by Lambeth on 16 December, but not
emailed.
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QjGPSr37aV4tOYvIhnYlK0I_36vnfecB/view?usp=sharing
And there was also information about an appeal.
The discount expires on Monday 30 Dec, so I can either pay now
or appeal. I can appeal online if you advise me to do, and
would repeat my previous submission, with the following
addition.
“ Lambeth’s rejection letter states
“We sent you a PCN because our CCTV camera evidence shows your
vehicle going where vehicles are not allowed. The sign is round
white and has a red border, with a picture of a motorcycle and a
motor vehicle.”
This is not a complete description of the sign, which also
states “Except authorised vehicles and loading”.
My representations pointed out that as a holder of a parking
permit for Controlled Zone S, and given that Stockwell Terrace
has signs indicating that it is part of that zone, my vehicle
was an authorised vehicle in the normal meaning of that phrase.
Lambeth has not commented at all on that element of my
submission, which I now repeat.
Can I have some advice, please?
#Post#: 51101--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth code 52 – Failing to comply with a prohibition –
Stockwell Terrace, SW9 0QD
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: December 27, 2024, 11:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure if this is winnable on the sign issue, because
"authorised vehicles" is normally emrgency services, and also
council vehicles engaged in council work. Ask yourself why the
council would change the sign. Clearly they wanted to reduce the
use of this street by permit holders.
However, I understand Hippocrates has identified a 'technical'
appeal based on their web pages for submitting representations.
This has been successful so far as I understand, so this would
be the emphasis of your appeal not the contravention itself.
#Post#: 51142--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth code 52 – Failing to comply with a prohibition –
Stockwell Terrace, SW9 0QD
DIR By: AFMAC
Date: December 27, 2024, 5:27 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I understand your first paragraph.
However, my point is that the signage for the parking controlled
zone is still there, which is what I am relying on.
#Post#: 51143--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth code 52 – Failing to comply with a prohibition –
Stockwell Terrace, SW9 0QD
DIR By: AFMAC
Date: December 27, 2024, 5:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
But of course Hippocrates may have a much better argument.
#Post#: 51271--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth code 52 – Failing to comply with a prohibition –
Stockwell Terrace, SW9 0QD
DIR By: AFMAC
Date: December 29, 2024, 9:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I see that the discount expires 14 days from date of service,
not from date of letter.
Letter is dated 16 December, so deemed service was on 18
December?
In that case the discount expires on 1 January.
If I appeal, is the discount preserved for longer?
#Post#: 51481--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth code 52 – Failing to comply with a prohibition –
Stockwell Terrace, SW9 0QD
DIR By: AFMAC
Date: December 31, 2024, 8:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I now have the rejection notice for the second PCN as follows:
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DNV3AQiz67lIZxg6m1_S6Sg8aTjx8YDw/view?usp=sharing
This has slightly different wording from the first one, but
still ignores my comments about the Controlled Zone notice.
I propose to pay the discounted rate (£65) for the first PCN
today.
Is it worth appealing the second PCN on the grounds that the
presence of the Controlled Zone notice must be there for a
reason? My argument is that if it has no effect, it should have
been removed.
#Post#: 52440--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth code 52 – Failing to comply with a prohibition –
Stockwell Terrace, SW9 0QD
DIR By: AFMAC
Date: January 8, 2025, 8:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have had no comments on this, so I propose to pay the
discounted rate tomorrow if nobody suggests appealing.
The basis of an appeal, in the absence of a technical argument,
would be that the Controlled Zone notices are still there, and I
am entitled to think that they mean something. The only thing
that they could reasonably mean is that I am allowed to enter
that street to enable me to park if there is a vacant bay, on
the strength of my parking permit for that zone. The rejection
letter did not deal with that point at all.
#Post#: 52444--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth code 52 – Failing to comply with a prohibition –
Stockwell Terrace, SW9 0QD
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: January 8, 2025, 8:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: AFMAC link ---
>
>
> I now have the rejection notice for the second PCN as follows:
>
>
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DNV3AQiz67lIZxg6m1_S6Sg8aTjx8YDw/view?usp=sharing
>
> This has slightly different wording from the first one, but
still ignores my comments about the Controlled Zone notice.
>
> I propose to pay the discounted rate (£65) for the first PCN
today.
>
> Is it worth appealing the second PCN on the grounds that the
presence of the Controlled Zone notice must be there for a
reason? My argument is that if it has no effect, it should have
been removed.
>
--- End Quote ---
It's an argument, but I'm not sure it's a slam -dunk win though.
The CPZ sign is for the boundary of a larger zone, not just that
street. One could say it is not in the right place now, but an
adjudicator could well say "So why did you ignore the "Flying
Motorbike" sign because all the CPZ sign gives is information
about single yellow line times ?"
#Post#: 52479--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth code 52 – Failing to comply with a prohibition –
Stockwell Terrace, SW9 0QD
DIR By: AFMAC
Date: January 8, 2025, 11:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you.
The answer is that I did not ignore the sign, which said “Except
authorised vehicles and loading”, and I interpreted “authorised”
as (in those particular circumstances) as including having a
permit to enter the street, given that there are bays still
marked as being part of the Zone.
But I agree that it would be a gamble, which is why I am
planning to pay if there are no other grounds for an appeal.
#Post#: 52483--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth code 52 – Failing to comply with a prohibition –
Stockwell Terrace, SW9 0QD
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: January 8, 2025, 11:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: AFMAC link ---
>
>
> Thank you.
>
> The answer is that I did not ignore the sign, which said
“Except authorised vehicles and loading”, and I interpreted
“authorised” as (in those particular circumstances) as including
having a permit to enter the street, given that there are bays
still marked as being part of the Zone.
>
> But I agree that it would be a gamble, which is why I am
planning to pay if there are no other grounds for an appeal.
>
--- End Quote ---
So the sign you refer to has been replaced by this one : -
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/7bmjuavdBev7gq6DA
Have you a photo of it ?
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page