DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 50112--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, parked in restricted street, Cranley Road Ilford
IG1
DIR By: NTIAEP
Date: December 16, 2024, 11:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: buscalls link ---
>
>
> [member=898]NTIAEP[/member] - Does this sign apply to the
opposite side too (side of plumbing shop facing Ley St)?
>
--- End Quote ---
I would hazard a guess and say "yes", but I'm sure the more
learned on the forum will confirm or otherwise. The GSV is from
2020 so might be an idea to check what signs/road markings etc.
there are in the present day.
#Post#: 50115--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, parked in restricted street, Cranley Road Ilford
IG1
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: December 16, 2024, 12:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: buscalls link ---
>
> [member=12]Incandescent[/member] - ie not worth bothering
then?
>
> [member=898]NTIAEP[/member] - Does this sign apply to the
opposite side too (side of plumbing shop facing Ley St)?
>
--- End Quote ---
If you are going to fight a PCN today, you have to be prepared
to forego the discount option. However if your reps are received
by them within the discount period, they will re-offer it when
rejecting your reps. Their rejection may show them as totally
wrong and give you the bones of a formal representation against
the next stage, the Notice to Owner. People seem to be totally
terrified at losing the discount, and councils know this, and
ruthlessly game the system to use this to get the money in.
#Post#: 50117--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, parked in restricted street, Cranley Road Ilford
IG1
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: December 16, 2024, 12:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There isn't a NTO, this PCN is it..next stop adjudication if
reps unsuccessful.
IMO, the sign isn't relevant to the contravention which is
stated in the PCN i.e. simple waiting where not permitted.
OP, what were you loading and was it pre-ordered or were you
simply shopping?
Loading/collecting is an exemption to the restriction but for
this a vehicle must have been essential for the carriage of the
item, you should have been parked as close as feasible and not
been there longer than necessary.
Do your facts fit?
As regards the CEO, the PCN recites both reasons why this type
of PCN may be served i.e. prevention and driving away before
they'd finished preparing. It's not all about preventing
service. IMO, it's inevitable that the CEO's notes are clear on
the circumstances and these support the authority issuing the
PCN, therefore it's going to be your word against theirs.
Your photos and account aren't clear. As you were obliged to
park, collect and depart smartly I'm surprised you had time to
photograph epaulettes. But it's your account and you were there.
#Post#: 50120--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, parked in restricted street, Cranley Road Ilford
IG1
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: December 16, 2024, 1:11 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
'Officer not prevented' from serving a PCN is a fairly common
appeal at the tribunal and often upheld if appellants have a
personal hearing and are credible to the adjudicator.
Sounds like you have good grounds on this and possibly the
loading exemption.
#Post#: 50168--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, parked in restricted street, Cranley Road Ilford
IG1
DIR By: buscalls
Date: December 17, 2024, 3:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
@HCAndersen I was collecting a bathtub from the plumbing shop
and hence parked as close as possible. The vehicle was visible
from the shops side window and when I was at the till I saw the
CEO and rushed out to move the vehicle. While stuck because of
the traffic I asked the CEO from the vehicle of I can stay here
because loading large item and he said I had to park at rear
which was obviously occupied at the time.
I took photo of his epaulette because earlier this year I had a
CEO near my vehicle when I was in a parked bay and sat in the
vehicle trying to figure out Ringgo because the parking machine
was out of order. He didn't affix any PCN nor was prevented
from doing so but then I received a PCN by post! After that I
thought best to take photo of his epaulette if anything similar
happens as same area which now has.
#Post#: 50182--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, parked in restricted street, Cranley Road Ilford
IG1
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: December 17, 2024, 4:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If the bathtub was preordered I can't see how the loading
exemption could fail. But your reps need redrafting - have you
sent anything?
#Post#: 50194--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, parked in restricted street, Cranley Road Ilford
IG1
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: December 17, 2024, 6:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
'He didn't affix any PCN nor was prevented from doing so but
then I received a PCN by post!'
Whether he was prevented or not is your opinion. It might be
right or otherwise, but it's not an objective fact and IMO you
need to break down what transpired into smaller events.
As regards 'he said I had to park at rear which was obviously
occupied at the time.' pl post a GSV of exactly where you were.
My inclination is to say that as loading is an exemption(where
is your receipt and did you pre-order etc...you haven't yet
dealt with this point)then whether the exemption applies is the
key. I don't think that the exemption can be disapplied by a CEO
simply because in their opinion you should have parked
off-street. There are some off-street parking areas around my
way which I wouldn't drive into if you paid me, their surfaces
are a hazard.
You would also add that on the face of it the PCN has been
served out of time because more than 28 days have expired
between the dates of contravention and service. It is NOT your
task to reason why, it's the authority's burden to prove that
they were entitled to serve 'late' ... because it's hired and
they notified the keeper that reps to the effect that the
vehicle was hired were served less than 28 days ago. Proof on
their part(copy of NoA to hire company), not assertion.
#Post#: 50879--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, parked in restricted street, Cranley Road Ilford
IG1
DIR By: buscalls
Date: December 23, 2024, 12:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I submitted reps as below and received letter rejecting the reps
(see link below). Noticed that on the "Your right to appeal"
guidance page the fourth bullet point is incomplete. Pointing
out in case it is technically wrong. Otherwise would appreciate
thoughts on whether to take this further.
"The vehicle was parked with hazards on next to a plumbing store
for loading of large, bulky items. There is no signage relating
to the location parked not permitting this activity.
Furthermore the PCN alleges vehicle was driven away before CEO
had finished preparing PCN or was prevented from serving. I
have photos as attached showing that there was traffic on the
road which clearly would have prevented the vehicle from being
driven away. Further the PCN photos show me approaching vehicle
to enter. Therefore if CEO wanted to serve PCN in person or
affix to vehicle there was ample opportunity to do so. I cannot
understand why this PCN was raised and what motivation
CEO/London Borough of Redbridge had for stating false
information on the PCN that vehicle was driven away or CEO was
prevented from serving. Therefore I request the PCN be
rescinded with immediate effect. I look forward to your
confirmation of the same."
HTML https://ibb.co/vJdnk88
#Post#: 50898--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, parked in restricted street, Cranley Road Ilford
IG1
DIR By: buscalls
Date: December 23, 2024, 2:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm a doofus didn't see the last two comments on the second
page!
Unfortunately didn't pick up these points (receipt, out of time)
in my reps. Should I still appeal based on the reps made?
#Post#: 50899--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, parked in restricted street, Cranley Road Ilford
IG1
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: December 23, 2024, 2:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Well, if you don't follow our advice you're going to end in the
brown stuff ! HOwever, if you are OK to risk the full PCN
penalty, then register an appeal now at London Tribunals.
Loading is an exemption to the yellow line and I would think a
bathtup is sufficiently bulky to be a reason for parking
close-by. It is this, or cough-up the £65; it's up to you.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 7
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page