URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 4164--------------------------------------------------
       TFL red route parking bay postal PCN
   DIR By: HS12
       Date: August 30, 2023, 3:32 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Contravention:
       TFL red route parking bay PCN in the post.
       I was parked in a red route parking bay) at 09:55 with the OK to
       park time being 10:00-16:00, & got caught by "camera operator
       number 172 who was observing real time pictures from an approved
       device at the time stated and has been recorded on digital
       storage media".
       Location: 1424-1428 London Road SW16
       Google Maps link:
  HTML https://goo.gl/maps/VU1GF8vFQv4HERQA6
       TFL PCN letter:
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/DS9TTqm.jpeg
  HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/keycases/Red%20Route%20Panel%20Decision.pdf
       I know from 2230060716 commercial plant services vs TFL (link
       above) there has been a precedent of red route PCNs from CCTV
       delivered by post being deemed illegal/unfair.
  HTML https://content.tfl.gov.uk/myths-and-complaints-about-red-route-enforcement.pdf
       I note on this link above TFL state "The Government has
       restricted authorities’ use of CCTV for issuing PCNs for parking
       enforcement by post. However, in recognition of their strategic
       importance, the new rules do not apply to enforcement of
       critical routes such as red routes where traffic must be kept
       moving for safety reasons; therefore TfL’s use of CCTV to
       enforce red route parking contraventions remains lawful."
       I do wonder - if this goes to an independent adjudicator, would
       it depend on their thoughts about my parking intentions? It's
       probably obvious I thought I could get away with it 5 minutes
       prior to the permitted time if I kept an eye out for a warden,
       but of course I wasn't aware of the camera because there were no
       signs for it. Is it worth appealing or are they likely to come
       back with the threatening £240 fine instead of the £80 if I
       don't pay up like a good sheep?
       #Post#: 4165--------------------------------------------------
       Re: TFL red route parking bay postal PCN
   DIR By: John U.K.
       Date: August 30, 2023, 3:39 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You copied the shortened links across from your PPP post, rather
       than using 'copy link' for each individual.
       Here's the TfL myths one
  HTML https://content.tfl.gov.uk/myths-and-complaints-about-red-route-enforcement.pdf
       and here the panel decision
  HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/keycases/Red%20Route%20Panel%20Decision.pdf
       #Post#: 4185--------------------------------------------------
       Re: TFL red route parking bay postal PCN
   DIR By: ivanleo
       Date: August 30, 2023, 6:27 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: HS12 link ---
       >
       > I do wonder - if this goes to an independent adjudicator,
       would it depend on their thoughts about my parking intentions?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Your intentions are irrelevant, the tribunal applies the law to
       the facts and that's that.
       You should make representations on the basis of the panel case,
       but also keep an eye on this thread:
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/tfl-judicial-review-326/
       Also send an email to
       generaloffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk and CC
       Rule6CPRService@tfl.gov.uk
       Subject: The King on the application of Transport for London v
       London Tribunals (Environment and Traffic Adjudicators) -
       CO/2884/2023
       [indent]
       Dear Administrative Court Office,
       I am aware that Transport for London is seeking to challenge the
       decision by a panel of London Tribunals adjudicators in the case
       of Commercial Plant Services Ltd and others v Transport for
       London (2230060716, 25 May 2023). I am in receipt of an impacted
       penalty charge notice issued by Transport for London, which
       Transport for London seeks to enforce against me, I therefore
       consider that I have a direct interest in the outcome of the
       judicial review.
       I am not in a position to make a formal application on form N244
       as the irrecoverable costs would be prohibitive.
       Yours faithfully,
       [/indent]
       #Post#: 4220--------------------------------------------------
       Re: TFL red route parking bay postal PCN
   DIR By: HS12
       Date: August 31, 2023, 2:58 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Is something along the lines of this any good:
       "Dear Transport for London,
       I challenge liability on the basis of a procedural impropriety,
       specifically it is unlawful for you to serve a postal PCN in
       these circumstances. I refer you to the red route panel decision
       in Commercial Plant Services Ltd & others v Transport for London
       (2230060716, 25 May 2023) published at
       www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/keycases/Red%20Route%20Panel%20Decision.pdf
       It follows that the PCN must be cancelled.
       Yours faithfully,"
  HTML https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1dFUa8HEcUh2HyuDprMyvoP1NZ67kMZWA<br
       />- I note in this case the appeal was upheld on the basis that
       "It is only when the device is certified by the Secretary of
       State that it can be
       used for the civil enforcement of road traffic contraventions."
       Would this be worth mentioning in my appeal to TFL (with the
       risk that in this case perhaps it is an approved device)?
       And Colin did your appeal succeed?
       Thanks all for your advice!
       #Post#: 4368--------------------------------------------------
       Re: TFL red route parking bay postal PCN
   DIR By: ivanleo
       Date: September 4, 2023, 5:25 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yes what you've drafted is fine.
       You'll find Colin's thread here
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/re-tfl-red-route-parking-bay-postal-pcn/,<br
       />we have a one case one thread rule otherwise it becomes
       impossible to work out what's what.
       Anish Raj Shrestha v Transport for London was a double red line
       case, so it's not really comparable to your case and I wouldn't
       bother referencing it. However as a backup I have requested the
       make and model of the camera.
       #Post#: 7884--------------------------------------------------
       Re: TFL red route parking bay postal PCN
   DIR By: HS12
       Date: October 20, 2023, 12:15 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Response 7 weeks later, relevant parts:
       "The decision you refer to has been disputed by TfL and is now
       the subject of a Judicial Review hearing following an
       application by TfL to challenge the adjudicators decision. This
       is because we consider the adjudicators were wrong and the
       decision was unlawful. It specifically relates to an
       interpretation of Regulation 11 of the Civil Enforcement of Road
       Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines
       and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022 and we are
       satisfied the correct interpretation of Regulation 11 and The
       Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD)
       does provide traffic authorities the power to serve a PCN on the
       basis of evidence from a prescribed device for
       contraventions detected in red route bays as well as
       contraventions detected when stopped on single or double red
       lines. The road is correctly marked in accordance with the TSRGD
       with the relevant upright sign conveying the relevant
       restriction in the traffic order for that location."
       The signs being parallel to the road & therefore not legible
       without stopping seems like a no-go, as they said:
       "The Traffic Signs Manual (TSM) recommends that a red route sign
       should face the direction of oncoming traffic so that drivers
       can read the sign without stopping, however it must be clarified
       that the TSM has the status of guidance only. TfL is satisfied
       that the signs in place at the above location give motorists
       adequate information regarding the restrictions in place."
       I also added a previously fully paid red route PCN to the appeal
       on the same basis. My options now are pay or go to the
       environment & traffic adjudicators & appeal, I suppose on the
       basis that "There has been a procedural impropriety on the part
       of the Enforcement Authority". Questions:
       1. Is it worth appealing or just paying up at this point? They
       say I can still pay £80 within 14 days before it goes up to £160
       2. If I appeal & lose, will I have to pay £160 instead of £80?
       3. Will the adjudicator look at both appeals including the
       previously paid PCN & will TFL refund me the previous PCN if I
       win?
       Thank you!
       [attachment deleted by admin]
       #Post#: 7987--------------------------------------------------
       Re: TFL red route parking bay postal PCN
   DIR By: ivanleo
       Date: October 21, 2023, 11:13 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Forget about any previous PCNs, if you paid and you're past the
       28 days to appeal given in the previous notice of rejection,
       then that money is gone for good.
       There is a possibility we might get all PCNs for the 2022/23
       financial year refunded, but that is wholly outside of your
       control and we will post an announcement on the site if this
       works out (and to be honest it's likely to end up in the evening
       news if it works out).
       There is also a question around camera certification.
       Would you like me to represent you at the tribunal?
       #Post#: 8413--------------------------------------------------
       Re: TFL red route parking bay postal PCN
   DIR By: HS12
       Date: October 26, 2023, 1:29 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       If you would be happy to? I'm just a bit tentative about ending
       up having to pay £160 instead of £80 but it seems there's a good
       chance of success? I'll send off my appeal this evening under
       "procedural impropriety"?
       #Post#: 8418--------------------------------------------------
       Re: TFL red route parking bay postal PCN
   DIR By: John U.K.
       Date: October 26, 2023, 2:21 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote ---
       > I'll send off my appeal this evening under "procedural
       impropriety"?
       --- End Quote ---
       AFAIK when CP represents, he handles registering the appeal.
       Send him a PM and hold off registering until he's answered. (I
       think he may be busy with the High Court hearing today :)  )
       #Post#: 8505--------------------------------------------------
       Re: TFL red route parking bay postal PCN
   DIR By: iispartan
       Date: October 26, 2023, 6:10 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       What was the outcome of the TFL court case? I believe it was
       meant to be today (26 Oct)
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 3
   DIR Next Page