DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 9456--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest - 12w Parked in a residents space - York Road
E10 - Covered sign
DIR By: tommytbone
Date: November 7, 2023, 4:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Frustratingly, I can’t find my saved document for this
representation, so I’ve tried to recreate what I sent below.
I’ll add pictures I added to the appeal too + one annotated to
represent where i parked and where the covered sign was, you can
also see the visible sign across the street that i wrongly
followed. I hope this helps your guidance and again, let me
thank you for your support here.
I referenced the below parts of the traffic act in some sort of
similar wording below, whilst referencing the specifics of this
incident.
Inadequate Signage Visibility: According to the Traffic Signs
Regulations and General Directions 2016, it is a legal
requirement that parking signage is clearly visible and provides
motorists with sufficient notice of parking restrictions. Upon
entering the location, I could not identify any clear and
conspicuous signage indicating the parking restrictions or the
requirement to display a valid parking permit. The signage in
question was either absent, obscured, or placed in a manner that
made it virtually impossible for any reasonable driver to notice
and comprehend the parking regulations in effect.
Non-Compliance with Regulatory Standards: The Department for
Transport's Traffic Signs Manual stipulates clear guidelines for
parking signage, ensuring that they meet specific standards in
terms of visibility, positioning, and legibility. It is my
contention that the signage at the location in question fails to
meet these standards, as it did not provide clear, visible, and
unambiguous information about the parking restrictions. This
lack of compliance with the regulatory standards raises concerns
about the validity of the PCN.
I also described how the changing nature of the local parking
restrictions have made it very difficult to understand the
rules. As on a 50m stretch of road there are 4 signs and 3 are
mon-sat 10-4pm and one is Mon-fri 10-4pm (it was this one that I
looked at as it was clearly visible 2 metres away from my car,
albeit on the other side of the road. All signs in this area
were mon-fri 10-4pm about 1-2 years ago, then changes started to
occur. The street where this occurred is a small connecting road
between two residential streets, I felt it was reasonable to
assume all parking bays were consistent with each other and as
the other closest sign for my side was complete blocked by
trees, and as the next one was about 150ft away, and unvisable
from my parking location, I made this assumption.
As a side to my representation, I sent a information request to
enquire when the signs were last checked for visibility. They
responded it was earlier that year and it was felt that they met
standards. As of today 6 months later, the sign is now even more
covered by overgrown branches, so continued disregard for
responsibility.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 9962--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest - 12w Parked in a residents space - York Road
E10 - Covered sign
DIR By: tommytbone
Date: November 12, 2023, 2:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
Wondering if anyone has any suggestions for my representation
since receiving the new NTO? Be a big help if so!
Thanks
#Post#: 10235--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest - 12w Parked in a residents space - York Road
E10 - Covered sign
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: November 14, 2023, 4:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Wasn't this sign
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/mMnZsKXjGkSeG4HY8
just
behind where you parked? Is it still there?
#Post#: 10238--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest - 12w Parked in a residents space - York Road
E10 - Covered sign
DIR By: tommytbone
Date: November 14, 2023, 4:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> Wasn't this sign
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/mMnZsKXjGkSeG4HY8<br
/>just behind where you parked? Is it still there?
>
--- End Quote ---
No, it must have been removed. Here's a pic of the post taken
from my car at the time. You can see the black post to the left
as I enter the road
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 10239--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest - 12w Parked in a residents space - York Road
E10 - Covered sign
DIR By: tommytbone
Date: November 14, 2023, 4:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
That's really interesting though, as gmaps streetview is from
april 2022 and the sign across from where I parked shows as
mon-sat, but is now the only mon-fri one on the street. So
within two years it's gone from mon-fri to mon-sat back to
mon-fri.
They've also removed the one you spotted on the left hand side
as you enter the road.
I also notice that the tree is covering the sign the year before
too.
#Post#: 10490--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest - 12w Parked in a residents space - York Road
E10 - Covered sign
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: November 17, 2023, 6:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Can you go back and get us a picture showing this angle?
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/iQTY7Cgc8XR3Vx5n8
If you can, that would make the case open and shut.
#Post#: 10492--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest - 12w Parked in a residents space - York Road
E10 - Covered sign
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: November 17, 2023, 6:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: tommytbone link ---
>
> [quote author=cp8759 link=topic=517.msg10235#msg10235
date=1700000502]
> Wasn't this sign
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/mMnZsKXjGkSeG4HY8<br
/>just behind where you parked? Is it still there?
>
--- End Quote ---
No, it must have been removed. Here's a pic of the post taken
from my car at the time. You can see the black post to the left
as I enter the road
[/quote]
You can see a small unpainted part of the pole where the sign
should be. Obviously the pole was painted after the sign was put
up so they missed a bit.
#Post#: 10505--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest - 12w Parked in a residents space - York Road
E10 - Covered sign
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: November 18, 2023, 5:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
There's fault on both sides here, yours and the council's, so if
it got to adjudication based upon what is known and how it's
been presented to date in your initial reps then IMO the outcome
would not be open and shut.
You parked; you knew you were within a marked parking place and
yet you did not look diligently for an applicable traffic sign
but instead apparently looked across the road where a parking
place had a Mon-Fri restriction and guessed/hoped/wished this
applied to where you were parked.
Your initial reps included the following:
..on a 50m stretch of road there are 4 signs and 3 are mon-sat
10-4pm and one is Mon-fri 10-4pm (it was this one that I looked
at as it was clearly visible 2 metres away from my car, albeit
on the other side of the road. All signs in this area were
mon-fri 10-4pm about 1-2 years ago, then changes started to
occur. The street where this occurred is a small connecting road
between two residential streets, I felt it was reasonable to
assume all parking bays were consistent with each other.....??
'There are 4 signs' So why did you consult one which, as the
holder of a driving licence, you are presumed to know did not
apply to where you were parked? And when did the knowledge of 4
signs i.e. 3 within your bay, come to your attention? Your whole
defence is based upon the invisibility of a sign, but if you
have acknowledged knowing it was there before you parked, where
does this leave your defence? I'm simply looking at what you've
already submitted.
From the council's perspective, the CEO's traffic sign photo
shows the one further from your car which implicitly accepts
that the visibility of the nearer was compromised for their
purposes, so why not for yours? And the fact it was the further
as opposed to furthest is because there were only 2 in situ(not
3 as you stated in your reps) and GSV shows that a traffic sign
had been displayed closer to your car in plain sight for some
time and IMO as regards signs this should be your focus.
The third, middle, sign is a very recent addition because when
the parking place was introduced in 2012 the council sited only
2 signs, one at either end. However, in 2020 the council decided
to erect a third sign on a pre-existing column, paradoxically at
a time when the overgrowth from the garden evergreen tree
immediately behind - whose relentless march from within a garden
to enveloping the footway can be seen in GSV - was guaranteed to
obscure it. The sign behind your car has been in situ
continuously since 2012 except for a short period in 2019,
therefore the council, quite correctly, attach importance to its
presence because it is the first one in the bay and alerts a
driver to the restrictions. Its absence for a short period could
perhaps be excused because there are 2 other signs, however,
when the closer of these is itself obscured, in this case by a
tree, this leaves only one sign potentially visible, nearly 40
metres away. The first sign was missing on the day...why has the
council allowed this to be is a line of defence I would consider
for formal reps hoping as a minimum to elicit a nonsense
rejection which could swing an adjudicator to your side.
But there are some who would think: you parked; you failed to
make any attempt to look for an applicable traffic sign; it's
your fault.
#Post#: 10638--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest - 12w Parked in a residents space - York Road
E10 - Covered sign
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: November 19, 2023, 2:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> But there are some who would think: you parked; you failed to
make any attempt to look for an applicable traffic sign; it's
your fault.
>
--- End Quote ---
As far as I can work out, there are three applicable signs for
the bay where he parked, one was missing (pending the photo I
asked for), one was obscured by vegetation, and one was far away
and out of sight.
A motorist who parks and gets out of his car is required to look
for signs that are visible, he is not required to walk out of
sight of his car (after all a CEO might come along and issue a
PCN) nor is he required to look behind leaves, branches, bushes
and so on.
If none of the signs were visible, the contravention did not
occur. The fact that the motorist might have incorrectly relied
on an irrelevant sign on the other side of the road would not
alter that.
#Post#: 11087--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest - 12w Parked in a residents space - York Road
E10 - Covered sign
DIR By: tommytbone
Date: November 24, 2023, 7:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> Can you go back and get us a picture showing this angle?
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/iQTY7Cgc8XR3Vx5n8
>
> If you can, that would make the case open and shut.
>
--- End Quote ---
Sorry for the delay in response but photos taken last night
attached.
[attachment deleted by admin]
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page