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#: 60141--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Manchester City council pcn
   DIR By: Zedbee
       Date: March 1, 2025, 4:03 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi thanks for your reply.
       no works that we could see
       #Post#: 60190--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Manchester City council pcn
   DIR By: stamfordman
       Date: March 2, 2025, 6:15 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       See also this case:
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/suspended-bay-penalty-charge-notice-(mcc)/
       I would challenge this on the lines Mr Anderson puts forward but
       draft something and post here first.
       That there is no council pic of your car in relation to the sign
       is one point; the works finished another.
       #Post#: 60448--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Manchester City council pcn
   DIR By: Zedbee
       Date: March 3, 2025, 4:22 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       hi heres my first draft
       I would like to appeal this ticket on the following basis:
       The suspension sign was far away from the bay I was parked in,
       hence why there is no picture by the CEO of my car in relation
       to the suspension sign
       There were zero signs of any works being done – no works
       vehicles, no workers, no skips – this is supported by the
       pictures taken by the CEO which show no such activity
       There was no indication on the road that the bay was suspended –
       no cones, no markings
       because disabled bays are in short supply, it was reasonable to
       conclude that they had been brought back into use hence no
       cones, they were due to end on 28th Feb 2025 and my ticket was
       issued on 25th February 2025 and works had apprently concluded.
       #Post#: 60493--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Manchester City council pcn
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: March 4, 2025, 5:50 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I saw the road marking 'Disabled' and parked as seen in the
       CEO's photos. I displayed my BB and clock and left. I did not
       look at the traffic sign because my stay was going to be short
       enough to fall within any BB restriction. I returned to find the
       PCN. I then looked at the traffic sign post and saw the
       suspension notice. This stated that the 3 bays which comprised
       this parking place were suspended from ** to 28 Feb. due to
       'works'.
       The CEO's photos show that the area was absolutely clear of any
       works or associated paraphernalia, including the road surface
       having been made safe for vehicles to park, and that the purpose
       of the suspension had clearly ceased. This is hardly surprising
       given the extended period of the suspension (over 4 months) i.e.
       whoever was undertaking the works would have given themselves a
       safety buffer of time when applying for the suspension.
       I suggest that this is a case of left and right hands within the
       council not co-ordinating their activities i.e. whoever
       authorised this suspension had lost sight of the council's
       obligation to maximise the availability of these disabled spaces
       and had not checked whether the legal (Traffic Regulation Order)
       basis under which the council was permitted to suspend the space
       by the simple **** of signs existed on 25 Feb.(simply paying the
       fee does not satisfy the council's policy criterion of need) and
       the CEO simply applied a date perspective.
       In summary, the only power under which a parking place may be
       suspended by officers derives from the TRO which requires that
       specified conditions must  be met before a bay may be suspended.
       The concomitant of this is that when this condition ceases to
       apply then the suspension has no legal effect. The **** of signs
       is simply a subsequent requirement and of itself is not evidence
       that a lawful suspension is in place.
       I submit that the contravention did not occur and that the PCN
       must therefore be cancelled.
       Is my take.
       Edit- by way of example, see paras. 28 and 30 of one of MCC's
       TROs:
  HTML https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/TRO/Manchester/MC232.pdf
       #Post#: 62433--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Manchester City council pcn
   DIR By: Zedbee
       Date: March 13, 2025, 6:26 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       as expected they have refused a my representation, I assume i
       wait for notice to keeper and then appeal again and take it
       adjudicator.  what do you guys think the prospect of me
       succeeding is?
       #Post#: 62439--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Manchester City council pcn
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: March 13, 2025, 7:39 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You should succeed because once the reason for the suspension
       ceases, (the works), the suspension has no effect, and any PCNs
       issued are hence void. However, such is council ignorance of the
       law on this that they will refuse all your reps until you get
       them in front of an adjudicator.
       #Post#: 62468--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Manchester City council pcn
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: March 14, 2025, 6:13 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Their rejection letter pl.
       #Post#: 62471--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Manchester City council pcn
   DIR By: Zedbee
       Date: March 14, 2025, 6:27 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       hi sorry here is their reply
       [attachment deleted by admin]
       #Post#: 70276--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Manchester City council pcn
   DIR By: Zedbee
       Date: May 6, 2025, 12:01 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi I would like to thank you for the below.  Manchester Council
       dropped it at Adjudication and so I got my email today that its
       not contested and has been dropped.  So massive thanks
       --- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
       >
       > I saw the road marking 'Disabled' and parked as seen in the
       CEO's photos. I displayed my BB and clock and left. I did not
       look at the traffic sign because my stay was going to be short
       enough to fall within any BB restriction. I returned to find the
       PCN. I then looked at the traffic sign post and saw the
       suspension notice. This stated that the 3 bays which comprised
       this parking place were suspended from ** to 28 Feb. due to
       'works'.
       >
       > The CEO's photos show that the area was absolutely clear of
       any works or associated paraphernalia, including the road
       surface having been made safe for vehicles to park, and that the
       purpose of the suspension had clearly ceased. This is hardly
       surprising given the extended period of the suspension (over 4
       months) i.e. whoever was undertaking the works would have given
       themselves a safety buffer of time when applying for the
       suspension.
       >
       > I suggest that this is a case of left and right hands within
       the council not co-ordinating their activities i.e. whoever
       authorised this suspension had lost sight of the council's
       obligation to maximise the availability of these disabled spaces
       and had not checked whether the legal (Traffic Regulation Order)
       basis under which the council was permitted to suspend the space
       by the simple **** of signs existed on 25 Feb.(simply paying the
       fee does not satisfy the council's policy criterion of need) and
       the CEO simply applied a date perspective.
       >
       > In summary, the only power under which a parking place may be
       suspended by officers derives from the TRO which requires that
       specified conditions must  be met before a bay may be suspended.
       The concomitant of this is that when this condition ceases to
       apply then the suspension has no legal effect. The **** of signs
       is simply a subsequent requirement and of itself is not evidence
       that a lawful suspension is in place.
       >
       > I submit that the contravention did not occur and that the PCN
       must therefore be cancelled.
       >
       > Is my take.
       >
       > Edit- by way of example, see paras. 28 and 30 of one of MCC's
       TROs:
  HTML https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/TRO/Manchester/MC232.pdf
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       *****************************************************
       Page 2 of 2
   DIR Previous Page