DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 63270--------------------------------------------------
Redbridge/Stopped On A Restrictd Bus Stop Or Stand/Outside 539
Cranbrook Rd (IG1)
DIR By: NTIAEP
Date: March 19, 2025, 11:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello Again.....it's like buses. You wait ages for one and two
arrive at the same time.
So received another PCN in the past few days, this one via the
post. Details are as follows:
PCN No: AF08832144 (redacted .pdf available here)
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/342fz0lfho7qtbgl2a53a/20250317_SAF17A_PCN_AF30678447_20250309_redacted.pdf?rlkey=9ge2lpfivflq68h77g8fy4b39&st=u1q60mjn&dl=0
Vehicle reg: SAF17A
Sep2024 GSV link
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/J7FMQeXDA3Qnn1Bm7/
HTML https://my.redbridge.gov.uk/parkingpcn/review
HTML https://my.redbridge.gov.uk/parkingpcn/review
Angle of video footage does not provide anything meaningful as
to the exact position of the car and you'll see from GSV that
the 'bottom' section Bus Stop markings have also been
deliberately 'erased' (which is still the case). FWIW, I
deliberately parked it there knowing that the Bus Stop isn't
properly marked out and even then, the front wheels wouldn't
have encroached the original road markings.
In addition, the PCN states location as: CRANBROOK ROAD (D)
which leads me to the following thread on FTLA CRANBROOK ROAD
(A) - appeal allowed
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/redbidge-council-cctv-pcn/<br
/>which was successfully represented by one of the forum
wizards.
Unless advised otherwise, I'm just tempted to respond by simply
saying that the alleged contravention didn't occur without
providing any further detail. In my initial representation, I'd
also like to state that if LBR refuse to cancel the PCN, I'll be
taking it to a tribunal and will be requesting costs.
Your advice/thoughts?
Thanks in advance - NTIAEP
P.S. Can anybody please teach me how to download or find the
link for the moving video from the LBR parking website?
#Post#: 63272--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/Stopped On A Restrictd Bus Stop Or Stand/Outside
539 Cranbrook Rd (IG1)
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: March 19, 2025, 12:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If you're sure you are clear of the stop I suggest marking up a
Maps view showing you were clear.
HTML https://i.imgur.com/FJaTr1D.gif
#Post#: 65543--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/Stopped On A Restrictd Bus Stop Or Stand/Outside
539 Cranbrook Rd (IG1)
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: April 3, 2025, 8:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Go to their website and screenshot all the hoops. Contravention
did not occur as video does not show where the Bus Stop starts
and no upright signage. Also, TSM recommends more than one
upright sign for such a stop as this.
#Post#: 65858--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/Stopped On A Restrictd Bus Stop Or Stand/Outside
539 Cranbrook Rd (IG1)
DIR By: NTIAEP
Date: April 6, 2025, 2:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
reps submitted as follows:
""""""""""
Representations (not exhaustive) against PCN AF30678447:
• The exact locus of the alleged contravention is not stated in
the PCN.
• The vehicle was within the confines of the single-yellow line
(as permitted at the time) and I put to you strict proof that
the vehicle encroached the alleged Bus Stop.
• There is no evidence of an upright sign in the video, even
more so for a Bus Stop of that length. I also take this
opportunity to refer you to the penultimate sentence contained
within section 13.24.9 of the ‘Traffic Signs Manual – Chapter 3
- Regulatory Signs’ which states: “……. Where the bus stop
marking has been extended to accommodate two or more buses, it
might be preferable to mount the sign close to the beginning of
the bay. …….”
• Notwithstanding the above, I put to you strict proof that the
markings for the alleged Bus Stop are in accordance with section
13.24.9 of the ‘Traffic Signs Manual – Chapter 3 - Regulatory
Signs’. From the ‘evidence’ that you have so far provided, it
is obvious that the markings have been deliberately
‘blacked-out’ by the council thus making them invalid rather
than due to mere wear & tear’.
• I also put you to strict proof that the camera used to capture
the alleged contravention has the correct approval and also
request the make/model of the camera.
• I make this collateral challenge in that the LBR parking
website fetters discretion because of all the boxes with grounds
which must be ticked, even before a formal representation can be
made. This is surely wholly prejudicial.
• Please also be advised that should you not cancel the PCN, I
put you on formal notice that I will be appealing this matter to
London Tribunals and will be requesting an award for costs.
""""""""""
#Post#: 65873--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/Stopped On A Restrictd Bus Stop Or Stand/Outside
539 Cranbrook Rd (IG1)
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: April 6, 2025, 4:02 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: NTIAEP link ---
>
> reps submitted as follows:
>
> """"""""""
> Representations (not exhaustive) against PCN AF30678447:
>
> • The exact locus of the alleged contravention is not stated
in the PCN.
> • The vehicle was within the confines of the single-yellow
line (as permitted at the time) and I put to you strict proof
that the vehicle encroached the alleged Bus Stop.
> • There is no evidence of an upright sign in the video, even
more so for a Bus Stop of that length. I also take this
opportunity to refer you to the penultimate sentence contained
within section 13.24.9 of the ‘Traffic Signs Manual – Chapter 3
- Regulatory Signs’ which states: “……. Where the bus stop
marking has been extended to accommodate two or more buses, it
might be preferable to mount the sign close to the beginning of
the bay. …….”
> • Notwithstanding the above, I put to you strict proof that
the markings for the alleged Bus Stop are in accordance with
section 13.24.9 of the ‘Traffic Signs Manual – Chapter 3 -
Regulatory Signs’. From the ‘evidence’ that you have so far
provided, it is obvious that the markings have been deliberately
‘blacked-out’ by the council thus making them invalid rather
than due to mere wear & tear’.
> • I also put you to strict proof that the camera used to
capture the alleged contravention has the correct approval and
also request the make/model of the camera.
> • I make this collateral challenge in that the LBR parking
website fetters discretion because of all the boxes with grounds
which must be ticked, even before a formal representation can be
made. This is surely wholly prejudicial.
> • Please also be advised that should you not cancel the PCN, I
put you on formal notice that I will be appealing this matter to
London Tribunals and will be requesting an award for costs.
> """"""""""
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 66786--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/Stopped On A Restrictd Bus Stop Or Stand/Outside
539 Cranbrook Rd (IG1)
DIR By: NTIAEP
Date: April 12, 2025, 11:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Amended reps re-submitted as advised by
[member=24]Hippocrates[/member] above and received the NoR which
can be perused at:
20250410_SAF17A_PCN_AF30678447_20250309_NoR_redacted
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/km3kxq7or3t33qed7xso2/20250410_SAF17A_PCN_AF30678447_20250309_NoR_redacted.pdf?rlkey=0muvtunk2xi6egajts0wvx8ik&st=4wiuzsnx&dl=0
Off to tribunal we go? (again)
#Post#: 66819--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/Stopped On A Restrictd Bus Stop Or Stand/Outside
539 Cranbrook Rd (IG1)
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: April 12, 2025, 3:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes. Also served/delivered issue. Shall I represent?
#Post#: 66874--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/Stopped On A Restrictd Bus Stop Or Stand/Outside
539 Cranbrook Rd (IG1)
DIR By: NTIAEP
Date: April 13, 2025, 9:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> Yes. Also served/delivered issue. Shall I represent?
>
--- End Quote ---
[member=24]Hippocrates[/member] Yes please.
Apologies for the novice question, but what's the
'served/delivered' issue?
#Post#: 66928--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/Stopped On A Restrictd Bus Stop Or Stand/Outside
539 Cranbrook Rd (IG1)
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: April 13, 2025, 4:11 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
E mail me please.
#Post#: 70837--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/Stopped On A Restrictd Bus Stop Or Stand/Outside
539 Cranbrook Rd (IG1)
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: May 10, 2025, 3:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Appeal filed after Charge Certificate already served
prematurely. Silence is golden.
Who runs this outfit? Roy Rogers and Trigger?
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page