gopher.createaforum.com/1/forums/ftla/p/8046

DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 89816--------------------------------------------------
Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place not
designated for that vehicle.
DIR By: IanO
Date: September 13, 2025, 1:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello!
I parked in Kingston (London), specifically at The Triangle, to
drop off a heavy parcel. It's a small road of around 8 bays. As
you enter you see signs mentioning that the parking is free for
one hour. As the first 6 bays were taken I parked in one of the
last two bays.
I was surprised to see a PCN when I returned (I was gone for
only 3 minutes). Apparently these last two bays are mix use
parking bays (loading only and 1 hour free) depending on the
time of day. The CEO was still there when I returned. The Goods
Only vehicle loading is applicable up to 12pm, after which there
is free parking. I had parked at 11:40am.
My points of contention are:
1) The sign is not parallel to the road. It is slightly offset,
unhelpfully pointing away from the bay, and therefore was not
visually impactful or obvious, particularly in light of the
earlier signs for the other bays.
2) the top of the sign referring to goods only vehicles was
partially obscured by the hanging flower pot right next to it
3) The CEO was still there, I made the above two points to him
and also told him that a 'Loading Only' marking on the ground
would be more useful and visually impactful. It was he who
pointed out to me that the Loading Only markings are there, but
virtually wiped out. He even suggested I should take a photo of
it and use it in my appeal if I wish.
Do I have any grounds for appeal please, or is this a lost
cause? In particular are the Loading Only markings on the road
compulsory or not? I couldn't tell from the Traffic Signs Manual
(see figure 13-52 on page 172):
HTML https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c78f895e5274a0ebfec719b/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-03.pdf
Front and back of PCN:
HTML https://ibb.co/k2qJ39Gx
and
HTML https://ibb.co/PGCwppSV

Picture 1 from CEO:
HTML https://ibb.co/s9pPVxpk
Picture 2 from CEO:
HTML https://ibb.co/FLgJtn1N
Google Satellite view showing my direction of travel and where I
parked:
HTML https://ibb.co/WQfbyHq

Image showing the badly faded Loading Only marking circled in
red
HTML https://ibb.co/0Rw61LYn
Image showing the partially obscure top plate, this is the one
not parallel to the bays:
HTML https://ibb.co/GfwLhvxs
Two signs like this visible immediately before the bay I parked
in: https:/ibb.co/RGz0dSP2
#Post#: 89818--------------------------------------------------
Re: Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place
not designated for that vehicle.
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: September 13, 2025, 2:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
GSV link to the location please, telling us exactly where you
parked.
#Post#: 89819--------------------------------------------------
Re: Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place
not designated for that vehicle.
DIR By: IanO
Date: September 13, 2025, 2:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi, GSV link here, the red pin is where I parked
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/h6aHxRun1QLs61ne8?g_st=ipc
#Post#: 89826--------------------------------------------------
Re: Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place
not designated for that vehicle.
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: September 13, 2025, 3:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yours is not a 'goods vehicle'.
You made a mistake, it happens.
IMO, everything else you've mentioned is not material as regards
a defence and I wouldn't risk anything on it.
But IMO you should make informal reps of the conciliatory kind
to see what happens.
#Post#: 89827--------------------------------------------------
Re: Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place
not designated for that vehicle.
DIR By: IanO
Date: September 13, 2025, 3:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks,I will make an appeal
So to be clear
1) �Loading� markings on the bay itself are optional? This would
have hands down been more noticeable and grabbed my attention
2) signs are allowed to be offset, to some extent, to the road?
For future reference this is good to know, although I�d say it�s
indicative of poor maintenance by a council.
3) it�s acceptable to put a planter next to a sign and have it
partially obscured? If I didn�t notice this sign in daylight,
I�d hate to know how people could see it at night. To me it�s
just common sense not to have a plant right next to a sign,
shame there isn�t a regulation about this.
#Post#: 89828--------------------------------------------------
Re: Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place
not designated for that vehicle.
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: September 13, 2025, 3:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hold fire. Do you want a technical appeal re the wording first?
#Post#: 89829--------------------------------------------------
Re: Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place
not designated for that vehicle.
DIR By: IanO
Date: September 13, 2025, 3:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Sure, how does that work?
#Post#: 89840--------------------------------------------------
Re: Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place
not designated for that vehicle.
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: September 13, 2025, 6:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It's always useful to look back at the views in GSV for previous
years.
In 2018, the bay is restricted to loading only 7am to 7pm, on
all days of the week, (no days on the sign means all days). So
the carriageway by the bay has Loading Only painted by the bay.
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/2V7Fv1ujMMe39sb5A
But some time between 2018 and the next GSV view of 2019, the
restriction changed, to make the restriction far less onerous.
Maybe there were local complaints. The carriageway text was
removed/painted over, and the sign one sees today applied.
Clearly the carriageway text would have been misleading for a
the new period when only loading is allowed, of 8.30am to Noon
Mon-Sat. In addition, Sundays became completely unrestricted.
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/qnFXMMzyZ33wPkDr5
The OP doesn't tell us, but it is quite clear that the sign was
not read when parking, and only read after the OP returned to
his car. When parking in a marked bay the motorist is under a
duty to establish what restrictions might apply to the bay, and
look for the sign. Here the bay is very short with room for only
two vehicles and the sign is positioned so it is easy to find.
Frankly, I see little of merit in the suggested points for
representations. Of course Hippocrates has suggested a
'technical' appeal based on wording, which I assume is the PCN.
It must be said that whilst such appeals have been won against
various councils, they were all won at the adjudicators, London
Tribunals, with the full PCN penalty in play.
#Post#: 89878--------------------------------------------------
Re: Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place
not designated for that vehicle.
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: September 14, 2025, 7:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: IanO link ---
>
> Sure, how does that work?
>
--- End Quote ---
Ref: PCN VRM
I challenge this PCN as follows:
The wording of the PCN in terms of the 28 days period is wrong
since it does not comply with Schedule 2 para. 2 @
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/schedule/2
(d)that the penalty charge must be paid within the period of 28
days beginning with the date on which the alleged contravention
occurred,
In light of this procedural impropriety please cancel the PCN.
#Post#: 92983--------------------------------------------------
Re: Kingston council Contravention code 232 - parked in a place
not designated for that vehicle.
DIR By: IanO
Date: October 6, 2025, 4:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> [quote author=IanO link=topic=8046.msg89829#msg89829
date=1757796777]
> Sure, how does that work?
>
--- End Quote ---
Ref: PCN VRM
I challenge this PCN as follows:
The wording of the PCN in terms of the 28 days period is wrong
since it does not comply with Schedule 2 para. 2 @
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/schedule/2
(d)that the penalty charge must be paid within the period of 28
days beginning with the date on which the alleged contravention
occurred,
In light of this procedural impropriety please cancel the PCN.
[/quote]
Hello, I received a standard notice of rejection to my informal
appeal here
HTML https://ibb.co/hpx30FZ
Next step is to wait for the Notice to Owner? I need to do some
digging on the London Tribunals page to see if there is a
precedent for this having been successfully challenged
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page