Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
I recently received a pcn, contravention code 46 (stopped on a red route) for South Lambeth.
I ride a motorbike, and at the time in question I was travelling to Brixton. My bike was rather hot due to the driving conditions (rush-hour) so I pulled over in what I presumed was a marked bay in front of some shops (red route marked bay).
I received the PCN stating I was stopped where stopping was prohibited. I immediately contested this on two grounds:
- That I had stopped in a marked bay (and the pictures showed me clearly stopped within the bay).
- That I was there simply to allow my bike to cool down.
I received today a rejection of the representation. TFL state:
"I have noted the comments in your email and letter where you state that you pulled over as your bike had overheated. I have viewed video of the contravention from 08:53:26 to 08:54:45 and all I could see was the vehicle stationary with the rider standing by the vehicle smoking a cigarette. Whilst I understand you state the engine had overheated I must advise it is the driver's responsibility to make sure that the vehicle is road worthy and safe before the start their journey. This includes making sure enough water is in the vehicle before starting off. This being the case I am unable to cancel this penalty charge notice.
"Signs at the location where the contravention occurred O/S 47-53 SOUTH LAMBETH ROAD SW8 clearly states no stopping Monday to Saturday 7am to 7pm except parking between 10am and 4pm for a maximum of 20 minutes, no return within 40 minutes. On this occasion the contravention was noted on the 24 July 2008 at 08:54 being outside the permitted time therefore a penalty charge notice was issued."
I was stopped for less than five minutes. I didn't leave my vehicle unattended, and I thought I was in a parking zone. As it happens a further picture they sent me in the rejection letter shows a sign (though the picture isn't good enough to see the wording) - however, I am the other side of it and wouldn't have been able to read it from where I was stopped.
So... should I just bite the bullet and pay? Or should I appeal to the adjudicator? If I want to see the video now before I decide on my course of action, does the 14 day grace for the reduced penalty get delayed from when I have requested to see the video until I have actually seen it?
I have viewed video of the contravention from 08:53:26 to 08:54:45 and all I could see was the vehicle stationary with the rider standing by the vehicle smoking a cigarette. Whilst I understand you state the engine had overheated I must advise it is the driver's responsibility to make sure that the vehicle is road worthy and safe before the start their journey. This includes making sure enough water is in the vehicle before starting off. .
I love the way they just make it up as they go along. Where is that 'before setting off' in any statute, LOL.
Not sure about extension to 14 days for video viewing. At their discretion I believe - what have they said.
If video (quite short) shows you at any point doing something that might be checking the vehicle then IMV you have a case. You might also argue that such a short piece of vid evidence is not sufficient to confirm that possibility.
This is only common sense stuff and reliant on an adjudicator agreeing.
-
I remember very specifically leaning down to check the water on the bike, and also the temperature gauge (on the dash). The water level was ok, so I thought I'd just give it a few minutes before continuing. And in that few minutes I decided to have a cigarette.
I also found the reference to checks before setting off to be rather odd... I always check things like tyres, brakes, etc. (my life depends on it, I only have two wheels...). An overheating engine is difficult to check against...
I haven't asked about the video yet. In the original pcn I was offered to either request the video (at a charge of £10!!), or request a viewing at their offices (which is free, apparently). I am now looking for the original PCN as I appear to have mislaid it. I got the response rejecting my reasons today.
I got the rejection today - the "grace" period was on hold while they looked into it. What do you need to see on it? I have typed word for word the relevant part of it. The rest of it is just standard stuff regarding process. If there's anything I've missed, I'm more than happy to post it.
I got the rejection today - the "grace" period was on hold while they looked into it. What do you need to see on it? I have typed word for word the relevant part of it. The rest of it is just standard stuff regarding process. If there's anything I've missed, I'm more than happy to post it.
You didn't include the date or anything about an extended deadline?
-
Date & Time of Issue: 24/07/2008 08:54
Location of contravention: O/S 47-53 SOUTH LAMBETH ROAD SW8
Notice of Rejection dated 26 August 2008
I appealed immediately - the deadline was extended as it automatically is when you lodge an appeal. My appeal was rejected today, the text of which is posted above.
I cannot see how an overheating bike is going to cause an accident? If you noticed it was getting too hot you should have pulled off the red route and waited somewhere else. A water cooled engine actually requires airflow through the radiator to cool the coolant remaining stationary for a short period of time will not cool the engine down it will just encase the engine in a 'jacket' of hot water. The only point in stopping would be in the case of loss of coolant in which case you would have been observed topping up the header tank not smoking a cigarette.
The only point in stopping would be in the case of loss of coolant in which case you would have been observed topping up the header tank not smoking a cigarette.
Which I checked when I stopped, and there wasn't any loss, so no need to top up - I am sure this would be on the video, but would the fact that I didn't top it up make this a pointless effort? Once I'd checked I smoked a cigarette...
There is airflow through my radiator when stopped due to the fan that kicks in when the engine is too hot, hence it would have been (and was according to the temperature gauge) cooling down.
I cannot see how an overheating bike is going to cause an accident?
It's a reasonable belief to hold. If I'm driving a vehicle which is overheating, I'm pulling over as soon as I can and checking it out, because you have no way of knowing what the cause is.
And if I'd realised I was still inside a red route within the bay, I wouldn't have stopped there. There was a van parked there when I arrived, and he pulled away shortly after my stopping. I hadn't seen any markings/signs limiting the bay before I stopped (though the van was parked in front of the sign from the pictures they have sent... though all the pictures are after the van has departed...).
Date & Time of Issue: 24/07/2008 08:54
Location of contravention: O/S 47-53 SOUTH LAMBETH ROAD SW8
Notice of Rejection dated 26 August 2008
I appealed immediately - the deadline was extended as it automatically is when you lodge an appeal. My appeal was rejected today, the text of which is posted above.
Ok, that works out correct - 21 days from a fairly assumed date of service equates to 17/9. Not that statute requires it - no it's not normal for all Councils.
As, for this type of pcn that is a 'Formal Notice of Rejection (does it say so?) then your only further recourse is to PATAS. They have only extended the date for payment - unless they have offered to extend further if you want to view the video - as I asked earlier - what did they say?
So presumably they have also given you PATAS appeal forms?
-
I cannot see how an overheating bike is going to cause an accident? If you noticed it was getting too hot you should have pulled off the red route and waited somewhere else. A water cooled engine actually requires airflow through the radiator to cool the coolant remaining stationary for a short period of time will not cool the engine down it will just encase the engine in a 'jacket' of hot water. The only point in stopping would be in the case of loss of coolant in which case you would have been observed topping up the header tank not smoking a cigarette.
Fire? Fuel fire? Has a funny habit of causing mayhem and death.
-
Yes, I have the PATAS appeal forms, and that is the only course of action left to me apparently.
I'll scan the rejection later and post images. It does state "Notice of Rejection", and:
"Thank you for the representation dated the 06 August 2008 regarding the above penalty charge notice.
"I have considered your representation in accordance with the requirements of the above Act and regret to advise that you have not established grounds or suitable reason for the penalty charge notice to be cancelled. This letter is issued as a formal Notice of Rejection to your representation."
It's a reasonable belief to hold. If I'm driving a vehicle which is overheating, I'm pulling over as soon as I can and checking it out, because you have no way of knowing what the cause is.
Breaking down may be more of an excuse than avoiding an accident but overheating is not really breaking down as it is in 99.9% of cases an event that happens over a period of time not suddenly like a puncture and you would still have time to park legally. Technically being tired can cause an accident but parking on a red route to have a sleep would not be seen as 'avoiding an accident' anymore than overheating would.
PCN 46 (stopped on red route)
, contravention code 46 (stopped on a red route) for South Lambeth.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by purplepomegranite
