Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

newham council parking ticket contravention 26


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4337 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Ok people, new to this but hoping I can get away with this one!

I received a ticket for parking in a place I have parked in for years at a football match.

The part of the 26 that effects e is 50cm the kerbs.

I was parked in a dead end street and was touching the end kerb.

It meant that the was 3 cars in a line, but it was a dead end street with bollards in front?

Does it have to be the side kerb that I am touching?

IMG_0075.jpg

IMG_0074.jpg

 

its worth noting that the green jag also got a ticket...

 

Any ideas people... thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who issued the ticket... council or Private Parking Company?

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like you were considered to be parked in the middle of the road (i.e. away from the kerb). I would imagine that you are supposed to be parked within 50cm of the kerb at either side of the road.

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah.. So where do you draw the line?? So a dead end street that's go 5 or 6 houses at the end, no one can park in front of? That can't be right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Code 26! Within 50ft of a curb!

 

Yes sorry, I miss-read your original post. Its also 'not in a designated parking space'. BTW it's 50cms not 50 ft! :lol:

 

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah.. So where do you draw the line?? So a dead end street that's go 5 or 6 houses at the end, no one can park in front of? That can't be right.

 

Well the offence is specific to London but you may as well appeal making you points and see what happens.

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh didn't know that. If I lose the appeal, could I pay the fine, then go small claim court against council. I'm so ****ed about this!

 

Well if you loose the appeal, there is still an opportunity to take it to PATAS. Obviously if you take it that far, you will loose any discount on the original PCN (assuming you loose of course). Taking the council to court after exhausting the appeal process is of course an option but it would involve a lot of expence with little chance of success.

 

Before you ask; http://www.patas.gov.uk/

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool, I will go to them next. I need photos of closes that have cars parking in at the end side. That will prove that it's Allowed! The end kerb surely however small is still a kerb, And the edge of a carriageway! Supposing I drove a smartcar? I could've parked that sideways where I parked? That would've been acceptable. Then again you could argue that the rules don't say a car must be parked sideways on the kerb... It's a flawed ticket

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool, I will go to them next. I need photos of closes that have cars parking in at the end side. That will prove that it's Allowed! The end kerb surely however small is still a kerb, And the edge of a carriageway! Supposing I drove a smartcar? I could've parked that sideways where I parked? That would've been acceptable. Then again you could argue that the rules don't say a car must be parked sideways on the kerb... It's a flawed ticket

 

Same rule would apply IMHO. It's the road side edge kerb that counts I think you will find.

 

 

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not just a London wide offence its in the TMA 2004 but thats beside the point. The actual contravention is parking more than 50cms from the edge of the carriageway there is no mention of kerbs in the statute. The was a key case at PATAS that stated a dead end was still the edge of the carriageway so there was in your case no contravention.

 

 

CARR V LONDON BOROUGH OF HARINGEY

Case No. : 2070469651 PCN Number: HY24262670

 

Contravention:

Vehicle parked more than 50cm (or other specified distance) from the edge of the carriageway and not within a designated parking place

STATUTORY REGISTER ENTRY:

 

 

The Parking Attendant noted all the details of Miss Carr's vehicle and recorded that this Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) was fixed to the vehicle five minutes after it was first seen. The PCN alleged that the car was parked "more than 50cm from the kerb and not within a designated parking place". The Attendant drew a sketch in the pocketbook showing the position of the car.

Miss Carr challenged the PCN on the basis that her car had been parked in a dead-end street, where she said that residents and commercial tenants used the space at the end of the street as a parking place on a daily basis. She pointed out that her vehicle was not blocking any other vehicle, and that there were no yellow lines painted in the road or any notices prohibiting parking in that space.

The Council rejected her representations, stating that her vehicle was "double-parked outside 5A Fairfield Gardens", and that double-parking is a contravention which can be enforced at any time.

In her Notice of Appeal Miss Carr rejected the allegation that her car was double-parked. She produced a photograph which she said showed her car on the day the PCN was issued, with a diagram showing the position of the car relative to other vehicles and the edges of the road. In their Case Summary the Council stated, "It is a contravention under the London Local Authorities Act 2000 to park more than 50cm from the kerb", which they said was what the Parking Attendant had recorded occurred in this case.

Whilst this contravention is commonly referred to as "double-parking", that expression does not appear in Section 5 of the London Local Authorities Act 1995, as substituted by Section 6 of the London Local Authorities Act 2000. Nor, crucially, does the word "kerb". Section 5(2) of the 1995 Act prohibits the waiting of a vehicle where:

(a) the vehicle is on the carriageway of a road and wholly or partly within a special parking area; and

(b) no part of the vehicle is within 50 centimetres of the edge of the carriageway; and © the vehicle is not wholly within a designated parking place or any other part of a road in respect of which the waiting of vehicles is specifically authorised

Looking at both the Parking Attendant's sketch and Miss Carr's sketch and photograph, it is clear that her car was parked more than 50 centimetres from the "kerb", if that is taken to mean the edge of the footway on either side of the street. It is not possible to ascertain whether or not there is an actual kerb, i.e. made up of kerbstones, across the end of the road, but this does not matter, because what is clear is that the carriageway ends just in front of where Miss Carr's car was parked. That is to say that the carriageway in this road has three edges, rather than just the normal two along the footways.

Both sketches and the photograph show Miss Carr's vehicle parked at the end of the road. In the absence of specific evidence from the Parking Attendant as to how far the front of her car was from the edge of the carriageway at the end of the road I cannot be satisfied that no part of the vehicle was within 50 centimetres of the edge of the carriageway.

Accordingly I cannot be satisfied that a contravention of Section 5 of the 1995 Act occurred. I therefore must allow this appeal.

[it would appear that the Council have been misled by their own use of the expression "double-parking", and also by choosing to use the expression "parked more than 50cm from the kerb" in the PCN itself. The wording does not accord with the Standard PCN Codes agreed by London Councils, which correctly reproduces the words of the legislation: "Vehicle parked more than 50cm from the edge of the carriageway and not within a designated parking place".]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...