Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Regarding a driver, that HAS paid for parking but input an incorrect Vehicle Registration Number.   This is an easy mistake to make, especially if a driver has access to more than one vehicle. First of all, upon receiving an NTK/PCN it is important to check that the Notice fully complies with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 before deciding how to respond of course. The general advice is NOT to appeal to the Private Parking Company as, for example, you may identify yourself as driver and in certain circumstances that could harm your defence at a later stage. However, after following a recent thread on this subject, I have come to the conclusion that, in the case of inputting an incorrect Vehicle Registration Number, which is covered by “de minimis” it may actually HARM your defence at a later stage if you have not appealed to the PPC at the first appeal stage and explained that you DID pay for parking and CAN provide proof of parking, it was just that an incorrect VRN was input in error. Now, we all know that the BPA Code of Practice are guidelines from one bunch of charlatans for another bunch of charlatans to follow, but my thoughts are that there could be problems in court if a judge decides that a motorist has not followed these guidelines and has not made an appeal at the first appeal stage, therefore attempting to resolve the situation before it reaches court. From BPA Code of Practice: Section 17:  Keying Errors B) Major Keying Errors Examples of a major keying error could include: • Motorist entered their spouse’s car registration • Motorist entered something completely unrelated to their registration • Motorist made multiple keying errors (beyond one character being entered incorrectly) • Motorist has only entered a small part of their VRM, for example the first three digits In these instances we would expect that such errors are dealt with appropriately at the first appeal stage, especially if it can be proven that the motorist has paid for the parking event or that the motorist attempted to enter their VRM or were a legitimate user of the car park (eg a hospital patient or a patron of a restaurant). It is appreciated that in issuing a PCN in these instances, the operator will have incurred charges including but not limited to the DVLA fee and other processing costs therefore we believe that it is reasonable to seek to recover some of these costs by making a modest charge to the motorist of no more than £20 for a 14-day period from when the keying error was identified before reverting to the charge amount at the point of appeal. Now, we know that the "modest charge" is unenforceable in law, however, it would be up to the individual if they wanted to pay and make the problem go away or in fact if they wanted to contest the issue in court. If the motorist DOES appeal to the PPC explaining the error and the PPC rejects the appeal and the appeal fails, the motorist can use that in his favour at court.   Defence: "I entered the wrong VRN by mistake Judge, I explained this and I also submitted proof of payment for the relevant parking period in my appeal but the PPC wouldn't accept that"   If the motorist DOES NOT appeal to the PPC in the first instance the judge may well use that as a reason to dismiss the case in the claimant's favour because they may decide that they had the opportunity to resolve the matter at a much earlier stage in the proceedings. It is my humble opinion that a motorist, having paid and having proof of payment but entering the wrong VRN, should make an appeal at the first appeal stage in order to prevent problems at a later stage. In this instance, I think there is nothing to be gained by concealing the identity of the driver, especially if at a later stage, perhaps in court, it is said: “I (the driver) entered the wrong VRN.” Whether you agree or not, it is up to the individual to decide …. but worth thinking about. Any feedback, especially if you can prove to the contrary, gratefully received.
    • Women-only co-working spaces are part of the new hybrid working landscape, but they divide opinion.View the full article
    • The music streaming service reports record profits of over €1bn (£860m) after laying off 1500 staff.View the full article
    • deed?  you mean consent order you and her signed? concluding the case as long as you nor she break it's conditions signed upto? dx  
    • Well tbh that’s good news and something she can find out for herself.  She has no intention of peace.  I’m going to ask the thread stays open a little longer.   It seems she had not learned that I am just not the one!!!!  plus I have received new medical info from my vet today.   To remain within agreement, I need to generally ask for advice re:  If new medical information for the pup became apparent now - post agreement signing, that added proof a second genetic disease (tested for in those initial tests in the first case but relayed incorrectly to me then ), does it give me grounds for asking a court to unseal the deed so I can pursue this new info….. if she persists in being a pain ? If generally speaking, a first case was a cardiac issue that can be argued as both genetic and congenital until a genetic test is done and then a second absolute genetic only disease was then discovered, is that deemed a new case or grounds for unsealing? Make sense ?   This disease is only ever genetic!!!!   Rather more damning and indisputable proof of genetic disease breeding with no screening yk prevent.   The vet report showing this was uploaded in the original N1 pack.   Somehow rekeyed as normal when I was called with the results.   A vet visit today shows they were not normal and every symptom he has had reported in all reports uploaded from day one are related to the disease. 
  • 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
      • 161 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

Parking ticket - Whilst loading in Loading bay


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4355 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

Few months back I was buying some weight lifting gear from Argos. There is a loading bay 50m away. I parked there and opened my boot ready, as it would have been impossible to carry the gear round town.

 

I got to Argos and realised (as soon as I walked in) that I had left my wallet in the car. I went back to the car (less than 1 minute after parking) to find a traffic warden taking photos etc.

 

I explained what I was doing, and that I was "loading" my car with heavy weight lifting equipment, and asked why I was getting a ticket?

 

She told me I had the "wrong type of vehicle" and that if it was an estate car I would have probably been ok.

 

I have since paid the ticket.

 

I was annoyed that the warden was obviously hiding out somewhere, and the lack of discression that they were willing to use (It was clearly proveable that I was collecting heavy weight lifting equipment). My only alternative would have been to park on double yellows outside of Argos whilst I nipped in.

 

Just to help get this off my chest, [edit]

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "wrong type of vehicle" quote is absolute crap.

 

There is nothing whatsoever in parking legislation that restricts loading/unloading exemptions to any class of vehicle.

 

There may be a natural presumption by TWs and PAs in favour of commercial vehicles, this is not backed up by law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many years ago the tax disc for all cars was issued as "Private". To avoid this sort of confusion almost all cars these days are taxed as "PLG" or Private/Light Goods. You are therefore taxed to carry Light Goods and are eligible to load your vehicle subject to normal loading restrictions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Actually there is a difference in private and commercial vehicles, different rules apply when loading.

 

I got a ticket thrown out when I accidentally left wifes my blue disabled badge in car when loading car in a loading only area the warden booked me when I was loading a brand new electric wheelchair for my wife.

 

Warden would not even discuss this was just arrogant.

 

dpick:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually there is a difference in private and commercial vehicles, different rules apply when loading.

 

Maybe in the approach of councils, but absolutely not in law.

 

Legally, there is no difference between the two; councils just tend to be a little more lenient with obviously commercial vehicles

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tlusnoc

Loading and unloading bays are intended for commercial vehicles only and not for shoppers. If everyone decided to park in these, then how are deliveries going to be made. And it is no good saying I will only be 5 minutes etc., for if a wagon turns up, where is the driver meant to park in the meantime?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tlusnoc
Actually, they're intended for loading and unloading by any vehicle, commercial or otherwise. It is the activity being carried out that determines whether the vehicle may be parked there, not the type of vehicle.

 

 

That is totally wrong, they are for the delivery and collection by commercial vehicles (that can include a car) and are not intended for shoppers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

tlusnoc, please post the regulation that states that all loading bays are for commercial goods only. This may clarify your assertion. Until then, I'm afraid I have to go with patdavies in that private vehicles are classed as Private/Light Goods.

-----

Click the scales if I've been useful! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Loading and unloading bays are intended for commercial vehicles only and not for shoppers. If everyone decided to park in these, then how are deliveries going to be made. And it is no good saying I will only be 5 minutes etc., for if a wagon turns up, where is the driver meant to park in the meantime?

 

The same place that most of them park when another shop's wagon is there

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is totally wrong, they are for the delivery and collection by commercial vehicles (that can include a car) and are not intended for shoppers.

 

Eh, no, it's not totally wrong. In fact, it's perfectly correct. I did not say that a loading bay is intended for shoppers. I said that it is intended for loading / unloading. I think you'll find a clue in the name... :)

 

There are a number of reasons why a loading bay would be used for non-commercial purposes. For example, your statement implies that somebody would not be allowed to turn up in a van and unload new furniture for their flat because that is not commercial use.

 

I think you'll find that your statement is the one that is 'totally wrong'...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Parking Adjudicator has examined loading with respect to parking enforcement in the decisions reported as Jane Packer Flowers and Others on 19/07/97.

It is quite clear from the decision in Jane Packer Flowers and Others that private cars are capable of loading for these purposes and that loading does not have to be of a commercial nature, and that loading includes the period away from the vehicle and that a period of several minutes is not unreasonable.

It is also clear for the Parking adjudicators decision in Douglas v Brent (PAS case No. 1960031276) that, since the driver had right to park for the purposes of loading, the burden of proof lies with Transport for London (substitute for your LA) to prove that the driver was not loading .

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Thanks you guys for your help. Just to follow up, I have sent the following letter. I have been eMailed back, asking for a postal address to which they can respond. I will keep you posted, obviously:

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

On 05/06/2006 I received a parking ticket whilst loading my car in the designated loading bay, West Avenue, Clacton on Sea.

I spoke to the traffic warden at the time, making it clear that I was loading my car with heavy weight lifting equipment that I had previously bought from the Argos store shortly before, and that I had moved my car into the loading bay simply just to collect it.

I was told by the traffic warden that I had the “wrong type” of vehicle to use a loading bay - I will point out that the taxation class of my vehicle is PLG, therefore I am entitled to carry Light Goods. Also, it has recently come to my attention that the Parking Adjudicator has examined loading with respect to parking enforcement in the decisions reported as Jane Packer Flowers and Others on 19/07/97.

It is quite clear from the decision in “Jane Packer Flowers and Others” that private cars are capable of loading for these purposes, and that loading does not have to be of a commercial nature, and that loading includes the period away from the vehicle and that a period of several minutes is not unreasonable. (Details of this case can be found here: http://www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk/user_documents/LOADADJ.pdf )

Also, I quote, “It is sometimes said (e.g. in the Parking Attendants Handbook) that shopping is not goods. This is an oversimplification. Certainly a person buying small items is not covered (Sprake - v - Tester ) …However, the fact that goods could be described as "shopping" does not prevent the exemption applying if the other criteria are met - for example, if the goods are heavy and bulky their actual transfer to a vehicle would be "loading" under the examples given in Sprake - v - tester. And if a motorist for example brings his car round to pick up the goods once a purchase has been made” as in this case “…that would also be a "collection" provided the goods warranted the use of a vehicle (Richards - v McKnight).”

Taking this information into account, I would like to bring to your attention that the ticket was issued unfairly and not warranted, and on this basis request a full refund. (Copy of digital Receipt below).

I look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good letter - very concise and leaves little room for dispute :)

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could someone in Wood Green Haringey London check what the signs are around the Shopping City area of Green Lanes. Because they do say something like, 'Heavy goods vehicle loading'. Thus Private cars would be the wrong sort. This assumes that such a sign has a legal status and isn't just made up by the council.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could someone in Wood Green Haringey London check what the signs are around the Shopping City area of Green Lanes. Because they do say something like, 'Heavy goods vehicle loading'. Thus Private cars would be the wrong sort. This assumes that such a sign has a legal status and isn't just made up by the council.

 

Your right a lot of loading bays will have a sign post along side stating "Loading/unloading by commercial vehicles only"

Being a lorry driver i see it all the time especially in towns where there is no enforcement. 99% of cars parked in loading bays are shoppers and not collect heavy things from argos. I have often double parked along side offending cars and they are always bloody shoppers - If people were not so lazy then there would never be an issue with loading bays.

Halifax Bank - Owed £1599

23/3 - Data Protection Act sent

24/5 - Data Protection Act finally arrived

25/5 - Demand for repayment sent

04/10 Court bundle filed with court and Halifax

29/10 STAY ISSUED

JAN 08 - Currently being harrased by debt collectors!

Mar 08 - New DCA - Stopped in there tracks

Jun 08 - And another

Jul 08 - Complaint made to HBOS

Nov 08 - My accounts been sold to a DCA

Jan 09 - New complaint issued against HBOS

Mar 09 - Halifax re-aquired the debt

Apr 09 - Applying for Hardship.

 

at least they removed 2 defaults in selling accounts! :D

 

I dont not claim to know everything and any advice i give should be treated as MY opinion.

 

If ive been helpful tip the scales!

or better still

DONATE TO CAG - every tenner helps!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I got hit by a ticket while parking in a loading bay on the main London Road at Thornton Heath Pond. The thing is as I parked I noticed to femail wardens right across the road. they saw me park. I waited to see if they would either move me on or shouyt at least to say that this was the wrong place to park. They walked on without so much as a wink. Anyway I walked into the local KFC to get lunch. every now and then I looked out to see if the wardens were there. I was in the KFC about three minutes, came out and saw them swiftly write up the ticket as I was getting into the car. They had obviuosly hid out of my line of sight to issue the ticket. B****es! However since looking at this thread I will check the status and wording of the ticket to see if I can also get this waived, or thrown out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

just as an aside, here in southport there was a bay with a sign that said"coaches only 15 minutes parking" .someone parked a private car there and received a ticket which he took all the way to to NPAS and they ruled in his favour because the council had ommited the full stop after "only", implying cars were not restricted!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as an aside, here in Southport there was a bay with a sign that said "coaches only 15 minutes parking". Someone parked a private car there and received a ticket which he took all the way to to NPAS and they ruled in his favour because the council had omitted the full stop after "only", implying cars were not restricted!

 

Lovely.

 

Shows that being a stickler for correct punctuation does sometimes pay off.

 

Good spelling also helps - I took the liberty of correcting yours in the quote :)

On some things I am very knowledgeable, on other things I am stupid. Trouble is, sometimes I discover that the former is the latter or vice versa, and I don't know this until later - maybe even much later. Read anything I write with the above in mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I Received a response re:this thread:

 

"I am writing with regards to your recent correspondence received on 22/5/07, in relation to the above penalty charge notice.

 

This notice was paid and fully closed on 6/6/06, and is past the period of challenge. As such, I regret to inform you that we are unable to reconsider this matter.

 

Yours sincerely....."

 

...So not only does it seem that they took my money unfairly by issuing an invalid ticket and refusing to listen to my reasoning at the time - but are now saying that because it is paid you cant ask for it back! (Regardless of validity or not!).

 

What do you guys think...?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...