Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About sassy-lassy

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. @ Sailor Sam - the PCN included 2x still shots of my car, which were time-stamped less than a minute apart. As the code of practice states that there should be enough evidence on the PCN to confirm an offence has taken place, this is why I thought I had been stationary for under a minute. But when the CCTV arrived, it became apparent it was longer than that - 2 minutes and 8 seconds from what I observed. Given I could not even recall the alleged incident, I had taken the original PCN pictures as marking the start and finish of the time I had stopped. Cheers
  2. OK - I have received the DVD from the Council in today's post. It would appear that the 2x still shots on the PCN which suggested my car was stationary for under a minute, did not capture the total length of time involved. The DVD shows my car was stopped for 2 minutes and 8 seconds. After which, I indicated and moved into the outer lane. It also appears that my vehicle was more than 50cm from the kerb, which had a single yellow line adjoined by a narrow band approx 2ft wide of cross-hatching (which I know one is prohibited from stopping in). Just to reiterate, I cannot remember exactly what I was doing to be stationary, but I know I was unfamiliar with the route and stopped to check where I was on several occasions. There is no other reason why I would have stopped. Furthermore, as the PCN's stated location covers a 2,000 ft length of Bethnal Green Road, it is difficult to tell exactly where I was when the alleged offence took place. There are market stalls along the side of the road, and as it is double width at this point, traffic was able to pass without having to cross the central reservation. As another poster has commented, it is ludicrous to issue a PCN when the driver is just trying to find his/her way and has temporarily stopped in a location where they are not causing a problem or delay to other drivers. Particularly given that the road in question is not a red route. As I see it, the council has committed a number of Procedural Improprieties, namely: 1) Sending out the PCN in second class (28p), rather than first class post – I believe this is in breach of statute requirements and it is also in specific breach of the CCTV code of practice 2) Refusing me the option of viewing the CCTV footage at a council office of my choice (sure, they sent me a DVD, and I was able to find a machine to view it on, but if I am going to be held to account for such a minor infringement, then I expect the council to be similarly compliant) – I believe this is in breach of statute requirements 3) The images on the PCN were insufficient to demonstrate that an offence had taken place, as they showed the vehicle stationary for a period of 49 seconds, which may be regarded as deminimus – this is in breach of the council’s CCTV code of practice which requires authorities to ‘include such still images on the PCN to show sufficient grounds for the PCN being issued’ 4) Location – I can’t tell whereabouts along the 2,000 ft stretch of Bethnal Green Road the alleged offence actually took place, as the PCN does not specify. There are any number of side roads along this stretch of highway which could have been used to pinpoint the exact spot. Is the description given precise enough to enable the council’s obligation to specify location in the PCN? (clearly as far as I am concerned it isn’t, as I have no idea where the alleged offence took place, but I cannot find a definitive answer as to what would be considered reasonable in this respect) Secondly, there is the issue as to whether the alleged offence actually took place. In part, this comes back to my original question as to what constitutes ‘parking’. Is it reasonable, for instance, for the term to encompass drawing in behind other similarly parked vehicles to check one’s location, before indicating and rejoining the main traffic stream?? Any comments and thoughts on the above are welcome. Thanks
  3. If I am being held to account for stopping for less than a minute, then I will take every opportunity I can to hold the council to account. Judging by other posts on this forum, I am certainly not the first person to take PIs into account when considering an appeal
  4. Hmm... Generally, do many people win appeals purely on PI? I am not working at present, so can't afford to take the risk of incurring the fine rising to £130 - mind you, I can't afford £65 either, particularly given I don't accept I've committed an offence Guess I'll have to wait and see what turns up.
  5. Thursday Evening Update This afternoon, the council's parking department left 2x messages on my answerphone: * The first one told me that they'd received my letter and that, if I wanted to view the CCTV footage, this could only take place at the town hall - and that there is no alternative venue where it could be viewed * The second message advised me that a copy of CCTV footage has been posted to me and the discount period extended until 9th February So.. no trip to the other side of London tomorrow am, but it sounds as if I will be provided with my own copy of the footage in the post. Is it legitimate for the Council to sidestep its obligations in tis way? It is unclear in what format the footage will be provided, I'm not sure exactly how I'm expected to view it!
  6. Update: @ FEP - I have taken your advice and written to the Council (by both email and hard 'signed-for' letter), stating that I wish to view the video at the one-stop office closest to the scene of the alleged offence this Friday (I am not sure whether this gives them enough time to arrange this?). Has anyone has ever successfully managed to repeal a PCN on such grounds? It also strikes me that if procedures are this strict, then the service of the PCN was not undertaken properly either. In breach of the Council's Code of Practice relating to CCTV operation, the Notice arrived second class when the code requires that 'a PCN should be sent by first class post and must not be sent by second class post'. There is also an issue as to where the alleged contravention actually took place, as it is not clear to me from the PCN. This specifies the location as being Bethnal Green Road, between Vallance to Camb Hth Rd. Google maps suggests that this is a distance of around 2,000 ft. After a careful review of Google Streetscape, I am none the wiser - I have no idea whereabouts along this bit of road the camera was located. Re the total length of time for which the vehicle was stopped, the council's CCTV Code of Practice states that 'the authorities should include such still images on the PCN as to show sufficient grounds for the PCN being issued'. The time-stamp on the two images supplied with my PCN suggest a 49 second gap, which I'd have thought was insufficient to demonstrate an offence had taken place, as this is less than a minute - if I had been stationary for more than a minute then the time-stamped images should have been further apart. When I hear back from the Council as to where I can view the video, then I will still have the issue of the alleged offence itself to address, so any further assistance and advice would be appreciated. Many thanks
  7. @ FEP. Thank you for taking the time to post such a comprehensive reply. I will certainly follow up the leads you suggest. In particular, the notice states that the recording 'must take place during normal office hours at [the Town Hall]'. No other addresses are provided, although alternatively they offer to send to my address 'such still images as satisfy us that the contravention occurred' The London Borough concerned operates in accordance with its Code of Practice for the Operation of CCTV Enforcement Cameras, which I am just about to print off and look at, and I see that the Notice itself has been issues under the Traffic Management Act 2004, so I guess I should check this out too. It is tempting to pay the reduced charge, because I am not currently working at present and money is tight. But these sorts of charges are reprehensible, so if I have a good chance of fighting my corner effectively, I am minded to do so. Sass
  8. @ Crem - thank you for your comment. there was no reason for me to have stopped unless I was trying to ascertain where I was, and/or in driving slowly to try and read the street names, get flustered and stall the car. It is ludicrous for the Council to try and classify either of these situations as parking offences. @ G&M - re your comment re accuracy, I doubt that many people can remember every separate inch of every separate journey they make, especially if they only have 2x quite close-up images that don't enable them to establish exactly where their vehicle was at the time
  9. It is certainly my intention to view the full video, since without doing so it is impossible to see exactly where I was at the time - hence my vagueness as to what I was doing when the alleged offense took place. The 48 second time period was calculated from the time/date stamps on the images provided. I read somewhere else that the images provided on a PCN need to be sufficient to demonstrate that an offense took place, so I assumed that this was the duration of the period concerned. Finally I am very new to this forum. Whilst appreciating your thoughts and input, I could do without the attitude. Thanks
  10. Hi Honey Bee Thanks for your post. Yes I'm a new poster and of course you're absolutely right - I don't expect an immediate answer, especially given the time of my posts (I couldn't sleep last night after getting home and finding the fine in the post...) I have tried Googling and looked at a couple of pieces of legislation, as well as the CCTV Code of Practice for the Borough concerned, but have run into the buffers - mainly because I have been looking for the definition of what constitutes 'parking'. I would have expected to find a definition of this somewhere, rather than having to rely on case law. I certainly don't understand how simply stopping (for whatever reason - until I see the video, it's not clear where the alleged offence actually took place - so I can't say for sure what might have caused it) can constitute a parking offence. Cheers Sass
  11. As previously stated, until I see the CCTV pictures, its not clear exactly whereabouts I was - consequently, especially as this all happened several weeks ago, it's not possible to say for certain exactly why I was stopped. I think I had hoped that someone could point me in the direction of legislation that defines what constitutes parking - which at the moment, no one has been able to do. Surely pausing for a period of 48 seconds when there's no traffic around - for whatever reason - is insufficient grounds to merit a £130 fine. This is what I am seeking to challenge.
  12. Looking at the photos, I may have had my hazard warning lights on - it's hard to tell. If I have - I guess I will have to arrange see the video to see for sure - it probably means I must have stalled the car When the PCN arrived, I couldn't even remember the when, or the where, or anything... only that it took place on a route I'd taken from A to B before Christmas!
  13. Thanks - are you aware of any case law that establishes how long you have to be immobile to constitute waiting or parking? I was stationary for less than a minute. What if my car had simply stalled - would I be liable for a ticket then??
  14. Hi Green and Mean thanks for the reply, but I've just had a quick look at this and can't see a definition in there. If I was 4-5 ft from the kerb, then surely that can't be seen as parking...? And from the stills they've provided, I was stopped for less than a minute - can that possibly be a parking contravention??
  • Create New...