Parked in Loading Area - code 25

[risingstar]

Parked in a Loading Area outside tube station to quickly drop the child and got the ticket within 5 minutes for the reason "Parked in a loading place during restricted hours without loading".

 

Desparate for any help to prove that ticket is technically unlawfully issued. Already ordered CAG labels to affix on my expected exchange of letters with council to appear as a knowledgeable.

 

One loophole may be what I found on parking ticket - 'THE COVER STRIP IS REMOVED BY THE OFFICER' but it was not removed/pasted on windscreen just kept on bumper. Possibly, warden was in a hurry to quickly get away before I arrive.

 

Not sure how I could attach my scanned ticket on the forum for expert comments.

[risingstar]

any opinions or past experiences on this?

[risingstar]

Parked in a Loading Area outside tube station to quickly drop the child and got the ticket within 5 minutes for the reason "Parked in a loading place during restricted hours without loading".

 

Desparate for any help to prove that ticket is technically unlawfully issued. Already ordered CAG labels to affix on my expected exchange of letters with council to appear as a knowledgeable.

 

One loophole may be what I found on parking ticket - 'THE COVER STRIP IS REMOVED BY THE OFFICER' but it was not removed/pasted on windscreen just kept on bumper. Possibly, warden was in a hurry to quickly get away before I arrive.

 

Not sure how I could attach my scanned ticket on the forum for expert comments.

 

 

Did some r&d and hosted the images of penalty notice on a image hosting site imageshack-

 

Penalty Notice image (just click it once on image hosting site to zoom):

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/5290/img146wl4.jpg

Penalty Notice cover:

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/6756/img147md4.jpg

restriction signboard:

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4822/dsc007313copyqk5.jpg

Hope someone has a eureka idea...

[risingstar]

Thanks loads cr**** for your pvt msg.I have removed personal details from PCN and the edited one is here-

 

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/785/pcnun3.jpg

[green_and_mean]

If you were not loading the PCN was correctly issued as far as I can see.

[risingstar]

Unfortunately, dropping kids upto the platform showed no activity in the car and I was back within minutes. The issue is how to prove I was actually unloading my passengers.

 

Also, should TW not have observed for longer, he did so only for 5 minutes. The loading is allowed there for 30 minutes.

 

I have asked for Traffic Regulation Order to check validity of parking restrictions.

 

Is there another way to challenge on technical grounds.

[green_and_mean]

Unless they are dead you cannot 'unload' passengers, you can drop passengers off but not park. You can load for 30 mins but you were not loading you were parked while visiting the tube station, which is why you got a ticket not for staying over 30 mins.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Green and Mean is being more obtuse than usual! :grin:

 

The loading/unloading exemption does not apply.

If an exemption does apply, it is boarding/alighting but I don't know if this was permitted in the loading bay in question.

 

You will need to argue the necessity to escort your passengers to where they were going. Success will depend on the age of the child and a demonstrable safety issue.

[green_and_mean]

Green and Mean is being more obtuse than usual! :grin:

 

The loading/unloading exemption does not apply.

If an exemption does apply, it is boarding/alighting but I don't know if this was permitted in the loading bay in question.

 

You will need to argue the necessity to escort your passengers to where they were going. Success will depend on the age of the child and a demonstrable safety issue.

 

Too young to walk in the station but happy enough to travel alone by tube....a slight flaw in that argument don't you think?

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Too young to walk in the station but happy enough to travel alone by tube....a slight flaw in that argument don't you think?

 

Not at all. Escorting a child to any of the following points:

1) Ticket office

2) Barrier

3) Platform

4) Boarding the train

Are all perfectly reasonable

 

As might be assisting with luggage to a point where station staff can assist or maybe someone else was being met the otherside of the barrier. We just don't know here.

 

The task for the OP if any of the above apply is to put forward a convincing case that what was being done was rendering appropriate and necessary assistance in the alighting process.

[green_and_mean]

Not at all. Escorting a child to any of the following points:

1) Ticket office

2) Barrier

3) Platform

4) Boarding the train

Are all perfectly reasonable

 

As might be assisting with luggage to a point where station staff can assist or maybe someone else was being met the otherside of the barrier. We just don't know here.

 

The task for the OP if any of the above apply is to put forward a convincing case that what was being done was rendering appropriate and necessary assistance in the alighting process.

 

None of these would get anywhere at adjudication in my opinion, alighting is just that helping children on a tube or buying tickets is not alighting.

[lamma]

and yet it has been found to perfectly reasonable for elderly passengers to be helped. And the Adjudicator has agreed !

[risingstar]

child being handed over to mother outside barrier from where both would travel in tube.

 

the child in question has learning disability (has a legal statement from council) and needs extra assistance/observation than usual.

[risingstar]

i will still argue with this point and hope for the best. if the case goes to Parking Adjudicator, would i lose early-payment discount of 50%

[lamma]

sounds like you have a good case to me - backed up with documentation !

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

This is the case to refer to.

 

http://www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk/user_documents/Wanambwa,%20exemptions,%20unloading%20alighting%20distinction%20edited%20version.pdf

[lamma]

indeed it is.

[risingstar]

thanks a million. Looks like there is some case to argue with.

 

in the past, I was charged for overstaying for 1 minute or less and reached the car when TW was still issuing ticket. Letters were exchanged with council and they dragged on for months possibly to wear me out but ultimately cancelled the ticket (without me bringing up the child status). So in this case, hopefully I'd be on a stronger wicket.

 

will update the progress as soon receive the Notice.

[risingstar]

This is the update on the case.

I made my representation to the council against NTO in the

following letter-

 

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/180/representationyj6.jpg

 

But council duly rejected it-

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/6619/uploadednoticeofrejectiyu9.jpg

 

I will appeal against the Notice of Rejection. But essentially grounds for appeal would remain same (can't make up). Any ideas if I missed out something or can make my appeal more effective and better presented?

 

Also, is personal attendance preferable to the postal

appeal?

 

Many thanks for any timely ideas, I still have 7 more days left

to prepare.

[green_and_mean]

This is the update on the case.

I made my representation to the council against NTO in the

following letter-

 

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/180/representationyj6.jpg

 

But council duly rejected it-

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/6619/uploadednoticeofrejectiyu9.jpg

 

I will appeal against the Notice of Rejection. But essentially grounds for appeal would remain same (can't make up). Any ideas if I missed out something or can make my appeal more effective and better presented?

 

Also, is personal attendance preferable to the postal

appeal?

 

Many thanks for any timely ideas, I still have 7 more days left

to prepare.

 

I cannot see on what grounds you are appealing? The Council has rejected your mitigation and the adjudicator cannot force the Council to cancel a valid PCN. You have admitted that you were not loading so cannot see PATAS saying anything different to the Council. I may sound a bit harsh but thats the law I'm afraid, walking your wife and child to the tube is NOT loading.

[risingstar]

If I could quote past cases and decisions of adjudicator which have considered similar special circumstances, should help.

 

Frankly, I was not even aware that unloading of only goods is allowed and not the people. I guess, I can't cite it as a point to be considered. I am a new driver and still learning the parking ropes.

 

Technically green_and_mean possibly you are right and thanks for input.

[green_and_mean]

If I could quote past cases and decisions of adjudicator which have considered similar special circumstances, should help.

 

Frankly, I was not even aware that unloading of only goods is allowed and not the people. I guess, I can't cite it as a point to be considered. I am a new driver and still learning the parking ropes.

 

Technically green_and_mean possibly you are right and thanks for input.

 

There has been cases where the vehicle can be left to assist a blue badge holder to an ajacent property but the flaws in your argument are..

 

a) Your wife from what I can see was with the child so there was no need for you to park

 

b) If you wife was unable to get the child to the station alone, how would she manage a tube journey without you?

 

From what I can see the only hope is a flaw in the actual PCN or Road markings.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

FORGET loading/unloading!!

This is the wrong exemption.

The correct exemption is boarding/alighting.

 

The LA, if they had been doing their job properly would have spotted tis in your appeal.

The LA have responded with a form letter and have addressed none of the specifics you raise. This is a failure to treat you fairly which is grounds for the adjudicator to find in your favour.

[green_and_mean]

FORGET loading/unloading!!

This is the wrong exemption.

The correct exemption is boarding/alighting.

 

The LA, if they had been doing their job properly would have spotted tis in your appeal.

The LA have responded with a form letter and have addressed none of the specifics you raise. This is a failure to treat you fairly which is grounds for the adjudicator to find in your favour.

 

Untrue, boarding/alighting involves passengers getting in or out of a vehicle, there is no need for the driver to leave the vehicle. In this case the driver parked and took his wife and child to the tube, which is not alighting or what a loading bay is for it is for the loading and loading of goods.

[Guest Ting]

I cannot see on what grounds you are appealing? The Council has rejected your mitigation and the adjudicator cannot force the Council to cancel a valid PCN. You have admitted that you were not loading so cannot see PATAS saying anything different to the Council. I may sound a bit harsh but thats the law I'm afraid, walking your wife and child to the tube is NOT loading.

 

Seriously annoyed! As much as i respect your knowledge 'mean' your ability to be human is seriously lacking! This is a clear case of an alighting exemption. Had you read properly you will have seen that he didn't walk his son and mother to the station. He maintained his son's safety in perfectly understandable circumstances. What world are you living in? I'm seeing increasing violence and death on the streets - have you got rose tinted glasses? How do you feel, given the later info about the child's particular challenge, about your earlier comment "not old enough to walk to the station but old enough to travel alone" - or something like that.

 

In giving your view, being a Council employee, you conveniently forgot to remind 'risingstar' that he had nothing further to lose if proceeding to adjudication.

In fact, the Rejection is nonsense: It goes on about loading when 'risingstar' made it clear that it was an alighting situation and gave perfectly acceptable reasons for it.

 

'risingstar', the discounted period has passed according to my reading of the rejection. You have nothing further to lose by proceeding to Adjudication. personally, I feel this is a disgusting situation and the attitude towards real life of Councils' is demonstrated by the Council employee above.

(Oh, and 'mean', if you want to complain and run to the mods , or interrupt this thread with any further inhuman rubbish - please let me know the name of you employer so i can have a little word with them on disability attitude issues!)

 

Back to 'risingstar'. Sir, I apologise for my rants but you might understand how someone has annoyed me. Apart from proceeding to adjudication I recommend that you make a formal complaint against the author of the Rejection or the Council in general. It is important that you do this via the general complaints channels rather than 'parking' who will just ignore you. Identify the highest possible person you can find and perhaps also a particular officer responsible for disability descrimination issues. Hit them all, in various departments.

 

I have some more info but can't put it here. I hope, in the circumstances of this case involving a vulnerable child the moderators will understand if i invite you to PM me.

 

Regards to lamma and bernie.

 

-