Parked at a dropped footway [Code: 27]

[Netyard]

I had a ticket on my windscreen of my vehicle on 12/07/08 whilst I was a work for being parked at a dropped footway, Contravention Code 27

 

Where I was parked was an entrance/exit for a private car park but it had metal posts concreted into the entrance so in otherwords it was unused

 

There were double yellow lines on the road but not within the bit where my car was parked, there is also no signs up around the area where I had parked

 

There were yellow dropped curbs that cross the area where my car was parked

 

The ticket states that my Tax disk was obscured when I know that to be false as I have one of them aluminium holder fixed to the lower nearsisde part of my windscreen, (the correct place for tax disks)

 

Have I got any grounds as with regards to no signs being in the area, or my ticket saying my tax was obscured?

 

I was thinking if they have photos of my vehicle as they always take photos then there would be a conflict between my vehicle and the ticket as in the photo my tax would be clearly displayed

 

This is a £120 fine, or £60 payable within 14 days and printed out on by computer from Barking & Dagenham Council

 

Thanks for you help if you are able to offer some advice (except do not park there again)

[green_and_mean]

You can only park across a drop kerb if loading or with the permission of the landowner/occupier of property the crossover leads to. The CEO will record your serial number off the tax disc not the disc itself so it may be a case of the holder was obscuring the serial number (at the top of disc) having said that the tax disc is not really relevant these days as photos are usually taken as additional proof it was your car.

[lamma]

there are other exemptions rather than the ones G&M chose to "only" include.

have a look at

Traffic Management Act 2004 (c. 18) - Statute Law Database

 

Only (true meaning of "only" this time) you know the full circumstances and whether any of these other exemption apply in your case. I suggest you read S86 of the Act linked above in case any of them do

.

[Netyard]

looks like im just going to have to pay it unfortunatly, thanks for the replies

[Rob S]

I wouldn't give up just yet. You said the posts were concreted so you have nothing to lose, so why not write a letter making informal representations pointing this out. By making the informal reps the local authority will usually extend the time you have to settle at the reduced figure.I would also suggest you got to pepipoo.com and post in their parking section on this one as well. You don't have to listen to posters like Green and Mean (the champion of the local authorities).

[Netyard]

Thanks but ive already paid it now, but I cant see how the posts will be able to negate the fact I was still parked across a dropped footway, I knew I was in the wrong to start with but it was worth a try to look into it.

[Rob S]

If the posts had were permanent and meant that the dropped footway could not be used then that would be a point worth taking up, but it is moot as you have decided to pay.

[green_and_mean]

If the posts had were permanent and meant that the dropped footway could not be used then that would be a point worth taking up, but it is moot as you have decided to pay.

 

What the crossover owner does with the access is not relevant as far as the contravention is concerned and would not be grounds for appeal unless the drop kerb had been revoked.

[Rob S]

What the crossover owner does with the access is not relevant as far as the contravention is concerned and would not be grounds for appeal unless the drop kerb had been revoked.

 

In your opinion of course:rolleyes:

 

Wouldn't the cross over owner in this instance be the local authority? And if the crossover is no longer in use why should it be enforced? Surely the local authority should be revoking it as soon as it's status changes, rather than leaving it and allowing their CEOs to rack up additional revenue.

[green_and_mean]

In your opinion of course:rolleyes:

 

Wouldn't the cross over owner in this instance be the local authority? And if the crossover is no longer in use why should it be enforced? Surely the local authority should be revoking it as soon as it's status changes, rather than leaving it and allowing their CEOs to rack up additional revenue.

 

Its not my 'opinion' its the law. I could put posts across my drive and then still drive my motorcycle in and out. You can also get steel posts that can be removed to allow access. It is not for the driver to decide if the drive is used or not as far as the law is concerned. The owner of the 'private' car park would be the only person who could give permission to park. My neighbours garage is covered with ivy and never used as he does not have a car but it would not give me a legal right to park across his drive.

[Rinky-dinky5575]

I have been given a fine of £120 for parking outside Youngs Chineese in Barking on a double yellow, fair enough I deserved it, what I am baffled with is that I too like you have been slapped with a fine for having an obscured tax disc. I pay my car tax regularly why on earth would I want to obscure it, like you my car was parked in Barking I think its terrible, I have sent an email challenging their decision to give me a fine for an obscured tax disc which is showing the reg number the date it runs out, I just dont understand I can understand if the tax disc was obscured from inside by myself but it isnt.

I have been told that even the police dont fine you for obscured tax discs I have asked them to produce a photograph so I can see where it was obscured.

[green_and_mean]

I have been given a fine of £120 for parking outside Youngs Chineese in Barking on a double yellow, fair enough I deserved it, what I am baffled with is that I too like you have been slapped with a fine for having an obscured tax disc. I pay my car tax regularly why on earth would I want to obscure it, like you my car was parked in Barking I think its terrible, I have sent an email challenging their decision to give me a fine for an obscured tax disc which is showing the reg number the date it runs out, I just dont understand I can understand if the tax disc was obscured from inside by myself but it isnt.

I have been told that even the police dont fine you for obscured tax discs I have asked them to produce a photograph so I can see where it was obscured.

 

You said the fine was for parking on double yellow lines where did you get the fine for obscured tax?

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

I suspect that what has happened is that where the CEO was expected to key in tax disc details they have keyed in "obscured" or similar and that is what is causing the confusion.

[green_and_mean]

I suspect that what has happened is that where the CEO was expected to key in tax disc details they have keyed in "obscured" or similar and that is what is causing the confusion.

 

Agreed.......hardly confusing though unless he also thinks the PCN is for having a 'Blue Ford' or whatever is stated on the PCN.

[Rinky-dinky5575]

reply to green and mean, I got the ticket for being parked on a double yellow line and on the same ticket he did me for having an obscured tax disc as well, which is total rubbish, my tax is within date and the description silver grand cherokee is clearly stated on the tax disc which is what my car is.

[Rinky-dinky5575]

reply to bernie the bolt do you think they have charged me £120 for parking on a yellow line then and obscured tax disc comment isnt part of the fine.

[Jamberson]

Can you stick a copy of the penalty charge up here (blank out identifying info) and someone will confirm exactly what the fine is for.

 

Your statement "I have sent an email challenging their decision to give me a fine for an obscured tax disc which is showing the reg number the date it runs out" suggests it was partly obscured, and you know which bits of it were showing. Is this the case? (You can tell us!!)