Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OK  so you may not have outed yourself if you said "we". No matter either way you paid. Snotty letter I am surprised that they were so quick off the mark threatening Court. They usually take months to go that far. No doubt that as you paid the first one they decided to strike quickly and scare you into paying. Dear Chuckleheads  aka Alliance,  I am replying to your LOCs You may have caught me the first time but that is  the end. What a nasty organisation you are. You do realise that you now have now no reason to continue to pursue me after reading my appeal since you know that my car was not cloned. Any further pursuit will end up with a complaint to the ICO that you are breaching my GDPR.  Please confirm that you have removed my details from your records. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I haven't gone for a snotty letter this time as they know that you paid for your car in another car park. So using a shot across their bows .  If it doesn't deter them and they send in the debt collectors or the Court you will then be able to get more money back from them for  breachi.ng your data protection than they will get should they win in Court-and they have no chance of that as you have paid. So go in with guns blazing and they might see sense.  Although never underestimate how stupid they are. Or greedy.
    • Thank you. Such a good point. They did issue all 3 before I paid though. I only paid one because I didn’t have proof of parking that time, only for two others.    Unfortunately no proof of my appeal as it was just submitted through a form on their website and no copy was sent to me. I only have the reply. I believe I just put something like “we made the honest mistake of using the incorrect parking area on the app” and that’s it. Thanks again for your help. 
    • They are absolute chuckleheads. You paid but because you entered a different car park site also belonging to them they are pursuing you despite them knowing what you had done. It would be very obvious to everyone, including Alliance that your car could not have been in two places at the same time. Thank you for posting the PCN so quickly making it a pity that you appealed since there are so many things wrong with it that you as keeper are not liable to pay the charge. They rarely accept appeals since that would mean they lose money but they have virtually no chance of beating you in Court. Very unlikely that they will take you to Court given the circumstances. Just in case you didn't out yourself as the driver could you please post up your appeal.
    • Jasowter I hope that common sense prevails with Iceland and the whole matter can be successfully ended. I would perhaps not have used a spell checker just to prove the dyslexia 🙂 though it may have made it more difficult to read. I noticed that you haven't uploaded the original PCN .Might not be necessary if the nes from Iceland is good. Otherwise perhaps you could get your son to do it by following the upload instructions so that we can appeal again with the extra ammunition provided by the PCN. Most of them rarely manage to get the wording right which means that you as the keeper are not liable to pay the charge-only the driver is and they do not know the name and address of the driver. So that would put you both in the clear if the PCN is non compliant.
    • Thank you so much. Yes, I wish I had done my research and not paid. It's all for the same car park. Here is one of the original PCNs, they are all the same bar different dates. PCN-22.03.24-1.pdf PCN-22.03.24-2.pdf
  • 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

PCN with On Street contravention code in Council Car Park


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5473 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

Hi

 

Got a PCN in a Council car park under contravention code 16 - Parked in a permit space without displaying a valid permit.

 

The CEO has obviously used the wrong code as 16 specifically relates to an On-Street parking contravention. The one that probably should have been used was code 85 for an Off-Street parking contravention. There are other issues that I'll cover later but is this first one likely to be a sufficient reason to include in my informal appeal?

 

The other issues that I can throw in if necessary are as follows:

 

1. The only sign on display said 'No Parking Area - Reserved for Market Traders Only'

2. The PCN was given on a day when the Market was not in operation

3. There is nothing to state a permit is required

4. There are no marked parking bays or spaces

5. There is no indication that ignoring the sign will result in a fine/penalty charge to pay.

 

I'll post photos showing the sign and location shortly.

 

Hope someone can offer advice.

 

Thanks

MB65

Link to post
Share on other sites

The code is technically not required the description of the alledged contravention is however needed.

If the contravention code relates to on street parking and contravention occured in an off street car park then the traffic order will not be the same for the alleged breach.

Your particular instance will come under a parking places order for the car park.

 

I believe this in itself may cancell the ticket for maladmistration.

 

You should also post up a scan of the pcn front and back so it can be checked for technical errors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the contravention code relates to on street parking and contravention occured in an off street car park then the traffic order will not be the same for the alleged breach.

Your particular instance will come under a parking places order for the car park.

 

I believe this in itself may cancell the ticket for maladmistration.

 

You should also post up a scan of the pcn front and back so it can be checked for technical errors.

 

I have yet to see a traffic order that mentions contravention codes?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have yet to see a traffic order that mentions contravention codes?

The information is sufficiently misleading.

The area relates to an off street order, the contravention code relates to on street.

 

There are alot of things that technically do not have to be on the ticket. Much like getting the make or colour wrong, this will be suffiecient to have the ticket cancelled. Personal experience and a couple of threads on two forums I know of proves this.

 

If the authority chose to add information and they get it wrong like this instance then it should be cancelled, however it will be nice to go in with more.

 

monkeyboy65 states that the market was not in operation therefore perhaps a permit is not needed for these days and there is possibly insufficient signage.

 

We may have a complete muppet issuing tickets where they have no right to to do so and getting the contravention codes wrong along with other stuff.

It maybe worth submitting a freedom of information request for the attendants notes and the error rate for the last 6 years to find out if we are indeed dealing with an idiot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PCN Photos x 3

Is the second photo the entrance to the car park or is this the whole car park.

 

Is the sign the only one there.

 

And where did you park in relation to this sign.

Edited by nero12
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

The paved area forms approx 1/5 of the whole car parking area.The rest is alongside the right hand side of the building in the photo and forms a 'J' shape. This is tarmaced rather than paved and part is shown in the bottom right corner of my photo. Cars park on the paved area at 90 degrees to the road/building, accessing it across the pavement via the dropped kerbs. I was parked on the paved area just to the left of the sign. There are approx 3 other identical signs attached to the side of the building that are visible from the larger part of the car park.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The paved area forms approx 1/5 of the whole car parking area.The rest is alongside the right hand side of the building in the photo and forms a 'J' shape. This is tarmaced rather than paved and part is shown in the bottom right corner of my photo. Cars park on the paved area at 90 degrees to the road/building, accessing it across the pavement via the dropped kerbs. I was parked on the paved area just to the left of the sign. There are approx 3 other identical signs attached to the side of the building that are visible from the larger part of the car park.

I take it this paved area where you parked is where the market traders park to set up on market days.

Do the traders set up stalls along the area with double yellow lines.

 

Can you state what days the market is open.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, market traders park their vehicles on both the paved and tarmaced parts of the car park after setting up stalls on the market square which is around the front of the building.

 

No stalls are set up on the road.

 

The market runs on 2 weekdays plus Saturday. As mentioned above the PCN was served on a non market day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, market traders park their vehicles on both the paved and tarmaced parts of the car park after setting up stalls on the market square which is around the front of the building.

 

No stalls are set up on the road.

 

The market runs on 2 weekdays plus Saturday. As mentioned above the PCN was served on a non market day.

Ok is there any written proof or signage that indicates what days the market opens for buisness. How long has the market been operating these particular days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure, but there may be an info sign on the market square that includes details of market days. Info is published on council website etc. Market has been operating in this location and on these days for just over a year (originally at the other side of town for years).

 

There is no info or signage about market days anywhere near this car park.

 

Cars have parked here for years without a problem before the market moved and even since it moved on non market days. Problems only started when council took over parking enforcement approx 6 weeks ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure, but there may be an info sign on the market square that includes details of market days. Info is published on council website etc. Market has been operating in this location and on these days for just over a year (originally at the other side of town for years).

 

There is no info or signage about market days anywhere near this car park.

 

Cars have parked here for years without a problem before the market moved and even since it moved on non market days. Problems only started when council took over parking enforcement approx 6 weeks ago.

Ahhh newly decrimmed, that will explain it.

 

Ok go in with poor signage you parked on a day when the market is not there and the PCN contravention code does not properly describe the contravention.

 

 

Cobble up a letter mate and post it here to be checked.

 

BTW there maybe others here who may help further so keep checking the thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are newly decriminalised then they will have had to fill in and sign a form that all signs, markings and TROs are correct. This form is sent to the DfT so ask the DfT for a copy of the completed form. As I recall the blank form is available on the web - anyone have a link ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Informal appeals appear to pretty unsuccessful (with the council not wanting to give up their ill gotten gains). On rejection from the council, appeals to the adjudicator are much more successful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

crem AFAIK they havnt come up against the CAG mate

 

Plenty to take them apart with. LOL

 

I'm sure you're right nero. I was just meaning they don't seem to realise they are beaten at the first appeal and make you take it further before they give up. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all comments so far. Appeal letter cobbled as follows:

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

PCN No: **********

Reg No: **** ***

 

The above numbered Penalty Charge Notice was served on **/**/** in the car park adjacent to ***********.

 

However, I wish to appeal against it as I believe the PCN has been issued incorrectly for the following reasons:

 

1. The signs do not give adequate warning that a penalty charge will be applied.

2. The signs do not indicate that a permit should be displayed.

3. The signs indicate that parking is reserved for Market Traders Only but do not state any times or days that the restrictions are in place.

4. The PCN was served on a day when the Market was not in operation.

5. The PCN does not properly describe the alleged contravention. This is shown as Code 16 - ‘Parked in a permit space without displaying a valid permit’. However, this code relates specifically to an On-Street Parking contravention.

 

I would also request that you provide me with a copy of the Off Street Parking Places Order covering the location where this PCN was served.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Name

Address

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Quick update - Council have cancelled PCN....on this occassion only :wink: and added that it will be served as a warning so don't do it again.

 

Result 8)

 

 

...oh and they don't have a copy of the relevant parking order covering this location but will send it in due course...I won't hold my breath.

 

Thanks to all for help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick update - Council have cancelled PCN....on this occassion only :wink: and added that it will be served as a warning so don't do it again.

 

Result 8)

 

 

...oh and they don't have a copy of the relevant parking order covering this location but will send it in due course...I won't hold my breath.

 

Thanks to all for help

Ahh missed the letter mate but well done.

 

Post up if you get the order mate. Complain if you dont!icon10.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done, and don't let them off the hook. parking orders are public documents. refer your contact at the council to the LGA 1972 S.228 (7) (7) If a person having the custody of any such document— (a) obstructs any person entitled to inspect the document or to make a copy thereof or extract therefrom in inspecting the document or making a copy or extract, (b) refuses to give copies or extracts to any person entitled to obtain copies or extracts, he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 1 on the standard scale. Local Government Act 1972 (c.70) - Statute Law Database

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...