Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • images/posts removed . please do not post jpg picture images directly to a post . read upload and redact in jpg then convert using on of the listed websites there to convert to one multipage pdf only . that way only logged-in,registered and approved caggers are the only ones that can download and see them . else anyone can see them caggers or not. dx
    • OK, I will do now.   I did look to black out certain things, but I was not sure what I should and should not redact and there was nothing on there that was personal enough for me to be concerned with being made public. So I am happy for all to view, but if you are kind enough to redact what is needed as per the forum rules, that would be amazing.     I was planning on collecting up other court cases they have lost, to refer to as part of my evidence, I'm not sure if this is worth doing or could just confuse matters?   But there seem to be many where the judge has ruled against them because of confusing and not clearly displayed signage, trespass, as well as their charge being £100, which is more than the Bevis case said was reasonable.    A quick search found this article as one example KBT cornwall lose case article.pdf   Lastly, I will go to the site to get updated images, but from google earth, you can see from the pictures the entrance states it is for the hotel parking, which I follwed instructions and gave my details to the hotel. Where I think my car was parked (it was that long ago I'm not exactly sure) there are signs on the opposite wall, but it was 12.30am, pitch black and they could not be seen.           Claimants_WS.pdf
    • yes but have the landowner paid this years contract fee. no evidence they have in the ws. pop it back up now if you wish. the forum is quiet i'll redact it for you so we have the info.   dx  
    • Thank you all so much for taking the time to comment and help, I really do appreciate it.   Just to elaborate a bit more on the background, just because my lack of knowledge of the process might mean I've actually done things along the way that I did not know what they were and so hadn't mention it.    When they decided to go to court, I was offered mediation, which I took. I offered to pay the reduced rate, just to make it go away, but insisted it was not an admission of guilt, it was a goodwill gesture to save us all the effort of court. They refused and wanted £250.    A court date was set, but in Leeds, then a couple weeks later I received another letter saying it had been moved to London.   I was not aware I had any say in which court it would be held at, but I now understand i have good reason to request it is moved to a local one to me, which is also local to the offending place, I will call the court tomorrow and explain that. But so far I have only been told what is happening, I've not been given the choice for anything.   They seem to be going down the route of a contract breach, not trespass which is interesting. There is a document in the evidence which has the agreement between themselves which I assumed meant they can pursue me.    I am going to visit the site again shortly, at midnight the time of the offence and take pictures to build a case file of the route I took to enter the car park, how it is in the hotel grounds and no signs can be seen.    Am I right in saying, the fact they do not actually have any pictures of my car in the location they say it was in, just because all of the pictures they have were at 12/30am and it was pitch black, I am going to say my car was parked correctly in the hotel side, not on their land and it is then up to them to prove otherwise, which they are not able to do, because the burden of proof lies with the claimant I think?
    • did you move during the duration of this agreement.   dx  
  • Our picks

ciupas

Parking Behind Yellow Line

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3651 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Can you advise please...?

I have parked my van in front of gate of the office building or more precisely sideways on the driveway behind yellow line (there was another car parked right in front of the gate)

I thought that if you are parked behind yellow line its private property.

Anyway I’ve got ticket for the following contravention: 624 Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of road other than carriageway.

Secondly on the two pictures attached to the PCN the registration mark is not fully visible I mean - one digit of the vehicle registration mark is not visible at all. On first picture you can see first half and on the other the second half of the registration plate - but without the middle digit.

Do you think I can appeal against the PCN?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you post the PCN up so we can take a look (obscure reg details ect). Also if you have pics of the location or let us know the location so we may be able to Google it.


Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you post the PCN up so we can take a look (obscure reg details ect). Also if you have pics of the location or let us know the location so we may be able to Google it.

 

 

Hi Thank you for reply.

 

The address is 26 Banner Street EC1, Islington.

Thats the entrance with Yelow sigh 'MAX. HEADROOM 2.4M'

 

I have also attached the PCN.

Thaks again.

SCAN0008.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parking on the footpath within London is not permiteed except where signage says that it is. Bang to rights I'm afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add that any traffic orders prohibiting parking normally extend to the rear of the adopted footway.

 

You probably need to check the limits of adoption.


If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry JS,This is not bang to rights and you should,nt say it is until all avenues of appeal have been explored.

It seem to me that a procedural impropriety has occured, they state the you should pay the penalty must be paid WITHIN the period of 28 days, when the correct wording should be "paid before the end of the period of 28 days"


:mad:LF53

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It does look as though you were all over the footway (Google street view here.)

 

Yep, I have to agree...even though I can't see much in the OP's thumbnail pic!


If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry JS,This is not bang to rights and you should,nt say it is until all avenues of appeal have been explored.

It seem to me that a procedural impropriety has occured, they state the you should pay the penalty must be paid WITHIN the period of 28 days, when the correct wording should be "paid before the end of the period of 28 days"

 

I can't comment on this, but it's an interesting observation...how did you manage to read the thumbnail?!! :confused:

 

Such technicalities appear to be the only grounds for appeal in this case.


If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By using the word "within" they are effectivly prolonging the time to pay or appeal to 29 days and as the Local authority have no right to do this, it renders the original PCN prejudical and unenforcable.

As in the ruling of "Al,s bar and resturant-v-wandsworth"

 

It really is suprising that some LA,s have not changed the wording by now


:mad:LF53

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how did you manage to read the thumbnail?!!
It's not easy, but it is possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By using the word "within" they are effectivly prolonging the time to pay or appeal to 29 days and as the Local authority have no right to do this, it renders the original PCN prejudical and unenforcable.

As in the ruling of "Al,s bar and resturant-v-wandsworth"

 

It really is suprising that some LA,s have not changed the wording by now

 

Whilst I am sure you know what you are saying, that makes no sense to me. How does the word 'within' extend 28 days to 29 days? Within my house means the same as before you reach the edge of my house surely?

 

Happy to hear clarification. I still think there is no grounds for appeal but am completely open to correction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How does the word 'within' extend 28 days to 29 days?
"Within" has been held to mean "excluding the first day" (Al's Bar and Restaurant v Wandsworth) so the PCN actually means "29 days beginning with the date of service".
It's not what you, BaldyBaldwin or I infer, but what the courts interpret.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as i am aware, "within" has been held (in Al's Bar and Restaurant v Wandsworth) excludes the first day mentioned. As such, it gives a time period of 29 days beginning with the date of service of the notice, not 28. This is non-compliant and prejudicial.

 

good point Real Name, but i believe the adjudicators have already interpreted on this one


:mad:LF53

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JimmySpangle, google als bar and resrurant-v-wandsworth and have a read through,it will explain the point better than i can ever do


:mad:LF53

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That case was upheld on the basis of a raft of non-compliance details. It was not simply the one phrase "Within the period of 28 days". I am not certain that an appeal would win, but it's worth a try. They might uphold an appeal simply to avert a possible PATAS case and subsequent costs should they lose and have to cancel a load of other PCNs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you,

sailor sam, JimmySpangle, BaldyBaldwin, WelshMam2009, My Real Name and Jamberson

 

 

It was very enlightening, I will appeal based on the Within the period of 28 days".

Will see... I will let you know how this case ended.

Regards Ciupas[/font]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Thank you for reply.

 

The address is 26 Banner Street EC1, Islington.

Thats the entrance with Yelow sigh 'MAX. HEADROOM 2.4M'

 

I have also attached the PCN.

Thaks again.

 

The above coments seem to be correct i'm afraid although I think the PCN may be flawed because you cannot see the whole VRM in either of the pics. Also I believe that there should not be a person in the foreground. But as for the offence itself, you seem to be parked ilegally.

 

Your only hope is to appeal aginst the actual PCN on the grounds it was not correctly issued.


Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a) That is not a PCN its a notice to owner

b) There is no legal requirement for ANY photos let alone ones with the VRM.

c) 'within a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service' is not the same as 'within 28 days' as in Al's Bar and Restaurant v Wandsworth and those that quoted it should actually go back and read it properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the PCN may be flawed because you cannot see the whole VRM in either of the pics. Also I believe that there should not be a person in the foreground.

 

The contents of photographs have no bearing on the validity of a PCN. There is no obligation to take photos, and they are not relied on. They are just a convenient way of clarifying matters if disputes arise. So, this would not affect the vaildity of this PCN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he was parked 'illegally' it would be a police (criminal). Contravention (possibly, of the PCN is valid, the signs and lines compliant, the TRO valid and made validly)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The contents of photographs have no bearing on the validity of a PCN. There is no obligation to take photos, and they are not relied on. They are just a convenient way of clarifying matters if disputes arise. So, this would not affect the vaildity of this PCN.

 

This is why i said 'I THINK the PCN MAY be flawed'. Obviously we are trying to 'clutch straws' on this one! But thanks for the clarification and also to G & M.

Edited by sailor sam
Signature still not posted

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If he was parked 'illegally' it would be a police (criminal). Contravention (possibly, of the PCN is valid, the signs and lines compliant, the TRO valid and made validly)

 

What TRO or lines would footway parking require?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...