Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 7 weeks now. What happens if they don''t get back to me within the 8 weeks? They have to provide me a final response in that time frame right? 
    • Referring back to to your initial post... So not a judgment ?
    • I have never heard of any such law. Please post a link to what you have read online that explains this law. And please confirm whether you were ever married to or in a formal Civil Partnership with your Ex.
    • Today has been hectic so  have been unable to complete the whole thing. If you now understand it and want to go ahead with a complaint to the IPC, fine. If not then I won't need to finish it. But below is my response to your request  on post 64. No you don't seem stupid, the Protection of Freedoms Act isn't easy to get one 's head around at first. The part of the above Act referring to private parking is contained within Schedule 4 which you can find online under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Section 9 of SCH.4 relates to how the parking scrotes have to perform so that they can transfer their right to pursue the keeper from the driver when the PCN is still unpaid after a certain amount of time. In your case the PCN was posted to you the keeper and arrived within 14 days from when they claimed a breach occurred. That means they complied with first part of the Act. The driver at that time was still responsible to pay the charge demanded on the PCN and PCM now have to wait for 28 days to elapse before they can write and advise the keeper that as the charge has not been paid, that they now have the right to pursue the keeper. They claim they sent the first PCN on the 13th March, five days after the alleged breach and it arrived on Friday 15th March. So to comply with the Act they have to observe Section 8 subsection 2f   (f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given— (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------So the first PCN was deemed to arrive on the 15th March and for 28 days to have elapsed is when the time is right for them to write and say you are now liable as keeper. So they sent the next PCN on the 12th April which is too early as you could still have paid until midnight of the 12th. So the earliest their second PCN should have gone to you was  Saturday 13th April so more likely on Monday 15th April. The IPC Code of Conduct states "Operators must be aware of their legal obligations and implement the relevant legislation and guidance when operating their businesses." So by issuing your demand a day early, they have broken the Act, the IPC Code of Conduct, the DVLA agreement  to abide by the law and the Code of Conduct not to mention a possible breach of your GDPR .   I asked the IPC  in the letter on an earlier to confirm that  CPMs Notice misrepresenting the law was a standard practice for all of PCMs Notices or just certain ones. Their distribution  may depend on when they were issued and whether they were issued in certain localities or for certain breaches. Whichever method used is a serious breach of the Law and could lead to PCM being black listed by the DVLA . One would expect that after that even if the IPC did not cancel your ticket, PCM could not risk going to Court with you nor even pursuing you any further.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Kingston Eden Street Bus Lanes


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3120 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

Many thanks for posting this. At last some common sense from officialdom. I appealed against my fine for a "contravention" in June seemingly on same grounds as this case & have heard nothing from RBK for several weeks- presumably waiting outcome of this. The adjudicator seems to be saying, between the lines, "If you want this road to be no entry at this point for cars & lorries, just put up a simple sign which says this." My grief is compounded by the fact I'm a ratepayer in this Borough & officials are wasting my money on getting these things wrong, then more by going thru all the processes which flow from this.

 

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 394
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

My grief is compounded by the fact I'm a ratepayer in this Borough & officials are wasting my money on getting these things wrong, then more by going thru all the processes which flow from this.

 

D

 

Try writing to them and see how hacked off you are then! I've written numerous letters to Councillors and Council staff who haven't even bothered to reply :-x . They are a bunch of buffoons they even admitted to me in a FOI that they started the 'pay by phone' parking system over a month before they had the traffic order in place. Most of their problems are simple to fix if they didn't stick their head in the sand like the proverbial ostrich. I actually live in the borough to and despair at the incompetance and Council tax wasted by these idiots. One of my pet peeves is this 'loading bay' in Surbiton http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Claremont+Rd,+Surbiton+KT6,+United+Kingdom&hl=en-GB&ll=51.393747,-0.304321&spn=0.001131,0.00284&sll=51.522522,-0.32648&sspn=0.006295,0.006295&geocode=FVw8EAMdBlz7_w&z=19&layer=c&cbll=51.393836,-0.304311&panoid=Bbglv8dDwr3_UEFFRsstCg&cbp=12,107.11,,0,3.57 outside loading bay hours its enforced as a no waiting no loading restriction despite having no yellow line and no kerb blips yet they claim this is lawfull....doh!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Hi guys, received a PCN, date of contravention 24/7. We were visitors to area and didn't even realise we'd driven on bus lane??

Could anyone pls help with my letter of appeal please? Is it enough to say signs were not clear??

 

Thank you in advance.

 

Yes that should be fine but include a reference to the case in post #325 above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
There have been several threads on these Bus lanes but all the OPs seem to disapear after taking the advice given. I'm trying to escalate the matter to stop enforcement and need to hear from anyone that has a PCN issued in Eden Street Kingston regardless of the current state ie cancelled, paid, outstanding.

I have just received a PCN for driving in a bus lane in Eden Street, which I was not aware I had done !

All advice gratefully received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. I have drafted the following to RBK - please advise if this is sufficient in the first instance ?

 

Many thanks

"I write to appeal this PCN and require you to provide to me:

 

 

1) The Traffic Management Order

2) Video evidence

3) Photo Evidence

4) Written notes of camera operator"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. I have drafted the following to RBK - please advise if this is sufficient in the first instance ?

 

Many thanks

"I write to appeal this PCN and require you to provide to me:

 

 

1) The Traffic Management Order

2) Video evidence

3) Photo Evidence

4) Written notes of camera operator"

 

OK: email address is: [email protected]

 

[email protected]

 

There is no extra spacing!

Edited by HYMN AND MI
spacing come out wrong ly in first e-mail address
Link to post
Share on other sites

We have received a letter few weeks after our appeal asking us to pay a higher amount (final notiice) as we have not paid yet, is this just a standard letter pending appeal decision?

 

Where are we with this? Do you mean you received an Enforcement Notice? Please advise with all details. We need to see details of appeal and their response.

 

See this link for explanation of the process:

http://www.patas.gov.uk/buslaneenforcement.htm

Edited by HYMN AND MI
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

A carer was issued with a parking fine for displaying a disabled badge the wrong way round on the dashboard. The carer asked the warden to withdraw the fine on the basis that it was a valid disabled badge (which had not expired) but the warden refused, saying the badge was not properly displayed (even though the clearly disabled passenger was present at the time). Does anyone have any advice to help the carer appeal ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

A carer was issued with a parking fine for displaying a disabled badge the wrong way round on the dashboard. The carer asked the warden to withdraw the fine on the basis that it was a valid disabled badge (which had not expired) but the warden refused, saying the badge was not properly displayed (even though the clearly disabled passenger was present at the time). Does anyone have any advice to help the carer appeal ?

 

Sorry but this needs its own thread for proper help as it is to do with parking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I emailed them on 9/8 to appeal and ask for photo evidence. Last week rec a letter asking to pay £130.

 

I did receive a acknowledgement receipt from them on 9/8.

 

If they have not provided you with the evidence and/or considered your informal representations, they are guilty of procedural impropriety, which, strictly speaking is not a ground in itself, nevertheless I have seen one case with RBK in which they have "jumped" a stage, and cancelled citing procedural impropriety. I would e-mail them again and require them to cancel or you will be progressing to PATAS and seeking costs. They must provide you with the evidence!

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have received a letter few weeks after our appeal asking us to pay a higher amount (final notiice) as we have not paid yet, is this just a standard letter pending appeal decision?

 

There is legally no appeal stage before the enforcement notice if you don't pay within the discount period they can just carry on and send you the the enforcement notice for the full cost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they have not provided you with the evidence and/or considered your informal representations, they are guilty of procedural impropriety, which, strictly speaking is not a ground in itself, nevertheless I have seen one case with RBK in which they have "jumped" a stage, and cancelled citing procedural impropriety. I would e-mail them again and require them to cancel or you will be progressing to PATAS and seeking costs. They must provide you with the evidence!

But the PCN says "Any enquiry regarding this notice should be made in writing to the address overleaf within 14 days......If your enquiry is received after 14 days you will lose the opportunity to pay the reduced amount". This seems to imply that you do not have to pay the higher amount provided your enquiry is received within 14 days ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is legally no appeal stage before the enforcement notice if you don't pay within the discount period they can just carry on and send you the the enforcement notice for the full cost.

 

Correct. But, we all know that RBK do consider informal appeals from many case histories. Therefore, they are at fault by not providing the evidence and by completely destroying the motorist's expectation of what is to happen next. In my view, on this argument, this PCN should be cancelled. The motorist has a right to view the video evidence, which they have bypassed. Also, in terms of Admin. Law, they are not acting fairly, proportionately or reasonably: throw all this at them. If other motorists are afforded an informal representation, then so should you! Furthermore, they normally put the case on hold until you have seen the evidence etc. So, they are way out of order on this one.

 

Frankly, depending on whether you want to play the long game or get this over with, I would just write to them and say that the lane has been declared unlawful as per the adjudication above: they will know what it is, believe me, as they are taking legal advice upon it. Whatever else, please do not pay it!

Edited by HYMN AND MI
Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. But, we all know that RBK do consider informal appeals from many case histories. Therefore, they are at fault by not providing the evidence and by completely destroying the motorist's expectation of what is to happen next. In my view, on this argument, this PCN should be cancelled. The motorist has a right to view the video evidence, which they have bypassed. Also, in terms of Admin. Law, they are not acting fairly, proportionately or reasonably: throw all this at them. If other motorists are afforded an informal representation, then so should you! Furthermore, they normally put the case on hold until you have seen the evidence etc. So, they are way out of order on this one.

 

Frankly, depending on whether you want to play the long game or get this over with, I would just write to them and say that the lane has been declared unlawful as per the adjudication above: they will know what it is, believe me, as they are taking legal advice upon it. Whatever else, please do not pay it!

 

Lets stick to the regulations as they stand rather than what you think they should be! They are entitled to consider informal reps just as they are to ignore them, there is no mileage in complaining if they don't. They do not have to send you the video but you should be entitled to view it or receive still photos but there is no obligation to hold the discount period whilst you do so. The bus lane has been declared unenforceable on numerous occasions that is fact and is a far stronger case than making up 'improprieties' based on your own expectations rather than the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets stick to the regulations as they stand rather than what you think they should be! They are entitled to consider informal reps just as they are to ignore them, there is no mileage in complaining if they don't. They do not have to send you the video but you should be entitled to view it or receive still photos but there is no obligation to hold the discount period whilst you do so. The bus lane has been declared unenforceable on numerous occasions that is fact and is a far stronger case than making up 'improprieties' based on your own expectations rather than the law.

 

No-one is expecting what the regulations should be. The issue of whether they consider this OP's informal is, of course, salient since they always have considered others: fact. I am merely bringing this argument into play to nip this in the bud. If you care to read their policies online - and therefore grasp the expectation - you will agree that this is even more pertinent. To paraphrase Phillip Morgan from the Surrey Comet: the enforcement of parking and bus lanes in this Council needs an overhaul from root to branch.

 

While I agree with you re decisions, we are all faced with the incongruous fact that one PATAS adjudicators's decision is not binding upon another's so that, as usual, one needs the scattergun approach. You and I have had our differences in approach, but have the same outcome in mind. Interesting that PATAS sent an adjudicator down there to inspect - and that he had the courage to criticise the DfT. BTW, I was heavily involved in the case cited above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reply to Green&Mean's appeal for info updates:

 

I received a notice in June, sought advice from this forum (great-thanks all). Went to Guildhall & saw video. Gave verbal notice of appeal & received verbal assurance from named officer that I couldn't be billed for the double amount just because I had appealed & not paid £60 within ?how many days.

 

I sent written appeal within the 10 days, with photos of location (1st week July?). Shortly after saw reference in Surrey Comet. Have heard nothing since.

 

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...