Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • is response to CPR rules you sent me - my observations are   1)they havent stated under what law/legislation they make a claim, they have mentioned document they rely on but didnt serve it with application as above   2)they didnt serve application or evidence on me ever! court knows this    3)this is a telephone hearing where no oral evidence is to be given , do we do skeleton arguments or court bundle , when do we give to court - order is to only submit evidence in response 7 days before hearing   4) there are /is a document which gives complete defence to the claim, disclosable at trial , so they shouldnt have sought summary judgement a)i have an email from them ,  a deed of guarantee and indemnity (DOGI) was required for guarantee, pre condition to lending b)i have a docusign email sending request to sign this  DOGI document (not attached it was a docusign login) , c)they dont have a copy of it and havent provided under SAR or specific request.  d) anyone who does a DOGI, is not defined as a 'Guarantor' in the agreement, which is not signed in a personal capacity anyway, e)so in the application they rely on loan agreement having a self contained gurantor section, and the fact my name is next to word guarantor (but not signed personally, no statute of frauds anyways)   their definition of a guarantor-"person named in offer letter who enters into this loan agreement to provide a personal guarantee and indemnity. this definition excludes any third party guarantor who enters into a seperate DOGI"
    • Hi Anney.   Let's give this a bit longer. With the best will in the world, altosbestos hasn't been here very long and we don't know much about them. It would be good to know what forum regulars think about what altos is advising.   HB  
    • thanks for that very helpful, ill make some points on it in a minute just wanted to say they never served me application against CPR, i had to obtain off court a copy. They refer in wtiness st - marked as what they rely to support application a paginated bundle PR1 which apparently accompanies the statement, i can see from the references and amount of pages it should be the loan offer and loan agreement, as you would expect.   so i asked court can i have copy of PR1 so i can check, they just got back and said  claimant has never either in electronic database or in paper, served a bundle PR1 with the application,    there said it was claimants job to serve everyone and me- so ask them      i was about to and i had a thought, they havent submitted any evidence in support of their application why remind them !   in theory judge will get to hearing and go where is your evidence of this agreement?   and for the record they are very sloppy and do make major mistakes in their paperwork, so this isnt unusual
    • You can draft the letter before action yourself and send it against the individual that's not giving you clear responses. No need to involve solicitors at this stage.   I would recommend you do it today, start maintaining a paper trail. 
    • Obviously the real proof will come when the contract is revealed.   In the meantime you could write to the DVLA asking who applied for your data back in 2017. And show them the signage where both companies are listed and ask in view of who asked for your details, did the right one apply and what is their view on both companies showing on the sign.   Is this legal and explain that you are in the middle of a Court case and they may be called.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies

PCN code 62 - parked with four wheels on pavement


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3788 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

Sorry! failed to read!!!

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ooo, I think you've left yourself wide open with that statement Lamma!

 

It would depend on the type of sign whether it can be contavened or not. In this case, the sign merely indicates the start and end of the exemption if thats what you mean. In my opinion, just because it shows an image of a car with 2 wheels on the footpath, it dosn't necessarily mean you cannot park with all foiur wheels on the footpath (according to the booklet the OP posted). I do note that the OP hasn't said whether he was parked in or out of the exemption area indicated by the signs. Also its interesting to note that the booklet was published in 2002 so perhaps there is one more current?

 

__________________

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 professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my scales at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice usefull.

 

Not in the slightest. A contravention if it occurs is a contravention of a lawful Traffic Order. This is an essential truth. Read a few annual reports to catch up. And the same is true for speeding. The signs only indicate, it is the Order that counts. And the booklet carries no weight whatsoever by the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Not in the slightest. A contravention if it occurs is a contravention of a lawful Traffic Order. This is an essential truth. Read a few annual reports to catch up. And the same is true for speeding. The signs only indicate, it is the Order that counts. And the booklet carries no weight whatsoever by the way.

 

So what about ''failure to comply with a traffic sign'' an offence under section 36(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988?

 

__________________

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 professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my scales at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
:confused: The funny thing about this post is,

it is the first ever post the O P

has made to the forum, and not offered further

info.

 

There may well be a reasonable explanation as to why the OP has not returned, but it still leaves me with a nagging feeling this may be a 'wind-up' of some sort.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There may well be a reasonable explanation as to why the OP has not returned, but it still leaves me with a nagging feeling this may be a 'wind-up' of some sort.

 

:confused: Hence my post!!!!!!!!

 

 

:)

 

dk

:welcome::rofl::welcome:

 

 

 

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

:tea:

 

 

 

most of my knowledge is from the school of hard knocks

 

not based on any legal background

 

As quite a lot fellow caggers state seek Legal Advice

 

 

:ranger:

Link to post
Share on other sites
So what about ''failure to comply with a traffic sign'' an offence under section 36(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988?

 

__________________

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 professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my scales at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Partial quotes help no one. read the rest of S.36 especially this part "has been lawfully placed on or near a road". A contravention if it occurs is of a lawful Traffic Order. As I said with regard to parking read a few annual reports and catch up. the reports make it very clear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi mean and green

 

lamma is fond of partial answers,

the post "police speeding fine" is getting similar posting's

 

:)

 

dk

:welcome::rofl::welcome:

 

 

 

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

:tea:

 

 

 

most of my knowledge is from the school of hard knocks

 

not based on any legal background

 

As quite a lot fellow caggers state seek Legal Advice

 

 

:ranger:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot contravene a footway parking sign since it is not a 'restriction' it is a sign indicating permitted parking. The sign with two wheels on the footway indicates footway parking is permitted with the car partially on the footway, the sign for completely on the footway is not the same it has a picture of a car unsurprisingly with 4 wheels on the footway. If you are not parked within the exempted bay then you are in contravention of the footway parking regs. It is no different on street if you are in partially in a 'free' unrestricted bay and half the car is on a DYL you are parked in a restricted street not 'out of bay' the bay indicates the extent of the permitted parking area.

Link to post
Share on other sites

G&M the "The Road Traffic Act 1991 (Special Parking Areas) (England) Order 2003" is an Order - the clue is in the name you know. As I said "has been lawfully placed" is what the stature says. As for the speeding thread - it has been asked and answered. the OP was given proper advice and then some less than helpful posts suggested that 1) a speeding fine 'falls' to the RK - presumably through some magic that removes the need for evidence. and 2) even worse a post suggesting that the RK gives the driver the NIP to deal with. And so landing them in unpleasant S.172 waters. As I recall these came from you dk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
G&M the "The Road Traffic Act 1991 (Special Parking Areas) (England) Order 2003" is an Order - the clue is in the name you know. As I said "has been lawfully placed" is what the stature says. As for the speeding thread - it has been asked and answered. the OP was given proper advice and then some less than helpful posts suggested that 1) a speeding fine 'falls' to the RK - presumably through some magic that removes the need for evidence. and 2) even worse a post suggesting that the RK gives the driver the NIP to deal with. And so landing them in unpleasant S.172 waters. As I recall these came from you dk.

 

No what you said was it needed a traffic order, the above order merely decrimilises the 'offence' of failing to comply with a traffic sign. The bus stop clearway offence is created by the TSRGD 2003 no traffic order is needed. If you read the RTA 1988 properly it states...

 

A traffic sign shall not be treated for the purposes of this section as having been lawfully placed unless either—

(a) the indication given by the sign is an indication of a statutory prohibition, restriction or requirement, or

(b) it is expressly provided by or under any provision of the Traffic Acts that this section shall apply to the sign or to signs of a type of which the sign is one;

and, where the indication mentioned in paragraph (a) of this subsection is of the general nature only of the prohibition, restriction or requirement to which the sign relates, a person shall not be convicted of failure to comply with the indication unless he has failed to comply with the prohibition, restriction or requirement to which the sign relates.

 

Apart from bus clearways the following create offences under sect 36 RTA 1988 by statute no order is required.

 

TSRGD 2003 Diag.

601.1,

602,

606 when used on the central island of a roundabout or at a junction with a dual carriageway road

609 when used on the approach to a dual carriageway road

610

611.1

615

616 in certain circumstances

629.2 and 629.2A where used on a road where headroom is limited by a structure

Link to post
Share on other sites
"a statutory prohibition, restriction or requirement," note the word statutory. Y

 

Which means that Sailor Sam was correct you can contravene some signs no traffic order is required as you claimed! Do you want a shovel?

Link to post
Share on other sites

we are still talking about parking are we ? perhaps you should send your shovel to the adjudication services who are very clear that a parking contravention of it occurs is a contravention of a lawful traffic order. The TMA backs them up but that just means you will have send a shovel to Parliament as well. How many quotes from them would you like G&M ? mind you you have read their output anyway haven't you. Strange you havenlt addressed this. Big memory lapse G&M. Its also true for speeding as I mentioned. The signs only indicate, its the Order that counts. No need for a shovel thanks, I can deal with what you are dropping without one. I see the referenced 'speeding thread' has gone quite since rebuttal. amazing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Which means that Sailor Sam was correct you can contravene some signs no traffic order is required as you claimed! Do you want a shovel?

 

:eek:

 

__________________

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 professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my scales at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice usefull.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
we are still talking about parking are we ? perhaps you should send your shovel to the adjudication services who are very clear that a parking contravention of it occurs is a contravention of a lawful traffic order. The TMA backs them up but that just means you will have send a shovel to Parliament as well. How many quotes from them would you like G&M ? mind you you have read their output anyway haven't you. Strange you havenlt addressed this. Big memory lapse G&M. Its also true for speeding as I mentioned. The signs only indicate, its the Order that counts. No need for a shovel thanks, I can deal with what you are dropping without one. I see the referenced 'speeding thread' has gone quite since rebuttal. amazing.

 

You claimed ALL signs needed a Traffic order, they do not the TSRGD 2003 and the RTA 1988 creates the offence of failing to comply with certain signs without a traffic order. Neither myself or Sailor Sam mentioned parkng he even stated the correct legislation. You can try and pretend you only meant parking (even though thats not correct either due to bus clearways) but you didn't. Stop digging and appologise to Sam.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You claimed ALL signs needed a Traffic order, they do not the TSRGD 2003 and the RTA 1988 creates the offence of failing to comply with certain signs without a traffic order. Neither myself or Sailor Sam mentioned parkng he even stated the correct legislation. You can try and pretend you only meant parking (even though thats not correct either due to bus clearways) but you didn't. Stop digging and appologise to Sam.

 

:eek:

 

__________________

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 professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my scales at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice usefull.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has always been about parking.

The reference to an other thread (speeding) was only about partial answers.

 

I still find it quite odd that the O P has made 1 post to Cag not carried on with thread. No answers to questions raised no other details.

 

:)

 

dk

 

ps: are you sure it's gone quiet

Edited by dragonkeeper
adding ps

:welcome::rofl::welcome:

 

 

 

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

:tea:

 

 

 

most of my knowledge is from the school of hard knocks

 

not based on any legal background

 

As quite a lot fellow caggers state seek Legal Advice

 

 

:ranger:

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Parking enforcement under the TMA will be based on the same principle that a Penalty Charge Notice can only be issued where there has been a breach of a lawful TRO" Read the NPAS/TPT reports. They are an education. About the Traffic Penalty Tribunal downloads - Traffic Penalty Tribunal many references to this, very many.

Link to post
Share on other sites
"Parking enforcement under the TMA will be based on the same principle that a Penalty Charge Notice can only be issued where there has been a breach of a lawful TRO" Read the NPAS/TPT reports. They are an education. About the Traffic Penalty Tribunal downloads - Traffic Penalty Tribunal many references to this, very many.

 

The problem is Lamma that you said:

 

you cannot contravene a sign. Signs merely indicate.

 

Without qualification that you were referring to parking only.

 

The problem is that those who wish to ignore the fact that this thread is about parking are free to ignore that lack of precision and argue the toss about what you have suggested as a fact.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing how people can miss the thread title isn't it ? "Re: PCN code 62 - parked with four wheels on pavement". I bet they get surprised all the time when reading books !

Edited by lamma
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I make a suggestion here? As DK points out, the OP hasn't made any further contribution to his thread since post #1 and all we seem to have acheived since is a pointless, waste of time, argument. My suggestion is therefore we stop wasting any more time bickering amongst ourselves here as clearly the OP is no longer interested in his 'problem'. I myself will not be wasting anymore time here and I suggest you other guys do the same.

 

__________________

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 professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my scales at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

  • Haha 1

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Amazing how people can miss the thread title isn't it ? "Re: PCN code 62 - parked with four wheels on pavement". I bet they get surprised all the time when reading books !

 

Amazing how people try to cover up a mistake!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fuzzy6988

Thanks to all for your responses.

 

There was no marked "parking bay" on the road.

 

It's a small, narrow residential road with no yellow lines. It isn't even in a controlled parking zone (CPZ).

The strange thing is that the other residents on that road also park using four wheels.

 

By the way, I have just discovered I've been issued with multiple PCN's - one for each day my car has been left there. Got the notice through the post. But there was only one ticket on the windscreen - for the most recent PCN issued.

 

Whatever is happening, I'm definitely not going to pay all 5 x £100 tickets.

Edited by fuzzy6988
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3788 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...