Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Please also take photos of the sign at the entrance as well as any signs inside the car park especially any that are different. Please take them from a distance where we can read them and if there is a payment machine, the sign on the machine or very close to it that explains their T&Cs for the machine.
    • Thanks for getting the signage posted up so quickly. The sign on entry should explain their T&Cs. As they don't it means that  what they have given you is  an offer to treat, not a contract. For there to be a contract they would have had to put their offer at the entrance.  You cannot put a notice saying that their T&Cs are inside the car park and expect motorists to be subject to those T&Cs when they are unaware what the terms are.. They have to be able to read them and understand them before they can accept them. My feeling is that the sign that includes the charge of £100 is too small to be acceptable On top of that the sign at the entrance is for Parking Control Solutions while the signs inside are from HX Management-a completely different animal. To strengthen your case for not paying them is the fact that their PCN is not compliant.  Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 there are certain wordings in  the NTK  that by Law must comply with the Act. They don't  have to quote that part of the Act in their PCN but the relevant wording has to be included. PoFA Schedule 4 paragraph 9 [2]   the notice must  [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;   Your  NTK does not include  [if all the applicable conditions  under the Schedule have been met ]thus rendering the NTK non compliant.  
    • I agree its about time but why has it taken for the National Crime Agency to flag this up for then to take action and not Ofcom.   Yet again a Government Agency that is meant to deal with this hasn't Ofcom but flagged by another Agency NCA.   If the telephone companies have this facility in place already to do this then why hasn't Ofcom been pushing them to stop all these scam calls and giving them massive fines for not doing so.    
    • Hi   Send this to them:   Dear Sir/Madam   Formal Complaint   Reference:            (insert their complaint reference number here)   Thank you for your response letter dated XX/XX/2021 which I received by email on XX/XX/2021 that contained your Original Email sent that showed due to your Maladministration that you had sent the Original Email containing my Personal Data to an incorrect email address due to spelling errors in the email address.   a)      Due to this Maladministration of this email being sent to the incorrect email address this email contained my Personal Data which is a Data Protection Breach therefore I require clarification from yourselves that this Breach has been reported to your Data Protection Officer and what action is being taken to ensure that my Personal Data contained in that Original Email has not been read by the recipient that you sent that email to with the incorrect email address.   As the email was sent by yourselves to my correct email address containing the original email showing the incorrect email address was due to spelling errors (maladministration) your IT Department will be able to obtain those emails sent.   If I do not get a satisfactory response that this has been dealt with by your Data Protection Officer, I will report this Data Breach to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/   b)      Due to this Maladministration I failed to receive your Stage 1 complaint response within the allocated time limit for a Stage 1 response therefore this complaint should be dealt with as a Stage 2 Complaint and if you refuse to treat this as a Stage 2 Complaint, I require Full Clarification for your refusal.   I was placed in this Tenancy via the Rough Sleepers Initiative and I find your response about damaged/destroyed items that you would not be able to look into this as this happened 2 years ago but all tenants regardless of private or social housing are responsible for arranging their own contents insurance totally unacceptable as again, I was never notified nor informed of this requirement on taking up this tenancy.   I require clarification from yourself that when a New Tenant takes up a Tenancy Agreement with yourselves why are the not informed of this requirement of Contents Insurance which you should be duty bound to inform all tenants on taking up a tenancy agreement if such a requirement and it should also be noted within that tenants Housing File which you have full access to as dealing with complaint so I require clarification as well if this is noted in my Housing File.   You state multiple properties throughout the area were affected by sewage flood on the same day and the issue will have stemmed from the mains which is not your responsibility.   a)      You have failed to take into that the above statement from yourself blaming the Mains is without any actual evidence from yourselves to back up this claim therefore I require clarification as to what actual evidence you have and to be provided with copies.   b)      You also failed to take into account that in my initial complaint letter that on 12th July 2021 basement flats 1 & 2 were flooded by sewage exacerbated by blockage in the property’s drainage. The blockage has been confirmed by two contractors after the flooding including CCR who were subcontracted by Pyramid Plus that it was the properties drainage that was blocked. Also, while I was decanted from this property, I was contacted by CCR who confirmed that the drain was blocked but they could not access manhole as it was inaccessible as it is located in a utility cupboard underneath carpet, floorboards so how could this be the Main and not your responsibility when it is within the properties boundaries.   Your response about how complaints have been made by residents in relation to this issue is that your system does not allow you to find that information is completely unacceptable as your Housing Association should be able to produce these as part of ongoing repairs and maintenance/procurement processes to present these to your Board for there yearly Budget meeting if not why not.   Then you state you are under no obligation to share that information; therefore, your organisation is not being Open and Accountable to your Service Users and under which Article of the General Data Protection Act (GDPR) are you using for this refusal.   You have also failed to mention that I can make that above request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI) and what is your process for such a request again not being Open and Accountable.   I await your response.
    • RE: EC261 Compensation   It's normal they won't have asked you to contact them . Your initial rescheduling was obviously done by a bot - and there was no human to notice the mistake, as far as the bot knew your scheduling was perfectly normal so there was no need to ask you to contact them.   As long as that was done 2 weeks in advance the carrier's liability to notify you is fulfilled.   (You could have contacted them there and pointed out that the new schedule was impossible. Unfortunately you didn't. Claiming you didn't notice is not likely to work in your favor)   The bot who sent you the 24h confirmation didn't notice the mistake either, obviously.   At some point a human or another bot finally identified the problem and that's when they called you. As far as they are concerned neither you nor them had noticed the scheduling mistake and they took it on them to notify you so you don't have a bad surprise when you try and check in.   However as far as I know, neither flight was delayed or cancelled. You could have taken both flights, if you had the power to be in two places at the same time.   So I don't think there is any scope to claim for EC261. But claim forms are free so feel free to try.     Then, you can certainly make an old fashioned claim (directly to BA)   What could perhaps play in your favor:   It's the carrier's responsibility to ensure that they don't sell you a ticket where the flyer cannot meet the minimum connection time or MCT.   This situation mostly applies to situations where the flyer doesn't know and gets caught. For example say you connect at LHR and you are given 35 minutes to connect. This may look just fine to an unsuspecting tourist, but in reality there is practically zero chance to make the connection, therefore the airline is liable here for selling you this ticket resulting in you missing your connection   In your case though it could be argued that even an unsuspecting tourist should be able to tell that it is not possible for them to depart 5 minutes prior to disembarking and therefore that you should have checked your notification more carefully.   The fact that the bot allowed such a glaring mistake to happen is certainly an argument in your favour shall you decide to make a complaint.     What doesn't play in your favor:   The airline obviously did their best to get you to your destination as soon as they noticed their mistake. They offered you more than one alternative (the first alternative would have got you in time at your destination, but you declined) and you then accepted another alternative, and fully travelled the ticket. That is a very strong position for them.     What did you lose and what do you intend to claim for?   You took the overnight connection so obviously you had to stay at an airport hotel. Is that correct? Did you keep the receipt for your hotel and meals?   You certainly should have asked them on the phone when negotiating your re-route that they provide a hotel. Within 20hrs of the flight it's something they would most probably not have denied to you (but airlines will generally avoid offering off the bat. Why lose money when a customer is just going to roll with it and pay for their own stay anyway, right?). After the fact it's going to be a lot more difficult to claim.   I do certainly think it would be reasonable to try and write them a polite but firm letter to claim for that. Not 700 euros, not damages and hardship and all that jazz, just the extra expense you incurred following a scheduling mistake that they made (that should have never happened) and that they didn't notice until way too late in the day , with your categorical inability to leave 3 hours earlier (you had very important business meetings or something critical, it certainly wasn't just convenience) and the extra costs incurred, and asking that they kindly provide compensation for the hotel and meals, which you feel it was their duty to offer you and you are politely disappointed that they didn't, and thafully you happen to have kept all the receipts. Put Alex Cruz on copy for good measure.   No guarantee but I feel it has a fair chance of success. Most probably you will be offered a heap of Avios instead of cash. It's then up for you to decide whether you want to accept that. Personally I wouldn't bother going further, but that's just me. See if anyone here disagrees, and do let us know what you decide and keep in touch with how it went.            
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Going through a tram road... Fined... TWICE!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3370 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

Hey people,

 

Hope someone can really help me or give me some advice about this issue. About a month ago in Nottingham, I accidentally drove onto a tram route and after quickly realising did a 3 point turn and returned back out of it. Later on that week I got a fine from Nottingham City Council stating that I had been caught on an ANPR camera passing through a designated Tram Gate.

 

I put my hands up and agreed that it was my fault and agreed that I would pay the fine. However to my surprise another fine was sent out but this time on the same day for my car caught on the ANPR camera 2 minutes later. Thats when I realised that the camera caught me on the way in and on the way out.

 

I appealed against the second fine to say that I felt I was being penalized for correcting my mistake as I turned around when I realised I had entered a tram route. After that I assumed that was the end of that and common sense should prevail. I received a letter today from Nottingham city council telling me that the appeal had been rejected with the comments "I have noted your comments abd would advise that by turning around and re entering the tram gateway, a second contravention occured and a second penalty charge was correctly served and remains payable".

 

After reading that letter, I am absolutely fuming and it feels like daylight robbery :-x Someone please help me or get me some advice please!!

 

Thanks in advance!

Link to post
Share on other sites

just a bump onto todays pages

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have noted your comments and would advise that by turning around and re entering the tram gateway
But you didn't re-enter the tram gateway you turned around and exited.

 

One for the experts I think..

If my post was helpful don't forget to click the star!

Advice is offered freely, without liability and without prejudice.

If in any doubt professional legal advice should be sought.

 

I do not profess to be in any way legally trained, I am a big

oily truck driver and all I know has been learned within the

Consumer Action Group.

 

FAQ's

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/

 

Trying to stop smoking?

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/give-up-smoking-here/

 

A dummies guide to the forums

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

--

KEEP WILDLIFE IN THE WILD

http://www.bornfree.org.uk

BORN FREE FOUNDATION

--

Link to post
Share on other sites

We would need more info and pics ect. Can the OP tell us the exact location so we can check it out on street view?

 

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 reputation 'star' button 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

  • 8 months later...

Hi Shazzy777

I was wondering how your appeal against the second PCN panned out.

I am have appealed over two contraventions...but I could quite easily had four, since like you I turned around and went back through the tram gate. Notts CC claim that they have a poilcy to avoid multiple PCNs being issued in quick succession. I have asked for a copy of this policy, without success.

Cooperm4n

Link to post
Share on other sites

I grew up in Nottingham, and I'm having a really hard time figuring out how you did that to be honest. The only bits I can think of are the bridge towards the final stop near the capital one building, or the parts where the tram runs along railway track which are really clearly not road. I could have forgotten something though. Can you tell us whereabouts this happened?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Al27

I could have had four contraventions since I took some relatives along Goldsmith Street, from Peel Street, and back again.

I have submitted a letter of representation and received a notice of rejection.

I am now awaiting an appeal date...currently running around November...so forgive me if I don't post the letters (see Pepipoo below)

I think my chances are 50:50 at the moment, but I have been trying to get a copy of any policy.

I have had help from Pepipoo, where there is much debate.

I've lived in Nottingham all my life too, tiredTraveller, and had no idea that there was a tramgate on Goldmine (sic) Street.

Be warned, there is now an enforcement camera on Fletcher Gate...do not proceed into Carlton Street for George Street...you must turn right into Warser Gate...if you must, go left into Victoria Street, do a U turn and then go into Carlton Street, etc... This is currently a loop-hole, but I won't be exploiting it!

Other ANPR cameras are planned for Milton Street, Parliament Street, Friar Lane...etc

Cooperm4n

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just taken a look on street view. There is a tram stop half way along Goldsmith which has blue 'tram only' signs at each end. i'm assuming that it was there you drove through. The only thing I can see is that the road markings arn't that great and the signs themselves seem to be positioned away from the kerb. However, going on the Midland Metro system (Wolverhampton to Birmingham) which travels along sections of roads at the Wolverhampton end, the 'tram only' sections are enforced for fairly obvious reasons really. There are local TO's in place to enforce these so I would guess the same applies to Nottingham. if that is the case, I can't see you appealing successfully to be honest.

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

Hi Sailor Sam

Fair comment...but therein lies the issue. No camera enforcement warnings signs, poor road markings, poorly spaced road signs, (un)intended restrictions for cyclists, wholesale inconsistencies in the use of road signs at other sites in Nottingham, inconsistent application of multiple PCNs...which is why I posted. There are so many irregularities with the tram gate, it is now a matter of principle. The Sheriff has a nice cash cow.

Wish me luck

Cooperm4n

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the problem with having no camera enforcement signs? If the rules are abided by, they shouldn't be an issue. They are not mandatory anyway. Having said that, if the signage is inadequate/incorrect then your PCNs should be cancelled. That is what PATAS is for.

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

  • 4 months later...

I too have just received a notice for going through Tram stop on Goldsmith Street, in my instance I was following my Sat Nav looking for the Premier Inn, it was the first time I have driven in Nottingham so unfamiliar with the road layout.

 

My Sat Nav took me down Chaucer Street and at the end there is NO sign to say I can't turn left, the only sign is a tiny "No Through Road" sign on the opposite side of the junction, naturally I assumed this meant the road came to some sort of dead end as is usually the case when faced with such a sign. I turned left expecting the Premier Inn to be down there anyway, so far so good no offence has been committed. Next thing I know I am driving right up to a tram stop, there is no other junctions to turn down, no turning facility, at this point I hadn't seem any signs to say I couldn't drive through but remember thinking its odd driving through such a stop and was I doing the right thing, anyway I am faced with making a split decision on whether to drive through or do a "U" turn possibly in front of a Tram. Having had a family member tragically killed doing such a "U" some years ago (by a car not a tram) I made the split decision to drive through especially as I had not seen anything to say I couldnt.

 

Upon arriving at the Hotel I was still unsure whether I was allowed to drive throught the stop and so questioned with the receptionist who advised that I shouldnt and customers are always doing it, to my amazment there was 6 other people in the hotel reception area that had done exactly the same as me that very evening! Because of this I walked back to double check I hadnt missed any roadsigns and I was correct, nothing at the end of Chaucer Street to prevent you from turning left but there was signs either sign of the tramstop however these are spaced wide apart, well away from the usually positioning at the edge of the road, I hadnt seen these due to the vast spacing between them, the fact one was positioned up against a building wall, the other was in line with a row of trees and it was very dark.

Two points here: -

1. Why are they so far apart and not next to the road in a more obvious visable position to the motorist?

2. By the time you are in a position to see the sign to advise you cant proceed any further there is no other roads to turn down, no turning provision and the only way to prevent yourself driving through is via a very dangerous U turn potentially in front of a Tram! Good road planning NCC!

 

I always adhere to road signs and in 27 years of driving have never ignored a road sign or traffic signal, and obviously as such have never received any such penalties. I object strongly to this fine as I feel the only reason I drove through this Tram Stop is because of Nottingham County Councils failure to provide adequate road signs. I have searched the internet and found somebody who has made the same mistake, contested and won! At the appeal NCC didnt even bother to turn up and the court found that there was inadequate signage and overturned the fine.

 

I too am going to appeal to my fine and would like to hear from anyone else who has made the same mistake and is willing to stand up to NCC!

 

One last comment, shouldn't NCC stop issuing fines until they have made adequate road sign provision to advise motorist correctly? Maybe thats why they offer a 50% reduction in your fine from £60 to £30 to get you to pay up quickly! I'm fighting mine on principle! :-x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi John and welcome to CAG

 

Really you should start your own thread. But having said that, the OP on this one (cooperm4n) didn't seem to come back to let us know the out come which is the what normally happens i'm afraid.

 

I've just taken another look at this as it's been a while now since we had the OPs case. It would appear to me that even the Google Street View vehicle went through the stop as the blue trace on the 'map' is continuous. Normally the blue line only indicates streets (or parts of) which are accessible to all vehicles (and was accessible to the camera car). Obviously this isn't to be used as an indication that there are no restrictions at all and that you shouldn't rely on Street View legally. Also, i'm having to assume that the situ now is the same as what is shown on Street View which can be out of date.

 

Having said that, although my opinion given in post #11 still stand, I think the signage is very suspect as they are not positioned very well. I also agree that there dosn't appear to be any obvious pre-warning of the restriction or adequate road markings. As i said previously, even the Street View camera car didn't realise!

Unfortunately though it's difficult to advise on what your chances are because we don't know how the OP got on. Clearly this must be a big problem and no doubt it is catching a lot of people out.

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

  • 5 months later...

dammit - I now know exactly which tram gate the OP means because I turned left into it due to the signs being obscured by building works around what used to be the Nottingham Trent Uni student union building.

The problem is that I stopped *just before the gate*, passenger told me there's no way to back out now, and you're already screwed so you might as well go and I agreed and kept going. I only realised walking back that way he was completely wrong.

 

D'oh - I'm guessing that although the signs are obscured and confusing the fact I stopped, looked at the situation and then carried on is just going to look far too bad to get out of paying this one so I'll just have to cough up...

Link to post
Share on other sites

unfortunately I live down in London, so it'd cost me more than the fine in petrol and time. That and I did stop short of the tramgate, assess the situation (albeit wrongly) and then drive through, so I'm 99% sure I don't have a leg to stand on.

 

I think I'd have had more of a chance if I'd just driven straight through to be honest...

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...