Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello I hope someone can give me some advice here, as I am at a bit of a loss on how to proceed. This relates to alleged offences under the RTA. Yesterday I received a notification from the local police of intention to prosecute for the following offences: 1 driving without due care and attention 2 failing to stop at a road traffic accident 3 failing to report a road traffic accident At this stage they have only asked me to say whether I was the driver at the time or not and provided a blank sheet of paper to give information about the incident. Going by the location (just round the corner from where I live) I can only imagine this relating to one recent incident, which wasn't actually an accident but more of a road rage event. I was driving past someone unloading or working next to his lorry which had stopped in the road. I wasn't going fast or anything, while I went by lorry man turned around and punched and kicked my car whilst going past him. I stopped and got out and wanted to know what he thought he was doing punching and kicking my car. He then hurled some verbal abuse at me, swearing and he was quite aggressive. I still didn't know what his problem was and said I would report him to his company for threatening behaviour and vandalism for punching my car. I got my phone and tried to take a photo of his lorry and number plate but at that moment he came right at me, still shouting and swearing, so I was worried he may hit me next, as he already punched my car. I thought if the guy hits me I will come off second best, so I decided to retreat. I quickly got back into my car and left. When I checked my phone later the photo I tried to take was blurred and useless, so I thought it was pointless to report the incident to the police, as the guy would not be traceable. Over that I forgot about it until I got the letter yesterday in the post. This is the only thing I believe this can relate to, but I have no idea based on what the three above allegations come from There was no road traffic accident, more of a road rage incident. So I am at a loss what to do. I have 28 days to respond. Should I just say yes I was the driver and was there and see what happens next, or should I already make a written statement on the attached piece of paper they sent me and send that with it ? Is there anyone here who would have a rough idea what to do next ? I tried my legal advice line through my Union, but they have sent me from pillar to post, now say it needs to go to a different department again and that would be chargeable as the RTA comes under Criminal Law. So any advice would be appreciated Many Thanks
    • So a quick update got bounced around two different departments and managed to speak to a DVLA bod , explained the situation and they could see the overlap and that DD payments had been made from Feb , also no formal remiders prior , they gave me a number for the legal dept who I am calling this morning to see what they can do in terms of the SJP notice , still have time to submit this online.  Will update after my chat this morning 
    • filed the defence at same time as suggested @dx100uk
    • Also, I am trying to understand how invoicing a large sum in a 6m period becomes tax fraud?   Is it because if he had invoiced over the £85k threshold he should have been obligated to charge vat?  Which would have meant hmrc would have benefited from the vat amount? So by not charging it Hmrc have lost out on £s revenue?  Is that what makes it tax fraud? So as a self-employed contractor, let's say he invoiced one Co for 200k.  Should he have charged vat on the full 200k (£40k)? Or just on the sum above the threshold (£23k)?  And that by not charging vat, he has knowingly withheld tax £s from Hmrc? And is the payer complicit ?
  • 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 
        • 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

contravention code 27 but kerb does not meet carriageway! Help please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4313 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, i parked on wakefield street outside flats 92 - 96 in east london part of newham council. now the contravention says: Parked in a special enforcement area (which first of all it isn't as there are no parking restrictions or bays) adjacent to a footwa, cycle track or verge lowered to meet the level of carriageway.

 

The kerb does not meet the carriageway in fact there is a good 4 - 5 inch difference between the kerb and road, also it is very unclear that it was a dropped kerb in the first place. I was parked out side the entrance gate of the block of flats which has no where to cross over to so even if it has a lowered kerb a pedestrian would not be able to safely cross over on to the other side of the road. there are aboyt 4 other flats on the same road further up and none of them have a dropped kerb to the entrances so this is the only one.

 

i will upload a pic but i didn't think to move my car and then picture it but feel like i should go back with a ruler and photograph the difference in the kerb and road just to prove how un-noticable it is.

 

any body have any ideas on how best to tackle this? all the other kerb drops on the same road meet the carriageway and i have pictured them too. now just to figure how to upload a picture!

 

thank you and i look forward to your response i have 14 days in which to appeal otherwise i'll be paying the money grabbers £130!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i should go back with a ruler and photograph the difference in the kerb and road just to prove how un-noticable it is
.

 

Good idea, also check that the 'dropped kerb' isn't kerb that has merely sunk (possibly caused by a heavy vehicle) and has proper sloping shoulder kerbs either side

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMAG0271.jpg

 

IMAG0274.jpg

 

IMAG0273.jpg

 

 

IMAG0278.jpg

 

in the first pic you can see the kerb drop but it's quite noticable on the photo but when standing there it's not as i wouldn't have parked there if it was! in the fourth pic you can see the whole street view and the gates leading to the other flats which do not have a dropped kerb in front of the gates. the second pic shows another kerb drop on a corner which properly meets the kerb.

IMAG0279.jpg

Edited by citizenB
separated images for easier vieiweng
Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks Micheal browne i will go back with a ruler but does any body know what the maximum difference between the kerb and carriageway can be as i have exhausted my self trying to google it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMAG0287.jpg

so i've been back with my metal ruler and have measured the height of the drop which is 3 inches and the full height of the kerb is 4 and a half inches, also when i parked there were cars on either side of the drop so i could not easily notice the difference in pavement height i.e it was not easily visible i only saw the drop after i got the ticket.

 

can they legally put in a dropped kerb where there is nothing to cross over on to, as in the opposite pavement has no drop in the kerb to indicate that it may be a crossing point, there is no difference in pavement leading from the gate to the kerb. all other kerbs on the same road meet the carriageway properly as in there is no difference between the kerb and road they meet almost seamlessly. other drops which lead into a school have keep clear in white lettering stenciled on the road.

 

i wouldn't have parked there if i had seen the kerb drop how can i prove this point?

 

i have asked to see photographic evidence anyway to be able to prove my case, but i have a feeling it's futile as i can't find the legal regulations to say how high the kerb can be maximum.

IMAG0286.jpg

IMAG0284.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have these points:

 

1. Although lower the pavement had not been lowered to meet the level of carriageway and certainly not enough to make it obvious that it constituted a dropped kerb.

2. When you parked there were cars on either side of the drop so the slight difference in pavement height was not obvious

3. There are other dropped kerbs for the same development only 15 yds away which are both properly lowered to meet the level of carriageway and marked by posts

4 There is no corresponding dropped kerb on the opposite pavement.

 

However, it's unlikely the council will allow an appeal on that basis, (although it is always worth a try), which means you would have to hope that an adjudicator would agree with you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Traffic Management Act (2004) states for dropped footways:

 

Prohibition of parking at dropped footways etc.

(1) In a special enforcement area a vehicle must not be parked on the carriageway adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge where—

(a) the footway, cycle track or verge has been lowered to meet the level of the carriageway for the purpose of—(i) assisting pedestrians crossing the carriageway,

 

(ii) assisting cyclists entering or leaving the carriageway, or

 

(iii) assisting vehicles entering or leaving the carriageway across the footway, cycle track or verge; or

 

 

 

(b) the carriageway has, for a purpose within paragraph (a)(i) to (iii), been raised to meet the level of the footway, cycle track or verge.

It clearly states that the kerb, verge or cycle track have been lowered to meet the level of the road. The road can also be raised.

 

PUTTING IT IN WRITING & KEEPING COPIES IS A MUST FOR SUCCESS

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Traffic Management Act (2004) states for dropped footways:

 

Prohibition of parking at dropped footways etc.

(1) In a special enforcement area a vehicle must not be parked on the carriageway adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge where—

(a) the footway, cycle track or verge has been lowered to meet the level of the carriageway for the purpose of—(i) assisting pedestrians crossing the carriageway,

 

(ii) assisting cyclists entering or leaving the carriageway, or

 

(iii) assisting vehicles entering or leaving the carriageway across the footway, cycle track or verge; or

 

 

 

(b) the carriageway has, for a purpose within paragraph (a)(i) to (iii), been raised to meet the level of the footway, cycle track or verge.

It clearly states that the kerb, verge or cycle track have been lowered to meet the level of the road. The road can also be raised.

 

 

so basically the dropped kerb meets none of those criteria?

 

i've consulted my cousin who's a CEO and he's said it's invalid as there isn't an identical croosing point on the opposite side making it an invalid crossing point for pedestrians and it's not for vehicular access either. if anything it may be for taking the bins out in which case again you can't be issued a ticket. my cousin does work in the same borough so he knows what he's talking about but can't phrase it like you guys hence i needed your help and he was unavailable until a little while ago.

 

thanks for the TMA as i wouldn't have been able to find that myself, really appreciate everyones help and i'll keep you posted on the result.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a copy of the letter i'm thinking of sending in do you think i should add or delete anything from it? thanks in advance...

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

 

 

Parking ticket number:

Vehicle registration number:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I received a parking ticket on 22/08/2012 but I believe the ticket was wrongly issued and I would like to submit an appeal for the following reasons:

 

 

 

  • The alleged contravention did not occur

Quite simply, the parking attendant got it wrong and I was not parked inappropriately at the time the ticket was issued. This is due to the fact the kerb was not lowered to meet the carriageway nor was there any signage indicating a dropped kerb. Neither is there a dropped kerb on the opposing pavement hence it is not for pedestrian use and it is not there for vehicular access either as there is no where for a vehicle to go.

 

 

Section 86 of the Trafiic Management Act clearly states what constitutes as a dropped kerb and where I was parked does not fall into this catergory, I suggest you train your CEO's better on what qualifies as a contravention and what doesn't as they are giving law abiding citizens stress without just cause. Had it been a dropped kerb there would have been no reason for me to the park there. There are 5 other gates to identical flats on the same road and not one has a dropped kerb in front of the gate, and every dropped kerb on the same road meets the carriageway as is stated in the TMA.

 

 

I am confident that my point has been been made and that the person dealing with this appeal will agree with me that no contravention has taken place hence the PCN is invalid.

  1. The Traffic Management Act (2004) states for dropped footways:
     
    Prohibition of parking at dropped footways etc.
    (1) In a special enforcement area a vehicle must not be parked on the carriageway adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge where—
    (a) the footway, cycle track or verge has been lowered to meet the level of the carriageway for the purpose of—(i) assisting pedestrians crossing the carriageway,
     
    (ii) assisting cyclists entering or leaving the carriageway, or
     
    (iii) assisting vehicles entering or leaving the carriageway across the footway, cycle track or verge; or
     
     
     
    (b) the carriageway has, for a purpose within paragraph (a)(i) to (iii), been raised to meet the level of the footway, cycle track or verge.

 

 

 

 

 

Please see attached photographic evidence which proves the kerb does not meet the carriageway as there is a 3 inch difference in the kerb and carriageway as proof of my appeal.

 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...