Told I'll receive the PCN in the post

[Benny_Toe]

Hello All,

 

I'm a newbie here so forgive me if I'm a little off with the format.

 

Two days ago after seeing a van indicate to leave a loading section of the road, I pulled in ahead of him so to reverse as soon as he vacated.

 

The section of the road that I pulled over to was beyond the section that allowed loading/unloading or waiting. At the time I wasn't aware of this and to be totally honest, would never really equate what I was doing to either Unloading or Waiting, since I had manouvered into a position that would allow me to reverse into the loading/waiting area (it is a very busy road so could not have stopped mid street behind the indicating van nor could I have stopped ahead of him for a reverse parallel park after he'd gone).

 

While I was looking back in my side mirrors, quite literally, a Cival Enforcement Officer (although I'd say nothing was civil about the way this particular office behaved) appeared out of nowhere proceding to take a closeup picture of my tax disc. I was totally confused by this so got out of my vehicle to ask what he was doing. The attendant just ignored me, stepped further back and took another picture front facing picture ofmy vehicle. After taking his second snap he walked over to a pole and took another picture of a small 'No Loading/Unloading or Waiting' sign that had an arrow pointing to the right (which is where I was) which incidently I had not previously seen. I tried to explain to him that I was manouvering to park in the space directly behind me to which he simply replied "You now have a ticket"

 

After scrambling my thoughts I then just returned to my vehicle and drove off. In which time he was able to take another two snaps, one from the rear and another from the front.

 

Today I decided to call to find out of a ticket had been issued against my vehicle, and it had! I was able to view the incident details online using the ticket number given to me over the phone. The pictures taken had been uploaded for me to view.

 

When I mentioned to the lady who took my call that no ticket had actually been issued to me, and that the CEO had not even begun the process before I left; she said that it had and that I must have been in that position for at least a minute since 1 picture was taken at 23 and the other 3 at 24 with the ticket being issued at 25 minutes passed the hour. I said that the ticket had not been correctly served, she replied it had, and advised me to appeal if I wished.

 

I understand why parking enforcement companies have a tendancy to recruit cold unscrupulous types, but while it would have made sense for the man to have just explained or warned before issueing a ticket, I would not expect him to tell lies that the ticket had been issued.

 

Please help

Edited March 21, 2013 by Benny_Toe

[Martin Willmott]

I'd have taken his name, placed a formal complaint against him and if all else failed track him down and remove the wheels from his car! They are impossible to reason with, and they have to be some sad gits to do a job like that in the first place, just be assured you have a better life and more happiness than the sad miserable twerp will ever know.

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi Benny_Toe, and welcome to CAG!

 

That is absolutely outrageous and of course you must appeal.

 

Come back when you receive the ticket and tell us exactly what offence is shown as having been committed, or can you see that online?

 

DD

[Benny_Toe]

Honestly I was just far too taken back to even think about what was taking place. The guy shocked me with his cold rude demeanor

[Benny_Toe]

Hi Daniella, the web site shows a contravention descrioption as:

 

"Parked or loading/unloading in a restricted street where waiting and loading/unloading restrictions are in force"

 

By the way, I was there for no more than 30 seconds which of course must have overlapped from minute 23 to minute 24 which somehow the lady over the phone calculated as bebeing there for at least a minute. Also the attendant had not even by begun entering anything into his ticket making device cos he was so concerned about getting his pictures first.

[Benny_Toe]

Should I appeal before I received the letter they send out at 28 days?

And to be clear, on what grounds would you say I should lodge the appeal?

[assisted blonde]

technically though you were waiting in a non waiting bay, you were waiting to reverse into a parking space but the space wasnt vacant at the time so you stopped and waited, you could have pulled up behind the vehicle (in the road) to let him out if he was moving right away, but if he wasnt and you were waiting for him to move then you were commiting an offence.

[Benny_Toe]

Thanks for clarifying that Assisted Blonde.

 

I learnt not to make common assumptions about every day simple words and terms when used by the authorities or those acting on their behalf.

 

By the way, what is meant by the grounds for appeal point "Not correctly served" ?

 

I ask because I have been told it applies in this case.

[Jamberson]

If a CEO intends to issue a PCN but before he can do so, the vehicle is driven away, then a postal PCN can be issued, and that's legit.

 

You can challenge it of course. Was there any type of restriction on what sort of vehicles were allowed to load/unload? Can you give us the exact location?

[Desperate Daniella]

The van was indicating so you were expecting him to move immediately. Out of consideration for other road users behind you pulled in front and were waiting for the driver to move so you could reverse into the space.

 

You were not parked, or unloading, and were only stationery for as long as you were because you got out to ask the warden what he was doing.

 

Wait for the Notice in case they say there are only so many grounds for appeal. I can't remember what they are and you have to be a little careful.

 

There was also something in the paper the other day about motorists parking for only a minute or two and being penalised, and that they shouldn't be, and you were not even parked.

 

DD

[Desperate Daniella]

If this were my ticket I'd be confident about appealing.

[green_and_mean]

Guidance to local authorities

 

8.77 A PCN may not be served by post if the motorist returns to the vehicle

before the CEO has started to issue it. A CEO has not started to issue a PCN

if s/he is observing a vehicle or jotting down some details. It is only when

the CEO starts to create the PCN and would otherwise have to cancel it that

they have started to issue it. If the driver returns before the CEO has started

to issue the ticket, the CEO should establish whether the vehicle is parked in

contravention (for example, if loading or unloading is taking place). If the vehicle is

in contravention, the CEO should ask the driver to comply with the restrictions.

If a driver is with the vehicle best practice is to ask him to comply before issuing a PCN, if the driver is in the vehicle he/she may have been picking up or dropping off a passenger so starting to issue a PCN without even speaking to the driver is totally wrong.

[Jamberson]

The account at the top only talks about taking photos, and I suspect there is more to it than is clear from this. There's no account of when the CEO logged the vehicle details, but he must have done so for a PCN to exist.

[Martin Willmott]

You could get onto your local MP or the new police commissioner they can both apply the correct amount of pressure, important thing is to stay calm and deal with it logically

[green_and_mean]

The account at the top only talks about taking photos, and I suspect there is more to it than is clear from this. There's no account of when the CEO logged the vehicle details, but he must have done so for a PCN to exist.

 

By law however he must have done this beffore the driver drove off, he could however if dishonest have used the photos taken to create the PCN which is why he probably took a close up of the tax disc. I would ask for the original of the photos that contains a time stamp and a print out of the PCN history from the enforcement software, this should indicate the order in which the evidence was recorded.