PCN 62J in Kingston

[Dodi]

I have just received a PCN for an offence of 62J. Although the pictures sent show my vehicle with 2 wheels on the pavement I was not parked. I have pulled over to let a car pass me as they were driving too close and dangerous. You can see on the pictures that my brake lights where on all the time and the 2 pictures provided are 3 seconds apart because as soon as the vehicle behind me had gone passed I pulled away. Do I have grounds for appeal as what constitutes parking as in my eyes I was not parked which is backed up by the 2 pictures clearly showing my brake lights on and only 3 seconds apart before I then depart

[Jamberson]

You can always appeal it. Just tell them what you told us. I presume it was a CCTV one, sent through the post? Maybe they have footage they can look at. I think you yourself are entitled to see it too, but would have to go to their office.

[Dodi]

I have reviewed the CCTV online and it shows me on the pavement for 20 seconds waiting to pull away in to traffic safely with my brake lights and indicator on. How can this be seen as parking. I would welcome opinions if I have a case for appeal

[Jamberson]

It would be defined as parking, yes. I know it's not common sense, but they would see it as parking.

 

I think you should appeal and just explain the circumstances. Emphasise that it was a safety issue for you (aggressive driver behind puts you in danger) and ask them to look at the footage, and see that you had no desire to park up - it was just evasive action.

 

You stand a chance of winning, I think.

[green_and_mean]

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=84882

 

I have just received a pcn for an offence of 62J. Although the pictures sent show my vehicle with 2 wheels on the pavement although I was not parked. I have pulled over to let my ill grandaughter out of the car with her nan. You can see on the pictures that my brake lights where on all the time and the 2 pictures provided are 3 seconds apart because as soon as they got out of the car and it was safe to do so I pulled away. Do I have grounds for appeal as what constitutes parking as in my eyes I was not parked which is backed up by the 2 pictures clearly showing my brake lights on and only 3 seconds apart before I then depart. I have subsequently reviewed the CCTV online and it shows me on the pavement for 20 seconds waiting to pull away in to traffic safely with my brake lights and indicator on with no video of me dropping my grandaughter off (I wonder why that is, lol!?). How can this be seen as parking. I would welcome opinions if I have a case for appeal

[/url]

......and you wonder why local Councils don't take representations at face value!

[Jamberson]

So the story of the dangerous driver is made up? What a waste of time.

[green_and_mean]

So the story of the dangerous driver is made up? What a waste of time.

 

Who knows which version is the truth if any?

[tiredTraveller]

the one on the video?

[green_and_mean]

the one on the video?

 

 

Very true! Its always mystified me why innocent drivers moan about cctv enforcement, cctv shows what actually happened rather than what a CEO claims happened. If you didn't park in contravention the cctv footage gives a much better record than the CEOs version of events.

[Jamberson]

I guess people think they might be allowed to get away with minor infringements. CCTV is a pretty zero-tolerance approach, and the Big Brother connotations are none too pleasant either. Punishment by remote control.

[green_and_mean]

I guess people think they might be allowed to get away with minor infringements. CCTV is a pretty zero-tolerance approach, and the Big Brother connotations are none too pleasant either. Punishment by remote control.

 

Its often the same people issuing both PCNs so its all in the mind if the driver is going to be let off its going to happen by either method. CCTV is more effective and can obviously issue PCNs in circumstances where a CEO would struggle to do so ie dropping off on bus stops, zig zags etc but the whole point of those restrictions is zero tollerance hence the no stopping restriction that exists. The vast majority of councils use the same criteria for issuing a PCN as regards observation etc on foot and by cctv so its not really harsher its just easier to catch people who think they are exempt from adhering to the law.