Parked in a taxi rank for 10 seconds!

[goingstraight]

Hello all

I parked in a taxi rank for 10 secs literally to pickup my girlfriend and been issued a 130 pound fine! Wow can't believe it. Anyway they have a photo of my car. What options do I have? I'm getting divorced so I didn't get this letter until today (was nearly 3 weeks ago) and moving home soon. Should I just ignore this? Can they affect my credit rating or send bailiffs round. I'm not leaving a forwarding address either.

Please help.

[goingstraight]

Might be worth adding that there were no taxis in the rank at all.

[goingstraight]

Some more info. It's 45 contravention I wasn't fully parked in the bay half my car was in the road like over the marked taxi bay, 10 secs I was there maybe 20 but no more than that just while my gf jumped in.

[goingstraight]

Sorry one more thing. As I'm actually separated from my wife and not actually staying at the address where the letter went, could I just ignore as we're moving next week, and if it ever came on top deny receiving the notice? And sign a statutory declaration?

Thanks.

[i hate bailiffs]

Ignoring this would not be the best way to go about things

It will only lead to massive fees later on

And the removal of your vehicle once bailiffs get involved

They will catch up with you at some point

[goingstraight]

Any suggestions then?

Another thing is that the 21 days is up tomorrow and I have only just received this due to marital troubles. Will they accept that if I do end up paying?

[Sidewinder]

Best contact them tomorrow and explain the situation. Can you pay over the phone/internet if needs be?

[goingstraight]

So you suggest just paying it? No dispute for this extortionate legal mugging?

[Michael Browne]

Alighting/boarding is a valid exemption on single & double yellow lines, but unfortunately not on bus stops or taxi ranks

[caro]

I agree that the worst thing you can do is ignore this and delaying payment will cost possibly many times more than £130. Is it worth what could be a long fight with little or no chance of success for £130?

 

You could try challenging when you phone and make it clear that you don't agree the fine is fair but I doubt it'll make a difference. If you pay you could challenge it afterwards without risk of more costs but I don't think you have much, if any chance of success.

 

Sorry if it's not the answer you hoped for, but it's honest.

[Jamberson]

I agree that the worst thing you can do is ignore this and delaying payment will cost possibly many times more than £130. Is it worth what could be a long fight with little or no chance of success for £130?

 

You could try challenging when you phone and make it clear that you don't agree the fine is fair but I doubt it'll make a difference. If you pay you could challenge it afterwards without risk of more costs but I don't think you have much, if any chance of success.

 

Sorry if it's not the answer you hoped for, but it's honest.

 

It's also wrong.

 

You cannot challenge a PCN over the phone - you have to do it in writing.

 

You should not pay it and also challenge it. A few councils may allow this but it's the wrong route - either do one or the other.

 

You have nothing to lose if you appeal now and get the appeal in on time. Your best bet seems to be to write a letter just explaining what happened and hope that they will do the decent thing. If they say no, then it's a no.

 

The fact is, there is no time limit for allowed parking in a taxi rank, so the title of this thread might just as well read, "parked in a taxi rank". That gets a PCN, so you wouldn't have a legal case beyond the normal appeal. If they decline it, you'd be best paying at that stage rather than thinking they'll never find you (they will!). It won't affect your credit rating at all, but bailiffs will be on the hunt for your car.

 

Worth a try with an appeal, I think. Bear in mind that they will reply to your current address, so you would need to chase them up if you don't get a reply in the next two or three weeks, otherwise it will time out and more charges will be added.

[Conniff]

Everyone agrees it is a rip-off and just a money-maker and nothing whatsoever to do with keeping traffic moving.

 

 

Unfortunately ANPR will eventually catch you and the bill could then be in the £thousands.

[goingstraight]

I sent an email to their representations department saying this.

Vehicle registration *******

 

I write to say that as per the DVLA "log book" JOHN SMITH is not the owner of above registration or vehicle.

Please write to the owner to resolve this matter.

 

Is this ok to do? I didn't sign off as anyone that's all I said?

[goingstraight]

Also if they don't accept that will I be able to still pay reduced rate?

[Conniff]

So are you John Smith or not and is it your car ??

[goingstraight]

John smith was what I typed here to protect my identity.

And yes I did purchase the car but after reading my v5 apparently I'm not the owner?

Worth a try I rekon.

[spb1957]

I sent an email to their representations department saying this.

Vehicle registration *******

 

I write to say that as per the DVLA "log book" JOHN SMITH is not the owner of above registration or vehicle.

Please write to the owner to resolve this matter.

 

Is this ok to do? I didn't sign off as anyone that's all I said?

 

It's certainly not OK to lie to them and could cause you more trouble.

As much as the V5 does not neccessarily mean the registered keeper is also the owner, it is the named keeper that will be considered responsible for parking offences

[goingstraight]

The v5 says not proof of ownership. I'm just saying what is then?

[spb1957]

Ownership is irrelevant. the registered keeper will be held responsible. And if there is an innaccuracy on the V5, that is also your reponsibility

[Jamberson]

The Registered Keeper is held liable, but in law it is the owner who is really liable. The council makes the reasonable assumption that the registered keeper is the owner and pursues them initially. (The V5 shows the keeper, not the owner.)

 

If you deny ownership they will ask you for details of the actual owner. If you fail to provide them they will continue to pursue you. (If only it were that easy!). If you don't sign your statement they will ignore it, as it might not have come from the liable party (you).

 

If you make up an owner detail for them, they will eventually draw a blank and transfer liability back to you, so it will delay matters but not resolve things.

[veganite]

The Registered Keeper is held liable, but in law it is the owner who is really liable.

 

just an opinion...

 

I think within law it is the registered keeper who is liable and not the owner. If someone had a company car, then the V5 should show the registered keeper of the car (the employee) - whilst the owner (the company) owns the car, they are not liable for the keeper.

 

 

goingstraight - you sent them information saying that you are not the owner of the car and asking them to write to the owner to resolve the matter. it is the registered keeper (yourself) who is liable.

 

maybe you could research the legislation and requirements of taxi rank road markings. if there were errors in the road markings then you could possibly use those errors as a basis for your appeal.

 

ive done a quick google search and found this site:

http://www.parkingfinesandlines.com/FinesSignsLinesZone/BibleofUKParkingSignsLinesInterpreted.aspx

 

hopefully you will find that the taxi rank you parked in briefly does not conform to the required road markings and on that basis you should be able to challenge your penalty.

 

i strongly advise you not to use 'excuses' such as saying contact the owner as this is irrelevant.

[Jamberson]

just an opinion...

 

I think within law it is the registered keeper who is liable and not the owner. If someone had a company car, then the V5 should show the registered keeper of the car (the employee) - whilst the owner (the company) owns the car, they are not liable for the keeper.

 

 

The person liable is the person named on the Notice to Owner. That person is the person the council believes to be the owner (hence, Notice to "Owner"). Probably 19 times out of 20 the registered keeper is also the owner, and since the registered keeper appears on the NTO, there's no issue.

 

There are two ways the owner can transfer liability onto someone else - one, if the car is a hire car and there is a contract proving it - then, the hirer can be made liable. And two, if it is a company car and again, there is a written agreement to those ends.

 

So, in the situation you describe, if the employee was listed at DVLA as the keeper, they could transfer liability onto the owner (the company). They would then transfer it back, on the basis that its a company car, and that would be the end of any dispute over liability.

[goingstraight]

Yeah but I don't own it. The dvla log book says so. I've seen this argument before it's a mystery that no one can work out sneaky dvla monsters keep it quiet.

[Jamberson]

The DVLA log book doesn't say you don't own it. It just says it doesn't prove you own it. You may do, you may not.

 

The council hold responsible the person they believe to be the owner. If they believe you are the owner, it's up to you to convince them otherwise. If not, the debt sticks with you.

[Conniff]

Yeah but I don't own it. The dvla log book says so. I've seen this argument before it's a mystery that no one can work out sneaky dvla monsters keep it quiet.

.

 

 

That is the rubbish that FOTL weirdos spout. If you start quoting things like that on here, you will find yourself with not a lot of friends but you will probably get abuse.

 

 

If you bought it, you handed over the money, but you are only the registered keeper, then who owns it ??