Parking ticket experts! help needed.
08-11-2010, 11:59 PM
#1
Parking ticket experts! help needed.
I was visiting a friends house just down the road and I got a council parking ticket in a residential parking bay that had no sign, just white dashed parking bay marked in the road.
I initially appealed on the grounds that the bay had no sign but that was rejected with the council claiming that as i lived in the area, i should know the restriction was in force despite no sign being present WTF
Obviously thats fucking rediculous.
this is the bay:
You can see a post where a sign once was (and has been replaced since).
Now i have a second opportunity to appeal and ive been advised i can appeal under the legislation called 'Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions' and that a ticket issued in an incorrectly marked parking bay (be it road markings or signs) is legally unenforcable.
Does anyone know the exact piece of legislation i need to quote in the appeal letter so I win???
I initially appealed on the grounds that the bay had no sign but that was rejected with the council claiming that as i lived in the area, i should know the restriction was in force despite no sign being present WTF
Obviously thats fucking rediculous.
this is the bay:
You can see a post where a sign once was (and has been replaced since).
Now i have a second opportunity to appeal and ive been advised i can appeal under the legislation called 'Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions' and that a ticket issued in an incorrectly marked parking bay (be it road markings or signs) is legally unenforcable.
Does anyone know the exact piece of legislation i need to quote in the appeal letter so I win???
09-11-2010, 12:41 AM
#4
15000
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: North Dakota, USA
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09-11-2010, 05:47 AM
#5
saff is working!!!...atm
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: fishburn sex shop...co.durham
Posts: 8,984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
go and measure the lines and gaps....the lines HAVE to be 600mm long (slight % tollerance)....but the gaps can be 600-2400mm....so eg 500ish line 500ish gap.......WRONG..........
.....get ur tape out bud...
(and still moan about the sign.....the fuckn post is there so why not a sign...??)
.....get ur tape out bud... (and still moan about the sign.....the fuckn post is there so why not a sign...??)
09-11-2010, 07:43 AM
#6
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SE London
Posts: 4,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I completely fail to see how they can enforce that when there's no sign.
Since I'm not from the area does that then mean that I could have parked there and not got a ticket?
Since I'm not from the area does that then mean that I could have parked there and not got a ticket?
09-11-2010, 09:19 AM
#7
PassionFord Regular
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Tyne & Wear
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there are parking bays along the side of the road then there should be signs within 5 metres at either end of the parking bays. There should also be signs every 30m.
Taken from http://www.nopenaltypoints.co.uk/par...ve-rights.html
Taken from http://www.nopenaltypoints.co.uk/par...ve-rights.html
Trending Topics
09-11-2010, 10:00 AM
#8
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
As you live in the area you should know the restrictions, what arse in the council thought that one up , what utter bollicks..
But there is a post there so i bet the was a sign there but some piky nicked it for scrap and the councill have not replaced it.
No restriction thee so they dont have a leg to stand on.
But there is a post there so i bet the was a sign there but some piky nicked it for scrap and the councill have not replaced it.
No restriction thee so they dont have a leg to stand on.
09-11-2010, 10:06 AM
#9
Zee Germans are coming
that little black post next to the wall looks like its ment to have a sign onit
if there is no sign then they can do nothing mate
take some good pics of the area and tell them to take you to court
also say you have spoken to a solictor on the matter
and you will be counter claiming for loss of earnings when going to court
bet they rip the ticket up
oh and say you have spoken to the local press and they have been out to take pics also and its going in the paper
if there is no sign then they can do nothing mate
take some good pics of the area and tell them to take you to court
also say you have spoken to a solictor on the matter
and you will be counter claiming for loss of earnings when going to court
bet they rip the ticket up
oh and say you have spoken to the local press and they have been out to take pics also and its going in the paper
09-11-2010, 11:28 PM
#13
Letter sent!! I also took it as an opportunity to get a dig at the council
08 November 2010
FORMAL REPRESENTATION WITH RESPECT TO PCN SK04771036 DATED 13/05/10.
Further to the initial rejection letter for my “Informal Appeal”, I am writing for a formal representation.
In the below 3 pictures it can be clearly seen that there is no residents parking sign:
In accordance with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 and guidance within Chapter 3 of the Traffic Signs Manual (page 69) there is supposed to be a sign marking the residents permit bay.
There is no such sign in this location; hence this restriction does not comply with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002. It is therefore unenforceable and I trust the PCN will be cancelled.
Further to this I note that in the initial rejection letter you state that having lived in the area nearby, that therefore I should be aware of the restriction. That is an assumption on your part. It is just as likely that I (or any other member of the public) would assume that the sign not being present was indication that the restrictions were lifted. Thus it is impossible for you, as the council’s representative, to assume the public would, on the balance of probabilities be aware that an unsigned restriction is still in force. Regardless of this, the TSRGD (2002) means the PCN is unenforceable anyway.
On one further note is the postage system within Parking Services. The initial rejection letter was received on the 9 July 2010 and posted on the 7 July 2010 as can be seen from the postmark in the picture below:
Yet on opening the letter it was dated 25 June 2010. Now it appears to me that the internal postal system of the council is clearly, at best, inefficient for a letter to take 12 days to be posted! Conveniently (or inconveniently from the public perspective) the discount period for a reduced charge is 14 days and with 2 days to delivery from receipt of the letter at the sorting office being the norm, it is likely that many customers would receive the letter after work on the 14th day, when the council office is likely to closed. Now of course this could be an unfortunate error by the department leading to letters being delayed or maybe it is a deliberate act by the council to avoid giving customers the discount period and hence raising more money for the cash strapped council. Of course the public would be rightly horrified if this was the case.
Maybe I am being a little cynical but in light of recent budget cuts, massive amounts of money being raised through PCN’s issued in the evenings since re-introduction of evening parking charges and cuts to important welfare services, is it any wonder that I come to such a conclusion?
As previously mentioned the missing sign means the bay does not comply with the TSRGD and as such it is unenforceable and I trust the PCN will be cancelled.
Yours Sincerely
Warren Penalver
FORMAL REPRESENTATION WITH RESPECT TO PCN SK04771036 DATED 13/05/10.
Further to the initial rejection letter for my “Informal Appeal”, I am writing for a formal representation.
In the below 3 pictures it can be clearly seen that there is no residents parking sign:
In accordance with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 and guidance within Chapter 3 of the Traffic Signs Manual (page 69) there is supposed to be a sign marking the residents permit bay.
There is no such sign in this location; hence this restriction does not comply with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002. It is therefore unenforceable and I trust the PCN will be cancelled.
Further to this I note that in the initial rejection letter you state that having lived in the area nearby, that therefore I should be aware of the restriction. That is an assumption on your part. It is just as likely that I (or any other member of the public) would assume that the sign not being present was indication that the restrictions were lifted. Thus it is impossible for you, as the council’s representative, to assume the public would, on the balance of probabilities be aware that an unsigned restriction is still in force. Regardless of this, the TSRGD (2002) means the PCN is unenforceable anyway.
On one further note is the postage system within Parking Services. The initial rejection letter was received on the 9 July 2010 and posted on the 7 July 2010 as can be seen from the postmark in the picture below:
Yet on opening the letter it was dated 25 June 2010. Now it appears to me that the internal postal system of the council is clearly, at best, inefficient for a letter to take 12 days to be posted! Conveniently (or inconveniently from the public perspective) the discount period for a reduced charge is 14 days and with 2 days to delivery from receipt of the letter at the sorting office being the norm, it is likely that many customers would receive the letter after work on the 14th day, when the council office is likely to closed. Now of course this could be an unfortunate error by the department leading to letters being delayed or maybe it is a deliberate act by the council to avoid giving customers the discount period and hence raising more money for the cash strapped council. Of course the public would be rightly horrified if this was the case.
Maybe I am being a little cynical but in light of recent budget cuts, massive amounts of money being raised through PCN’s issued in the evenings since re-introduction of evening parking charges and cuts to important welfare services, is it any wonder that I come to such a conclusion?
As previously mentioned the missing sign means the bay does not comply with the TSRGD and as such it is unenforceable and I trust the PCN will be cancelled.
Yours Sincerely
Warren Penalver
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
rsguy
General Car Related Discussion.
44
29-09-2015 03:29 PM
DavidK
Ford Sierra/Sapphire/RS500 Cosworth
1
27-09-2015 02:55 PM