Fine for Parking on single yellow line

h4zel

sarahg1969 wrote: »

Wrong. It would go to the Parking Adjudicator.

And you are wrong about the dates.

Wrong. The dates are clear & correct.

...and if the Parking Adjudicator threw the case out (highly likely) you would no longer have the option of paying £35 it would be the full £70 and if you delayed in payment further, the costs could increase SIGNIFICANTLY.

h4zel

Well at the end of the day it's your choice... pay the £35 and walk away more informed for next time you may face this situation OR follow sarahg1969's advice (who clearly knows much more than eveyone else on this subject) and spend the next 6+ months fighting your corner with your stress levels increasing at the same rate as your debt to the council. I know which I'd prefer and that's my opinion BTW.

sarahg1969

h4zel wrote: »

Well at the end of the day it's your choice... pay the £35 and walk away more informed for next time you may face this situation OR follow sarahg1969's advice (who clearly knows much more than eveyone else on this subject) and spend the next 6+ months fighting your corner with your stress levels increasing at the same rate as your debt to the council. I know which I'd prefer and that's my opinion BTW.

No. NeilB definitely knows more than I do.

Neil_B

manutd99 -- If you appeal solely on the lines you will likeley be unsuccessful as i said earlier. you need to use the flaws of the PCN.

If you don't understand that, also as I said, ask any questions you need to.

You now also mention loading - which is very relevant. Please clarify.

manutd99

my friend lives near there and i had to move items from my car to his house. The attendant must have just missed me.

There are no other parking places in the street. so could the loading and unloading rule apply. How would I prove it?

Neil_B

manutd99 wrote: »

my friend lives near there and i had to move items from my car to his house. The attendant must have just missed me.

There are no other parking places in the street. so could the loading and unloading rule apply. How would I prove it?

It's a sad state of affairs that unlike criminal law - for this the Councils consider you guilty until you prove your innocence - rather wonky IMO but it seems supported by some numpties in the public as you might have noticed.

A written statement from that friend 'should' be enough - but who knows how they will react.

that PCN is still very crucial mate - do you understand or need more. I deliberatley phrased it briefly to start with to invite questions on understanding.

manutd99

sarahg1969 wrote: »

What has any of that to do with the validity of the ticket?

Well you're wrong. It has everything to do with the ticket as i was unloading,

h**p://www.staffordbc.gov.uk/static/page6411.htm

It cleary says " You may stop to load or unload (unless there are also loading restrictions as described below) or while passengers get in or out of the vehicle"

So I thought what you said was a fact. Get to know the law before speaking.

Am i correct Neil

sarahg1969

manutd99 wrote: »

Well you're wrong. It has everything to do with the ticket as i was unloading,

h**p://www.staffordbc.gov.uk/static/page6411.htm

It cleary says " You may stop to load or unload (unless there are also loading restrictions as described below) or while passengers get in or out of the vehicle"

So I thought what you said was a fact. Get to know the law before speaking.

Am i correct Neil

I wasn't saying loading/unloading was irrelevant. That poster believed that you should just pay because you have been ticketed. She was saying you shouldn't have been loading/unloaded, and were banged to rights. I was saying that, considering the ticket is unenforceable anyway, her argument is irrelevant. I do know the law. You have simply misunderstood my post.

Yes, you are correct about loading and unloading.

Anyway, as Neil B has explained the ticket is invalid because of the dates issue (he has offered to explain more fully to you), so you now have two angles to attack this ticket from.

Neil_B

Yep.

If they were alleging breaking a loading restriction it would have said so (02).

The PCN indicates that the yellow line only restricts waiting/parking, not loading. (and they can't change their minds).

i'm gonna explain the dates thang in a minute anyway! Not convince you understand how serious it is.

then the idea is they will accept your plea of loading cos they won't want to/can't afford to - admit their docs are rubbish.

(Note Salford have just changed this very error on theirs! proof indeed!)
-

Neil_B

Ok here goes.

the law requires them to tell you certain information on a PCN - and quite rightly.

One of the most important is the period in which you may appeal or make payment - obviously.

the law requires them to tell you quite simply "28 days beginning with the date on which this PCN is served" They do actaully get this right but hard to read that image.
They then add a date (not required) presumably trying to be helpful. They get the date wrong. 28 days refers to 'dates' i.e changing at midnight.
Effectively they add a day.

The obvious question most people ask is 'well what's wrong with that? It's an advantage isn't it?'
The answer is no! They may move to the next stage of enforcement at the correct time and if you pay on that 29th day - tough! out of time.

Hence they miss-state your true legal position which prejudices you and renders the PCN invalid. It simply does not tell you accurately what the law requires.

(Ya could kinda think of an analogy like 'it's a foot wide' but when you get whatever it is home you find out it doesn't fit because it's actually 12 1/2 inches) does that help?