Parking fine, any ground for appeal?

Neil_B

Neil_B wrote: »

simply irrelevant.

wanna list of wins where there was a clear contravention?

hehe.

you get one anyway. i'm out for the night so laterz it will be. hvae to just be sample examples I'm afraid.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

:A <<<<<<<<<<<<<< me

Neil_B

Chippy_Minton wrote: »

do you just argue for the sake of it?

I wouldn't have the time. I just feel it important that when inaccurate or misinformed advice or information is posted, it should be challenged so that people are not misled.
-

Chippy_Minton_2

Ok so challenge it an put up a valid defence for the OP, or find somewhere else to sound off.

peeved_off

Can somebody enlighten me as to what constitutes a 'Improperly terminated double yellow line'. Is this when there are double yellows but where they end they have not been joined by a bar?

Neil_B

peeved_off wrote: »

Can somebody enlighten me as to what constitutes a 'Improperly terminated double yellow line'. Is this when there are double yellows but where they end they have not been joined by a bar?

yes that's about it as you describe but, on its own would be highly unlikely to win an appeal at any level.
Adjudicators would be likely to apply the principle of 'de minimus'.

i'm glad you're still around and not put off by some negativity. You really need to show ALL of the PCN or at very least say which Council so we can see if you have any grounds of appeal to work with.
-

roddydogs

So if u get caught speeding by a Police car following you, you would argue that "The police car was speeding as well?"

Chippy_Minton_2

Neil_B wrote: »

yes that's about it as you describe but, on its own would be highly unlikely to win an appeal at any level.

-

Wrong, you would win, as they are not double yellow lines unless they are painted correctly.

Chippy_Minton_2

roddydogs wrote: »

So if u get caught speeding by a Police car following you, you would argue that "The police car was speeding as well?"

He's entitled to do so as it's an ACPO approved method of speed detection.

TheBogsDollocks

I see the point you are making Neil B......you are advocating to look at the wider picture and not merely concentrate on the fact the vehicle was parked on a double yellow line. As before an alleged contravention can be considered in law to be enforceable via a penalty charge then the CEO, PCN and TRO must all legally comply to what is legally required of them.

To my mind simply concentrating on the yellow line is not too dissimilar from the Wanambwa v L B Southwark where the appellant and council simply focused on one element without looking at other possibilities.

http://keycases.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk/docs/Wanambwa,%20exemptions,%20unloading%20alighting%20distinction%20edited%20version.pdf

Chippy.... although the OP has not mentioned any other grounds for appealing other than the fact the CEO's van also parked on double yellow lines does not necessarily mean there are no other points of appeal.

The OP may well be guilty of contravening a double yellow line restriction but only if the TRO has been enabled and formed correctly. So I'm perplexed as to why, unless you have reviewed the TRO, that you say the "answer" is "yes" to your question "did he commit the offence"

If the TRO is correct then you need to ask are the lines compliant with the TSRGD 2002? Is the PCN compliant with the legislation? Has the CEO carried out correct procedure and made a correct record?

OP you have options to explore and form a defence but only if you are willing to make an effort.