Parking contravention 62 ticket appeal

VOMIT

At my business premises we had parked the car as we usually had for some considerable time in our driveway which we have never had any problems with so imagine my surprise when I suddenly saw a penalty charge notice on the car for parking!

Basically it says:

Contravention 62:
"Parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway"

However, we were NOT parked with one or more wheels over the footpath. Our car is an older longer model so while indeed the BACK END of the car sticks out over the footpath the actually WHEELS were not over the footpath at all!

So would like to please clarify exactly what this means and if this applies to the wheels only as opposed to the back end as well? It doesn't say so on the PCN and have searched the internet but cannot seem to find any more information on this so am really confused about it?

I appealed this decision, however, the appeal was rejected but not really sure on what grounds, as it doesn't really answer our appeal reason so not sure if I should take it further and risk paying double (£120) or simply pay it now and get the reduced rate of £60!

Need to decide today as our 14 days are up! HELP! ;-x

So if anyone know about this and could help clear this up for me I would be most grateful!

Thanks.

king100

Is it from the council /police or a private company.

If council or police please post a picture of front and back of ticket.

If from private company please file under "Worthless Paper" and ignore.

peter_the_piper

To post you will have to photo/copy both sides of the pcn and host on tinypic, copy/paste the url given and insert on your thread adding a space after http:// and before the rest. Experts will look it over and advise.

VOMIT

Hi,

Unfortunately this is from Hackney council - not a private company! Buhu! ;-C

Problem is that if we pay we admit 'guilt' also I guess and in essence need to find somewhere else to park as our backtail will continue to stick out! ;-x

Do you mean the original parking ticket they gave us? Would have to scan that in or take a photo I guess!? Cheers! ;-)

peter_the_piper

Do you mean the original parking ticket they gave us? Would have to scan that in or take a photo I guess!?

Correct.

VOMIT

http:// i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/karinakott/DSC00644-ed.jpg

http:// i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/karinakott/DSC00645.jpg

http:// i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/karinakott/DSC00646.jpg

http:// i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/karinakott/DSC00647.jpg

Cheers! ;-)

DaveF327

VOMIT wrote: »

[IMG]http:// i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/karinakott/DSC00644-ed.jpg</u><u>[/IMG]





Cheers! ;-)

You haven't seen their photo evidence yet. I hope you have yours. The wording says it all really. No offence has been committed. Don't pay. Appeal now to the adjudicator.

Don't worry about today's time limit as they will merely send a Notice to Owner (hopefully including their photo evidence) giving you 28 further days to appeal

VOMIT

Basically we used to park with the front of the car sticking out as you can see ont he picture - but that left the wheels closer to the footpath - so now we park as normal with the back out instead as, like I said, the car is an older model so quite long in compared to other cars and you can see we cannot possibly park in any other way here as we are right up against the front of the building! It's a close call but the wheels are not touching the pavement as I said but the front of course is sticking out! But hopefully that will soon change anyway as we're modifying the outside of the building and taking the front gate down so there will be more parking spaces but in the meantime I am just worried I am gonna get more parking fines, especially should they win this case! ;-( Thanks for all your feedback though! Much appreciated! ;-)

http:// i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/karinakott/DSC09379.jpg
http:// i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/karinakott/DSC09376.jpg

VOMIT

And this is their rejection letter:

http:// i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/karinakott/DSC00649-ed.jpg
http:// i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/karinakott/DSC00651.jpg
http:// i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/karinakott/DSC00652.jpg

Mark_Hewitt

Well that's a poor response. They clear have read your letter because they state that you say you weren't parked on the pavement. And then they go on to say you were parked on the pavement and what a bad thing that is.

Totally failing of course to address *why* they think you were parked on the pavement!

Having said that, this sort of thing has come up before and as I understand it the law isn't about where your wheels are, but the entire car, so from the photographs it does look like you are technically 'on the pavement', but only by a few inches!

Looks like they are trying to make a bit of money out of you!

DaveF327

What a rubbish rejection letter. They've totally dodged the issue and haven't clarified their position on overhangs. According to the wording of the offence, it still sounds have you haven't committed an offence, but it would be helpful if you post the picture of how the car was parked at the relevant time. Those photos of the car with its bonnet sticking out don't do you any favours as it's clear that a wheel is touching the pavement and some of the wheel's area is above it.