Council PCN through post. Very strange road layout

biscuitdunker

maninthestreet wrote: »

Sorry, but the signs clearly state to keep left of those bollards, and you went to the right. But £120 fine sounds a bit steep to me.

The sign is irrelevant if the space provided in non-compliant.


Is this the exact same place which someone else posted a PCN for last week with a faded cycle sign on the road? It mentions the cycle sign on the road in the article and it looks identical. I would go back and take a photo of the cycle sign, that's another reason why you may have driven through the middle.

biscuitdunker

Coupon-mad wrote: »

It's your call but I would appeal this one right to the adjudicator if need be.

Even though the main confusing sign has been removed recently (which was a bicycle painted on the road on the left!)

Oh, it's been removed? Nevermind, it's still confusing.

jgallcash

I will double check thats its completely gone. Its funny because in the picture you can clearly see a cyclist approaching from the opposite direction in the space that used to be a cycle path.

Is this an oppoertunity for me or would i be clutching at straws in using this point about the ambiguity of the setup?

biscuitdunker

Oh you should definitely fight this, you're not clutching at straws, it is obviously an extremely confusing set up, look at all of these for starters - http://www.pepipoo.com/search-results.htm?cx=002954149332536547518%3Aurx9dzjvubm&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=riversdale&sa=Search&siteurl=forums.pepipoo.com%2Findex.php%3F

biscuitdunker

Also, your PCN should say "28 days from the date this notice is served" but it clearly says "28 days beginning with the date of this notice", making your PCN non-compliant, for starters.

jgallcash

biscuitdunker wrote: »

Also, your PCN should say "28 days from the date this notice is served" but it clearly says "28 days beginning with the date of this notice", making your PCN non-compliant, for starters.

Should i include this in a letter to them appealing using some of the pepipoo arguements around the ambiguity of the setup and the distance of this from a main road?

Apologies for all of the questions.

biscuitdunker

jgallcash wrote: »

Should i include this in a letter to them appealing using some of the pepipoo arguements around the ambiguity of the setup and the distance of this from a main road?

Apologies for all of the questions.

if I were you, I would post up your PCN at Pepipoo and ask exactly what to say regarding the non-compliant wording of the PCN. It may be that you need only to include the ticket's non-compliance in your appeal, especially given that they seem to have taken measures to remove the more ambiguous road markings.

biscuitdunker

This is another Islington PCN with the same wording - http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=41000&pid=366466&mode=threaded&start=#entry366466 it seems some others on that thread think there's something wrong with the wording, but it could be that we are all wrong. I see someone on Pepipoo thinks I'm speaking out of my !!!!, and could well be! I'd get this clarified by someone more knowledgeable before you appeal!

jgallcash

biscuitdunker i just appreciate your feedback to be honest. i will keep on checking but it seems that the council have removed most of their incompetencies or loopholes from this scenario.

biscuitdunker

Yeah, they probably got fed up of people appealing because of the bad road markings so have cleaned it up in the last month or so. It could still be that the measurements are non-compliant, I would do what the poster Bama said and take some measurements. Also, there's a successful appeal letter in one of the other threads on Pepipoo about this, you may be able to use some of it, but delete anything referring to the road markings which have been removed.