Basin Road, Southwick Beach, Portslade - NOT PARKED CORRECTLY WITHIN THE MARKINGS OF A BAY OR SPACE

tannoy_2

Hi - as per the NEWBIES thread, I have drafted this message to appeal to GSX. You'll note the car is in a disabled parking bay as the car had multiple disabled passengers:

None of the reasons in the drop down box are relevant.

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn.

Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date. The photo of the sign is unreadable.

Multiple occupants of the car are disabled. One is autistic, who was displaying behaviour that was extremely distracting.

Also note in photos 13:54:48 & 13:55:23 the large piece of rubbish. The rubbish was in the bay at time of parking, thus driver reasonably tried to avoid this rubbish and kicked it to one side after parking. 

THE DRIVER IS NOT IDENTIFIED.

The PCN itself is the same as https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80397036/#Comment_80397036 except for the contravention, which is NOT PARKED CORRECTLY WITHIN THE MARKINGS OF A BAY OR SPACE. 

Could I ask someone to review the draft message? I'm unsure how the excuses matter and whether they're of relevance at all, at this stage or later should it go to court.

Coupon-mad

Send the appeal then TOTALLY IGNORE GXS. They send Debt Recovery Plus £170 threatograms but ignore them too (see the pictures in the 4th post of the NEWBIES thread).

I've helped a few fellow Sussex people and no GXS case has gone to court claim stage. Just daft letters!

Come back here if ever you get a claim form. Obviously you must tell them if you move house. That's it.

Beeblebr0x

I've seen other disabled parking bays with yellow hatching just on one side. How is the OP supposed to grant sufficient access to their car on the driver's side, as it will be too close to the van?

prowla

Beeblebr0x said:

I've seen other disabled parking bays with yellow hatching just on one side. How is the OP supposed to grant sufficient access to their car on the driver's side, as it will be too close to the van?

Not endorsing the parking scammers, but the OP's car is close to the adjacent car on the passenger side - what if they needed to get a passenger in a wheelchair in?
(Though they're across their line too...)

Beeblebr0x

prowla said:

Beeblebr0x said:

I've seen other disabled parking bays with yellow hatching just on one side. How is the OP supposed to grant sufficient access to their car on the driver's side, as it will be too close to the van?

Not endorsing the parking scammers, but the OP's car is close to the adjacent car on the passenger side - what if they needed to get a passenger in a wheelchair in?
(Though they're across their line too...)

The way that the OP has parked is understandable under the circumstances. I think the design of that disabled bay is flawed in my opinion.

Castle

Beeblebr0x said:

prowla said:

Beeblebr0x said:

I've seen other disabled parking bays with yellow hatching just on one side. How is the OP supposed to grant sufficient access to their car on the driver's side, as it will be too close to the van?

Not endorsing the parking scammers, but the OP's car is close to the adjacent car on the passenger side - what if they needed to get a passenger in a wheelchair in?
(Though they're across their line too...)

The way that the OP has parked is understandable under the circumstances. I think the design of that disabled bay is flawed in my opinion.

It's flawed; because, there should be 1200mm access on both sides of the vehicle.

Beeblebr0x

Castle said:

Beeblebr0x said:

prowla said:

Beeblebr0x said:

I've seen other disabled parking bays with yellow hatching just on one side. How is the OP supposed to grant sufficient access to their car on the driver's side, as it will be too close to the van?

Not endorsing the parking scammers, but the OP's car is close to the adjacent car on the passenger side - what if they needed to get a passenger in a wheelchair in?
(Though they're across their line too...)

The way that the OP has parked is understandable under the circumstances. I think the design of that disabled bay is flawed in my opinion.

It's flawed; because, there should be 1200mm access on both sides of the vehicle.

Does that mean the fine is unenforceable?

QrizB

Beeblebr0x said:

I've seen other disabled parking bays with yellow hatching just on one side. How is the OP supposed to grant sufficient access to their car on the driver's side, as it will be too close to the van?

Driver lets their passengers out *before* parking? Then there's only one occupant and space is only required on one side.

Gr1pr

Beeblebr0x said:

Castle said:

Beeblebr0x said:

prowla said:

Beeblebr0x said:

I've seen other disabled parking bays with yellow hatching just on one side. How is the OP supposed to grant sufficient access to their car on the driver's side, as it will be too close to the van?

Not endorsing the parking scammers, but the OP's car is close to the adjacent car on the passenger side - what if they needed to get a passenger in a wheelchair in?
(Though they're across their line too...)

The way that the OP has parked is understandable under the circumstances. I think the design of that disabled bay is flawed in my opinion.

It's flawed; because, there should be 1200mm access on both sides of the vehicle.

Does that mean the fine is unenforceable?

Only a judge in civil court could decide that aspect, either it is, or it isn't,  but not for us to say, only a judge 

Beeblebr0x

QrizB said:

Beeblebr0x said:

I've seen other disabled parking bays with yellow hatching just on one side. How is the OP supposed to grant sufficient access to their car on the driver's side, as it will be too close to the van?

Driver lets their passengers out *before* parking? Then there's only one occupant and space is only required on one side.

A needless faff. 

Beeblebr0x

Gr1pr said:

Beeblebr0x said:

Castle said:

Beeblebr0x said:

prowla said:

Beeblebr0x said:

I've seen other disabled parking bays with yellow hatching just on one side. How is the OP supposed to grant sufficient access to their car on the driver's side, as it will be too close to the van?

Not endorsing the parking scammers, but the OP's car is close to the adjacent car on the passenger side - what if they needed to get a passenger in a wheelchair in?
(Though they're across their line too...)

The way that the OP has parked is understandable under the circumstances. I think the design of that disabled bay is flawed in my opinion.

It's flawed; because, there should be 1200mm access on both sides of the vehicle.

Does that mean the fine is unenforceable?

Only a judge in civil court could decide that aspect, either it is, or it isn't,  but not for us to say, only a judge 

If the design of the bay is incorrect then I don't see how the OP can be fined.