Parking in loading bay Hammersmith and Fulham camera pcn

[jadey0101]

Hello People

 

I wonder if anyone can help

 

I received a PCN for parking in a loading bay apparently desginated for goods only vehicles. I had to deliver goods to an office in London and presumed as a business and delivering goods this would be OK.

 

I had a responce back saying that as I was using a private van (people carrier) that they could make no exception and that I must pay or appeal.

 

I furnished them with documents and emails from the customer showing they had purchased the goods and I was literally 5-6 minutes delivering.

 

I have to drive an automatic as I had prolasped discs last year - but again this did not have any effect.

 

Have I any grounds to appeal this as it was genuine business unloading - or is it a case of pay up and shut up.

 

I would really appreciate some advice.

[lamma]

Cars and people carriers are automatically 'light goods vehicles'.

there is no requirement for 'livery' that I know of.

 

fight this.

[patdavies]

You need to know exactly what the TRO and signage says.

 

It is possible to restrict a loading bay to a certain class of vehicle, but this does not extend to "goods" only. A private car is taxed as PLG (Private/Light Goods).

 

Generally, there is no restriction n the type of vehicle that may be used fro loading/unloading.

[jadey0101]

Hi and thanks for the replies

 

I have just phoned H&Fulham and enquired about their signage.

 

They state that it states loading bay only - and looking at my letter to them said there is nothing I could do as it is not a goods vechile - but a people carrier. I mentioned the PLG and they simply said that this is not a vaild reason.

 

Reading through many posts here I still believe I have some argument. More comments really appreciated.

 

TIA

[patdavies]

Stop phoning them - the contents of phone call can (and will) be denied. Put everything in writing.

 

They state that it states loading bay only - and looking at my letter to them said there is nothing I could do as it is not a goods vechile - but a people carrier. I mentioned the PLG and they simply said that this is not a vaild reason.

 

They are simply wrong that you have to have a 'goods' vehicle for a standard loading restriction.

 

As I said, check the TRO and signage for yourself. Asking them is like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas.

[lamma]

they are lying and just want your money.

 

look up the PAcker V Westminster case - I linked to it on another thread.

shame you contacted them by phone, some form of written communication is better, phone calls can be denied.

you DO have a case. you can prove the loading.

they will probably make you go to adjudication and then withdraw just before the date so the more hard evidence you can gather that they are acting vexatiously the better - that way you can try for costs agianst them.

put informal reps in with a copy of the paperwork that proves loading - keep the original at all costs.

[jadey0101]

Again thanks for the help

 

I presume I can phone and ask for the TRO?

 

Also I live in Brighton (and thought we had the shaprest of parking practices!!!), and travel very infrequently to London so am unable to check the signage on Beadon Road.....would you reccommend a trip if going to adjuication?

 

Proving the unloading is no problems as I have detailed emails from my French customers who wanted it delivered to their office in London. Even falls into with the time I was there!

 

TIA

[lamma]

you think they will provide the TRO fully and honestly ? after their response on the phone ? fat chance in my view.

TRO is paper document(s) and will include maps etc, much better to get hard copy - and makes sure that the docs are 'sealed'.

 

the TRO is a public document and anyone is entitled to get a copy.

 

do we have any posters local to the incident who could take the pics and get the TRO on your behalf perhaps ?

[jadey0101]

I did make my final call to H&F earlier

 

Apparently they do not prescribe or have TRO for that borough??!! I ask under what authority they acted and they suggested I google for other boroughs. I qeuestion whether his name was actually Zeiff at the end of the call.

 

If anyone near to Loading place - Beadon Road by Lyric Square could have a look at the signage and indeed if anyone could help regarding the TRO I would greatly appreciate and certainly pay for your time or make a suitable donation to a charity of your choice.

 

It is great to see community and advice working so well on this forum - I am humbled.

[green_and_mean]

Was the offence code 23 wrong type of vehicle or 25 not loading in a loading bay?

[jadey0101]

Hi Green and Mean

 

I will check this out tomorrow and report back

 

Thanks for your interest in my dilema

[lamma]

WHAT !!

 

they are issuing tickets and saying there is no TRO. that is plainly wrong. the person you spoke to probably didn't have a clue what a TRO is. or they were just giving you the run around.

 

see this link

http://www.lbhf.gov.uk/Images/Chapter7_noCCTV_tcm21-56158.pdf

 

 

When a case goes to adjudication one of the documents the LA has to produce is the TRO. They have the duty to prove the contravention took place. someone needs to turn up in person and ask for this TRO.

 

this is the kind of stuff that should be in there

The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 (No. 2489) - Statute Law Database

[patdavies]

WHAT !!

 

they are issuing tickets and saying there is no TRO. that is plainly wrong. the person you spoke to probably didn't have a clue what a TRO is. or they were just giving you the run around.

 

 

But is H&F the Highway Authority?

 

Should the request for TRO not go to TfL?

[lamma]

Pat, yes I believe they are (see link above -so does H&F ).

 

TROs are a council responsibility.

Unless its a 'special route' thing or whatever they are called.

[patdavies]

Pat, yes I believe they are (see link above -so does H&F ).

 

TROs are a council responsibility.

Unless its a 'special route' thing or whatever they are called.

 

OK, just thought I'd ask, for clarity.

 

It is only Council in London then. In most non-unitary areas, the county council is the Highway Authority although the local council is the enforcing authority.

[lamma]

you make a good point Pat,

 

I have to say I have not looked into who the PATASJC signatories are.

[jadey0101]

Hi all

 

Thansk Lamma and PatD for your continual dialogue in this matter

 

In response to one point yesterday I have been told I was convicted under s23 - wrong class of vehicle.

 

They are not very forthcoming and I am unsure who to approcach foor the TRO?

 

Sorry for being thick in this and help is appreciated.

[green_and_mean]

Hi all

 

Thansk Lamma and PatD for your continual dialogue in this matter

 

In response to one point yesterday I have been told I was convicted under s23 - wrong class of vehicle.

 

They are not very forthcoming and I am unsure who to approcach foor the TRO?

 

Sorry for being thick in this and help is appreciated.

 

 

Ok so basically they are saying the vehicle was not a 'goods vehicle' as defined by the TRO. You need to get a copy of the TRO for the bay and then take it from there.

[jadey0101]

Thanks GreenandMean - does this generally mean that I am 'buggered', excusing the French and that I should really just pay up - although I was on genuine business?

 

Kind regards

[patdavies]

Unless its a 'special route' thing or whatever they are called.

 

For trunk routes and special roads (motorways) - outside London - the Highway Authority is the Highways Agency.

 

Many people confuse the two.

[patdavies]

Thanks GreenandMean - does this generally mean that I am 'buggered', excusing the French and that I should really just pay up - although I was on genuine business?

 

Kind regards

 

My advice would be not yet.

 

You need a copy of the TRO to qualify what they are saying about class of vehicle. AIUI, there is no blanket "Goods Vehicle" restriction; it has to be more precise than that.

[lamma]

agreed

 

I am saying that your people carrier is classed as Private Light Goods and that you can use the loading exemption. I am also saying that the council is either wrong or lying.

This is tried on all the time by councils and is obvious rubbish

"You can't be loading there is nothing painted on the side of your vehicle" is what they are saying. Farcical.

Did you lookup Packer v Westminster as suggested ? if not do so now.

 

Now certain liveried vehicles do have exemptions from regs, notable the Post Office with its Royal livery. Do you have any idea how many parking tickets are handed out to exempt (liveried) post office vehicles by councils who KNOW about the exemption. It is a big number.

 

 

the council are wrong and you will win.

the council will very likely push you to adjudication - they do this hoping that people will give up and is ups their numbers. which is just one of the reasons that your dealings with them should be on paper NEVER by phone.

 

read the Packer case.

 

let me make it a bit easier by suggesting some text for your reps -which the council will ignore of course as they want you money. fairness doesn't come into it despite their duty etc.

 

"The definition in The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 which is be found in regulation 4 in these terms “”goods vehicle” means a motor vehicle or trailer constructed or adapted for use for the

carriage or haulage of goods or burden of any description”. For the sake of completeness I would that there is also a definition of passenger vehicle in regulation 4 which says that it means a vehicle constructed or adapted for the carriage of passengers and their effects. There is no question of adaptation of the vehicle but rather whether it was constructed for the carriage or haulage of goods or burden."

by all means then quote the actual relevant parts of the text in the TSRGD

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002

 

make it blazingly obviously plain to the council.

 

So thats the vehicle done and you have the paperwork to prove the 'Use' - that you were actually loading. The 'continuous' claim is obvious rubbish and has been found many times to be so by the Adjudicators.

In my view this is a sure fire win for you at adjudication (assuming you go about it the right way) AND you can nail the council for acting vexatiously and so get costs.

Edited June 6, 2008 by lamma

[green_and_mean]

Thanks GreenandMean - does this generally mean that I am 'buggered', excusing the French and that I should really just pay up - although I was on genuine business?

 

Kind regards

 

The council are on very dodgy ground with this one. There is a separate contravention (25) Parked in a loading bay without loading which most Councils use, some Councils like Hammersmith try to stop private cars unloading freeing up the bays for business deliveries by using the 'wrong type of vehicle' route. Whilst well intentioned its almost unenforceable as the deffinition of a goods/commercial vehicle is too vague.

[jadey0101]

To you all

 

Thanks for the information

 

I have read extensively over the last 24hours about loading bays, parking and indeed the kind pointers of case law.

 

I agree to the point that many many people give in.....I have to confess that there is a point of me that wants to do this - but then there is the pure principle that I was delivering in the line of my work - and i believe I am right.

 

Living in Brighton with the 1000's of green darleks, as they are known locally - I pay my tickets when I have no doubt that I am in the wrong....this loading bay on though is unjust.

 

I was reading that they generally turn down appeals at the first hurdle....evening though I showed a dialogue with the people i was dealing with in London and their request for the goods to be delivered to their London Office - outside where the loading bay was.

 

The CCTV still even shows me unloading - with a large box - 60cm-65cmx50cm.

 

I have requested a full hard copy of this to get better images and to show I was heading for the office in question.

 

Sorry for my ramblings - my time would be better directed to my business - but I would like an equitable resolve from this unfair stealth tax!

 

Kind regards

[jadey0101]

Hi all and special thanks to pat davis, lamma and green and mean.....

 

I took the advise and wrote to Hammer and Ful for TRO etc but heard nothing.

 

On the 28th day to log the appeal I scrawled ion my appauling handwriting the suggestions given above and sent my delivery note etc to support.

 

I received a latter days later saying my case was for the 1st August.

 

I received a letter today to say the case was being drop as it was not being defended by the council.

 

Victory for the motorist!!.....many many thanks to all who posted and stopped me sending a cheque for a quiet life - I am most grateful.