PCN for parking in loading bay. Legal?

[Docj0nes]

Hi, I've been reading a lot about the PCN charges on this site when using a loading bay legally. I'd like some advice on my situation if I may?

 

I received the PCN when stopping in a loading bay when dropping two packages into the post office. I unfortunately didn't realise I parked in this type of bay as all others in the high street are for free parking for a limited time and thought where I parked was the same.

I'm wondering if I could appeal against this PCN due to the actual reason being there was to deliver packages to the post office? I have receipts to prove this.

 

What particularly annoys me about this fine is that when I originally parked in the bay and entered the post office I forgot my wallet which meant I returned to my car. In doing so I saw a traffic warden in his bike gear standing recording data on his device about my car. I approached and unlocked my car which prompted him to move on and look at other cars. I presumed the man was recording number plates to make sure the cars would not be their for more than the allotted time. I waited around a little longer just to watch him seem to do the same with other cars parked on the street. I thought he would of informed me that I shouldn't be parking in that position, but I feel he deliberately chose to turn a blind eye to me until I left my car so he could earn himself some commission.

 

I understand that I should of checked the sign but now reading on this forum it seems I may well of been in my rights to park where I did to deliver packages to the post office. Is this an acceptable argument?

 

The PCN reasoning itself is that my car is "Parked in a placeor area not designated for that class of vehicle". Please note the "placeor" spelling mistake is on my ticket. Maybe a secondary reason for escaping paying the fine?

 

Thanks for any help that can be offered.

 

Regards,

Mark Jones

[sailor sam]

Without seeing the signage of the actual bay its rather hard to give good advice. From what you have stated it appears that the bay is designated for goods vehicles only which would exclude cars. However, if the signage indictates 'Loading' and there is no mention of 'goods vehicles' then it is possible the wrong offence has been recorded. There are exemptions for dropping off postal packages in Loading Bays. Perhaps you cabn give the location so we may see if street view covers it or better still, take your own pics and post them up.

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

 

I would always urge to seek professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

[Docj0nes]

Thanks for your response Sam.

The google address is here:

156-158 Crayford Rd

Greater London

DA1 4

United Kingdom

The loading bay is in front of Peacocks. I can't make the exact wording out buy hopefully the layout is recognisable and unique.

I'll upload some images when I can.

[sailor sam]

Mmm, I cannot quite make out the wording on the sign but i think it states 'delivery vehicles' when it should state 'goods vehicles loading only'. By the way, where is the post office?

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

 

I would always urge to seek professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

[Docj0nes]

It's across the road in the middle of the high street in Londis.

It's the deception by the man that infuriates me. To allow me for almost for a minute stand around my car with him not approaching me while all the while waiting for me to leave before giving me a ticket. You wonder why people don't like them - they're more interested in earning a few quid - awarding £100 fines rather than at least questioning my intentions. Thought I'd clarify my feelings, sorry for rant.

[sailor sam]

You need to clarify what the sign says. If it dosn't mention 'goods vehicles' then I think you have grounds to appeal.

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

 

I would always urge to seek professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

[Docj0nes]

Bummer. Checked the sign. States 'Goods Vehicles, Loading Only'. Is that my chance of appeal gone?

Would there be a loop hole that someone could check if I uploaded the actual sign? I also verified what I had thought before - the bay itself does not have 'Loading Only' printed on the floor of the bay. It was an odd sight when viewing street maps to see the printed text on the loading bay floor. Is this a strict guideline required? It all builds to my case of not realising it was a loading bay in the first place.

Ta,

Mark.

[dw190]

Bummer. Checked the sign. States 'Goods Vehicles, Loading Only'. Is that my chance of appeal gone?

Would there be a loop hole that someone could check if I uploaded the actual sign? I also verified what I had thought before - the bay itself does not have 'Loading Only' printed on the floor of the bay. It was an odd sight when viewing street maps to see the printed text on the loading bay floor. Is this a strict guideline required? It all builds to my case of not realising it was a loading bay in the first place.

Ta,

Mark.

 

 

I have just loked on google and tracked along the street to view from directly in front of Peacocks and the wording on the floor is "LOADING ONLY" however the lines along the carriaigeway are worn to a poor quality

[Docj0nes]

Yes. That's what made me double check as the wording is clear on google. Now though the outline of the bay is badly faded and the wording looks to have been removed. Do I have reason for appeal on these grounds?

Thanks for your continued support.

[dw190]

Yes. That's what made me double check as the wording is clear on google. Now though the outline of the bay is badly faded and the wording looks to have been removed. Do I have reason for appeal on these grounds?

Thanks for your continued support.

 

The permitted variants for the paintwork on the floor:

 

(1)(2)(3)ItemDimensions shown in diagramsPermitted variations1.3 metres or more(i)Up to 15% of the dimension where the varied dimension is greater than the specified dimension; or

(ii)Up to 10% of the dimension where the varied dimension is less than the specified dimension

2.300 millimetres or more, but less than 3 metres(i)Up to 20% of the dimension where the varied dimension is greater than the specified dimension; or

(ii)Up to 10% of the dimension where the varied dimension is less than the specified dimension

3.50 millimetres or more but less than 300 millimetres(i)Up to 30% of the dimension where the varied dimension is greater than the specified dimension; or

(ii)Up to 10% of the dimension where the varied dimension is less than the specified dimension

 

But the wording Goods Vehicles is not apermitted variant.

Unfortunately I think the sign on yours may be correct.

 

This loading bay has no roadmarkings and a wrongly designed signText for an appeals letter:

This loading bay does not comply with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 2002 as: 1.The phrase 'Goods vehicle' is not a permitted variant of diagram 660.4

2. It has no bay markings which must accompany diagram 660.4 as stipulated in Direction 24 of the TSRGD.

Edited January 11, 2011 by dw190

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Quite correct. The omission of the words "Loading only" from the sign should be fatal to the enforcement.

 

Here's the page from TSRGD

[Docj0nes]

Here are the images for the loading bay in question:

flickr.com/photos/25499543@N07/5345769465/

flickr.com/photos/25499543@N07/5346379498/

flickr.com/photos/25499543@N07/5345767703/

 

As you can see the markings for the bay have all but gone. The Sign seems to be legit and something I cannot oppose.

 

Should I appeal against the fine based on the markings? I must mention that if "Loading Bay" was printed brightly on the floor as google maps shows it then I expect I would of seen it and moved on...

[dw190]

Here are the images for the loading bay in question:

flickr.com/photos/25499543@N07/5345769465/

flickr.com/photos/25499543@N07/5346379498/

flickr.com/photos/25499543@N07/5345767703/

 

As you can see the markings for the bay have all but gone. The Sign seems to be legit and something I cannot oppose.

 

Should I appeal against the fine based on the markings? I must mention that if "Loading Bay" was printed brightly on the floor as google maps shows it then I expect I would of seen it and moved on...

 

Google Map I looked at showed "LOADING ONLY" had it said "LOADING BAY" an appeal would have been successful as its not a permitted variant.

 

I'm sure the floor should be painted.

 

The permitted variants for the paintwork on the floor:

 

(1)(2)(3)ItemDimensions shown in diagramsPermitted variations1.3 metres or more(i)Up to 15% of the dimension where the varied dimension is greater than the specified dimension; or

(ii)Up to 10% of the dimension where the varied dimension is less than the specified dimension

2.300 millimetres or more, but less than 3 metres(i)Up to 20% of the dimension where the varied dimension is greater than the specified dimension; or

(ii)Up to 10% of the dimension where the varied dimension is less than the specified dimension

3.50 millimetres or more but less than 300 millimetres(i)Up to 30% of the dimension where the varied dimension is greater than the specified dimension; or

(ii)Up to 10% of the dimension where the varied dimension is less than the specified dimension

 

Think you should be ok on appeal:

 

This loading bay does not comply with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 2002 as:

 

It has no bay markings which must accompany diagram 660.4 as stipulated in Direction 24 of the TSRGD.

 

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/images/uksi_20023113_en_135

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/images/uksi_20023113_en_055

 

http://www.ticketfighter.co.uk/signregs.htm#d24

Edited January 11, 2011 by dw190

[jooliohoolio]

I got one of these too today - apparently for not loading in a loading bay. i'm livid, especially as i was. it's as if these unts make this stuff up as they go along. i've lived in london for nearly 20 years and never had a problem with parking in a loading bay, i've now got the parking nazis checking to see if i'm actually loading! apparently if they don't see me doing any loading in a five minute period then i'm not loading at all - even though i'm allowed to load in that place for an hour!

[dw190]

I got one of these too today - apparently for not loading in a loading bay. i'm livid, especially as i was. it's as if these unts make this stuff up as they go along. i've lived in london for nearly 20 years and never had a problem with parking in a loading bay, i've now got the parking nazis checking to see if i'm actually loading! apparently if they don't see me doing any loading in a five minute period then i'm not loading at all - even though i'm allowed to load in that place for an hour!

 

This may help you.

 

http://www.ticketfighter.co.uk/parking.htm

[Docj0nes]

Hey again.

I'm now drafting up my PCN appeal. I have images that show that the loading bay is not clearly marked. Is it suggested that I include these images or leave it up to the council to prove me wrong? Personally I would like to not use the images to make them go out and look for themselves.

Ta

[dw190]

Hey again.

I'm now drafting up my PCN appeal. I have images that show that the loading bay is not clearly marked. Is it suggested that I include these images or leave it up to the council to prove me wrong? Personally I would like to not use the images to make them go out and look for themselves.

Ta

 

You need not include any pics to the council. But you must disclose all your evidence to the adjudicator.

 

If the bay is a 1028 it needs to have the words LOADING ONLY. If its a 1033 I dont think it needs the wording. Looking at your pics you cant tell if it has wording or not and the outer lineage is a disgrace and not adequate for a reasonable person to decypher.

[Docj0nes]

Thanks. Here is my draft letter. Any things to suggest before I send it off? I had to mention the CEO's actions as it, quite frankly, ****es me off!

 

Dear Sir/Madame,

 

I am writing to you to appeal against my PCN for parking in a place that is not designed for my vehicle.

 

I am appealing due to this loading bay not complying with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 2002 as it has no bay markings which must accompany diagram 660.4 as stipulated in Direction 24 of the TSRGD. The bay must include the words “LOADING ONLY” as per diagram 1028.3.

 

Please note that if I were aware of this offence I would of parked in the free parking spaces a few meters further down.

 

I would also like to mention that although walking from my vehicle and then returning moments later to retrieve my wallet I observed the CEO making an entry into their device. To verify I was in no wrong I decided to wait for just shy of 1 minute to verify what the CEO’s intentions were. I watched the CEO continue to the next parking bay and stand in front of a further two cars tapping into their device. It was only when I left my vehicle then they awarded the ticket stating the vehicle was not in the designated area for it’s class. I find this frustrating when I made a point of standing by my car for a long enough time to be approached and informed of my mistake. I feel that the CEO deliberately disguised their actions of awarding the penalty. Are these actions by the CEO something that is encouraged?

 

I will now need to question CEO’s of their intentions in each circumstance in the future as even if they walk away I cannot be sure if they will give me a ticket.

 

Regards,

Mr Mark Jones.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Include reference to the omission of the words from the sign.

Personally I feel it may be a mistake to attack the CEOs.

[Docj0nes]

OK. I'll remove the CEO attack. Maybe after (hopefully) they accept my appeal I'll right what I really wanted

 

The sign itself does have Goods Vehicle - Loading Only on it. The road marking however are almost non existent!

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

The sign itself does have Goods Vehicle - Loading Only on it. The road marking however are almost non existent!

 

The picture in post no 10 does not seem to.

[Docj0nes]

Ahh yes, post 10 was from another user. I posted links to flickr in post 12.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Ah, I misread and thought that the picture from the other poster was of the same sign. My mistake, sorry.

[Docj0nes]

Hi all,

Just received my letter stating the PCN was served correctly.

 

Actual response states I was parked in a bay restricted to a designated class - a goods vehicle only bay.

They go on to say "Whilst I note your comments that the words 'LOADING BAY' are not marked on the carriageway, there is no requirement to have the words marked on the carriageway. The sign clearly states that the vehicle is a loading bay for goods vehicles only."

 

Can anyone give advise on this now? I thought the requirement was for the road markings to accompany the sign?

 

I now have 14 days as of the 28th Jan to pay a £50 fine before going up to £100.

 

Personally I'd like to take this further, but only if it's certain I have a case. As far as I'm concerned they have just lied to me but that is now open for debate.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Omitting the words on the road is a permitted variant.