PCN Date served beyond 28 days..tottenham court rd bus lane contravention.

[honeybee13]

It's normally best to stick to one thread per issue. So this is the same traffic offence as the thread from earlier in the month, just to be sure?

 

HB

[1manteam]

Yes

[honeybee13]

Thank you.

 

Threads merged.

 

HB

[1manteam]

Hello Honeybee13,

There has been no response, I suspect because it was added to a previous thread.Could you de-merge the threads so that I can obtain a response please?

Thank you

[dx100uk]

nope there are more people subscribed to your original thread than the new one.

 

don't forget , people that can help give their time freely and no-one, inc the siteteam get paid at all.....

 

On 25/02/2023 at 14:57, 1manteam said:

the claims management company (previous PCN) are not the RK

 

so who is the registered keeper?

 

dx

 

[Manxman in exile]

12 hours ago, dx100uk said:

so who is the registered keeper?

 

dx

 

 

But I thought you were certain that you knew who the RK was?

 

Two weeks ago you scathingly rubbished me when I pointed out (correctly as it turns out) that it would be a mistake just to assume, as you had: (1) that the car hire company and not somebody else was the RK; (2) that the PCN that went to the car hire company must have been the first one; and (3) that that PCN must have been out of time.

 

At least Michael Browne had the good grace to accept that I could well be correct and didn't just dismiss me out of hand without proper consideration:

 

On 10/02/2023 at 22:13, Michael Browne said:

You're right, that is a possibility

 

On 11/02/2023 at 10:23, Michael Browne said:

What manxman is saying is that the claims management company might lease the vehicle and that the RK is a finance company and they would have received the original pcn...

 

 

Whereas your comments were:

 

 

On 11/02/2023 at 12:51, dx100uk said:

 

... I'd also doubt a financial institution funding hire/courtesy car to a company would be a registered keeper ...

 

 

and

 

On 11/02/2023 at 13:44, dx100uk said:

Well that's what happens when you join any thread, you 'think' and 'assume' this or that,  no matter where you go, you always introduce speculation and additional confusion or doubt .

 

It took me many years to learn not to do that here. I had to learn the golden rule, if you don't know the answer...don't post!!

 

Dx

 

I suggest you go back to the classroom and re-learn the golden rule....

 

    

 

 

[dx100uk]

On 25/02/2023 at 14:57, 1manteam said:

To respond to the earlier question about the RK,

the claims management company (previous PCN) are not the RK so would have had the originally submitted PCN forwarded to them from the RK.

until the speculation about who the RK might be ....the OP made no ref to the above.

 

now either the above comment is because of the speculation introduced,

or they actually know who the RK is , 

 

eitherway we need to know the truth from the OP. regarding the above comment.

[1manteam]

Thank you both.

 

the rk loaned the car to my claims management company who provided it to me. They received the pcn with the rk having notified Camden originally. It has now fed down the chain to me, as attached.

[Manxman in exile]

18 minutes ago, 1manteam said:

Thank you both.

 

the rk loaned the car to my claims management company who provided it to me. They received the pcn with the rk having notified Camden originally. It has now fed down the chain to me, as attached.

 

OK.  So you originally started this thread because you wanted to know if the PCN you had seen a copy of was out of time and therefore invalid.  Right?

 

That would depend on whether that PCN had been the first one issued in the chain and on whether it had been issued to the RK or not.

 

I read it that you are now confirming that the PCN that you saw a copy of was not the PCN issued to the RK and was not the first PCN in the chain?  If that's the case then it doesn't matter if it was issued by Camden more than 28 days after the contravention.

 

Do you happen to know if the very first PCN in the chain was issued to the RK in time?  It almost certainly would have been but might be worth double-checking if you can.

Edited March 1, 2023 by Manxman in exile

[Manxman in exile]

On 25/02/2023 at 14:57, 1manteam said:

 

... On Google Maps the street is still marked for permitted travel through this section.

I had no idea of the changes and have travelled down that section of road many times before...

 

 

It looks like you were caught just after the junction with Chenies Street and just before Goodge Street station?  Unfortunately the Google maps street view for that precise spot doesn't have a view later than October 2008.

 

But how did you get onto Tottenham Ct Rd?  For instance, If you turned onto it from Goodge St the signage at the junction seems to clearly say buses and cycles only from 8am to 7pm Monday to Saturday, and the road markings just after you turn onto TCR from Goodge Street direct "all traffic routes" to turn off to the right.

 

See 9 Goodge St - Google Maps and 3 Goodge St - Google Maps   (Both of these views from September 2022).

 

If you didn't turn onto TCR from Goodge St then I'd agree that I can't see much other signage approaching that spot on street view to indicate that you can't drive through, but that doesn't mean it isn't there.  And on street view there do seem to be suspiciously few cars for a main thoroughfare in that part of London, which leads me to think cars clearly aren't allowed.  (But I don't drive in London so may have completely the wrong impression... )

 

I think if you wanted to dispute whether the signage was adequate to convey the prohibition on cars, you'd have to go back and check it.

 

See what other posters with more experience of dealing with London PCNs think.  I'm sure somebody will have more idea than me.

 

On 26/02/2023 at 08:39, 1manteam said:

 

... I'm not sure the signage (indicated on screenshot) is that helpful and it was 9:03am when traffic is apparently prohibited from 9:00am. Unsurprisingly this feels like just another attempt to stitch up motorists...

 

 

Are you sure of the timings?  On the sign just before you turn onto TCR from Goodge St (see first link above) it seems to say buses and cycles only from 8am to 7pm(?)

 

 

Edited March 1, 2023 by Manxman in exile

[1manteam]

Yes, that’s right, as it seemed the obvious starting point. I don’t think retrieving the original will be possible.

so I’m then left wondering if there are any other grounds? Signage after the traffic light? Obscured behind the bus in front etc?

thank you

[Manxman in exile]

I forgot to say that I also mentioned this a couple of weeks ago.

 

On 11/02/2023 at 12:48, Manxman in exile said:

 

... AIUI councils are meant to follow a prescribed procedure when re-issuing pcns in respect of hire cars, and they sometimes get this wrong, thus invalidating the ticket.  So come back to this thread when you get your own ticket.

 

I have no particular knowledge about PCNs, but I seem to recall that when liability for a hire car is transferred from the RK to the person hiring the car, then the enforcing authority has to follow a set procedure in cancelling the original PCN before issuing a new one, and that they often fail to do this properly, thus making the new ticket invalid.

 

But I have no expert knowledge in this area and I don't know if I've got that right, or whether it applies to all car hire arrangements, or if it would specifically apply in your case.

 

Hopefully a more knowledgeable poster than me - somebody like @Michael Browne - could confirm if I'm right or wrong and what you would need to do to see if you could take advantage of it.

 

Good luck

Edited March 1, 2023 by Manxman in exile

[1manteam]

Thank you. I’m fairly sure I turned onto Tottenham Court Road from new Oxford street at the southern end. They’ve messed about with the traffic movement so much in recent years including making some parts two way rather than one way and so on. It now appears you can travel north on parts but not all of the road and this seems totally unreasonable to navigate

[Manxman in exile]

35 minutes ago, 1manteam said:

Yes, that’s right, as it seemed the obvious starting point. I don’t think retrieving the original will be possible...

 

I'm no expert on PCNs but I assume it would still be to your advantage if it turned out that the real first PCN to the real RK was out of time?  It might be a waste of effort checking - as I suspect you can be 99% certain that it was in time - but if you know who the RK is you could still ask them to check?  It's probably a waste of effort but up to you...

 

41 minutes ago, 1manteam said:

... so I’m then left wondering if there are any other grounds? Signage after the traffic light? Obscured behind the bus in front etc?

thank you

 

38 minutes ago, 1manteam said:

Thank you. I’m fairly sure I turned onto Tottenham Court Road from new Oxford street at the southern end. They’ve messed about with the traffic movement so much in recent years including making some parts two way rather than one way and so on. It now appears you can travel north on parts but not all of the road and this seems totally unreasonable to navigate

 

I suppose you could always argue about the signage or that signage was obscured by the bus.

 

As I said, I don't drive in London 'cos there's too many ways to be caught out, but I think looking closely at street view that there are "part time" traffic signs along the resticted parts of TCR that turn off and on (or close and open) depending on the time of day and whether the restriction is in force or not.  This is the sort of thing I mean, and it's a sign between New Oxford Street and where you were caught.  The vertical slats open and close to turn the sign on and off.  Or at least I assume that's how it works.  Tottenham Ct Rd - Google Maps

 

Here's one going the other way that seems to closed/off 245 Tottenham Ct Rd - Google Maps, and the same one open/on  242 Tottenham Ct Rd - Google Maps

 

I'll leave it to others to give you advice as to whether to pay up and get a discount or dispute the signage etc.