PATAS case reference help please...

[diskmandave]

I'm having a bit of a tussle with Tameside MBC at the moment over a vehicle that was loading

on a SYL during its hours of operation. The driver was inside the premises making final checks

after loading and came back to a 01 PCN with 6 minutes of ob's, the truck was fully liveried.

 

TMBC aren't budging on their stance that loading/unloading has to be, "a visibly continuous

operation at all times", and that 5 minutes of ob's is, "more than sufficient".

 

Is there a PATAS case that I could be pointed in the direction of that would help me with

this? I've looked but keep getting no results..

 

Tia - Dave..

[Michael Browne]

Jane Packer:

http://keycases.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk/docs/LOADADJ.pdf

[diskmandave]

Thank you Michael.

[diskmandave]

Update: Instant cancellation.....

You can hear the reverse beeper 5 miles away!!

 

Thank you again Michael..

 

Does anyone want to see this in full before I delete it all?

 

Dave - DMD.

[HYMN AND MI]

Yes please, Dave!

[diskmandave]

I'll post it all up tomorrow night...

[HYMN AND MI]

Cheers and many thanks in advance.

[diskmandave]

I'm sorry, but the PCN recipient who also follows these forums doesn't want

me to post this up, because he believes it will identify him to people that are chasing

him for money and other statutory debts, it's a too familiar story, but I have to

respect his wishes, sorry.

 

In short, he got a ticket whilst loading furniture on a SYL with 6 min's of ob's on an 01.

 

Sent challenge and complaint against CEO for giving him deliberately misleading information,

he said ticket issued for being on SYL for 20 minutes.. Challenge rejected with template

rejection letter and B/S about why we shouldn't park on a SYL in its hours of operation.

 

Sent stinking email back threatening legal action for ignoring complaint against CEO

and not addressing loading issue as vehicle and driver were loading furniture as were

moving house, no loading restrictions present, threatened PATAS with costs.

 

Got reply standing by original rejection, stating 5 minute ob's is the legal benchmark

and how loading must be a visually continuous operation, and a load of gumph on how

PATAS generally find for the Council in these matters, however, given the serious nature

of the issues raised will treat my 2nd letter as a 2nd informal challenge and will be

scrutinized at Internal Audit level.... Am I willing to supply a utility bill from the old address

AND the front cover of tenancy agreement for new address..

 

Send what's asked for, along with a stinking letter threatening hell, fire and brimstone, as well

as PATAS and my now increased costs, also quoting the JPF & Others -vs- WCC case.

Stated response would be viewed as final and that rejection would be pursued to PATAS

with claim for costs..

 

Less than 24 hours, Notice of Acceptance of Representations. Still stand by PCN issued correctly

but given evidence provided will use discretion on this occasion... Matter closed. Cancelled.

 

CEO's notebook..... "The driver of this vehicle came around the corner and approached

me in a threatening manner, he was holding a sandwich and drinking from a brew cup, he

started swearing at me and making the *usual* threats so I removed myself from the

scene."

 

Can't believe I won this!!!