On 27 Nov 2008 at 5:09pm Rooferman wrote:
I was parked half on pavement/road in Southover High Street to load my van after a hard day(allowing traffic to flow both ways as i was near mini roundabout at swann inn end) In between frequent visits to load up,warden turned up and ticketed me despite my van door oen and hazard lights on !!
A van parked behind me was not ticketed, after i warned him, because he was on a sewage emergency
I appealed, but failed as they say i was causing an obstruction-although i was parked in the same way as this van!!
ANY ADVICE WOULD BE APPRECIATED
On 27 Nov 2008 at 5:31pm Earl of Lewes wrote:
The whole thing's a farce. So much for democracy.
A friend made a microscopic scratch on the wrong date of his visitor's ticket, but luckily realised his error in time and scratched off the right date. He still got a ticket. He went to the Parking Shop and appealed, but lost (mind you, calling the wardens a 'bunch of c***s probably wasn't a wise move)
On 27 Nov 2008 at 5:37pm Sympathic Sole wrote:
Appeal again!
There seems to be three levels of appeal,
1. Written appeal by you (routinely rejected by ESCC and fine doubled)
2. Written appeal by you again (they tend to employ someone at this stage to read your appeal) 9 times out of 10 accept that they are wrong, thus reversing decision, but it takes them many months to notify you of this decision (six months in my cases)
3. Represent yourself at a "hearing". Do not be intimidated by this - it is not a proper court, but a panel of people in County Hall. I have not been this far but understand that you get a fair and reasonable hearing.
GOOD LUCK
On 27 Nov 2008 at 5:52pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
I called one a bespectacled homunculus once and still won my appeal.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 7:28pm S.oliver wrote:
You don't get just one chance to appeal. Write back, explaining that thr response does not address the issues you have raised, specifically the other van, and ask which aspect of policy you were breaching, that the other van wasn't. I had to write 5 times before it was admitted a ticket was heavy handed. Check the parking ombudsmans websire which will give you some ideas of what the Council should not be harassing people about.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 7:28pm S.oliver wrote:
You don't get just one chance to appeal. Write back, explaining that thr response does not address the issues you have raised, specifically the other van, and ask which aspect of policy you were breaching, that the other van wasn't. I had to write 5 times before it was admitted a ticket was heavy handed. Check the parking ombudsmans websire which will give you some ideas of what the Council should not be harassing people about.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 7:33pm s.oliver wrote:
I forgot to say that if they are claiming that you were obstructing the pavement, you can point out that you could not load without blocking road or pavement, and that pedestrians could at leats use the other side. ESCC acknowledge in their own consultation documents that it is often necessary to park on the pavement, due to the nature of this historic town. They also endorse parking, and driving on the pavements in Paddock Rd and outside the DIY shop. Check the ticket to see how long they claim you were causing an obstruction for.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 7:41pm Rooferman wrote:
Thankyou for advice so far. I aim to contact Norman Baker/Ruth O"Keefe as well because of their attitude. I find the traffic wardens in Brighton much more understanding-there seems to be an entirely different agenda towards motorists their.
When i spoke to an official today and asked her if she had ever parked half on the pavement, she replied that she does"nt have a car.
NEVER A STRAIGHT ANSWER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On 27 Nov 2008 at 8:23pm me wrote:
pay the ticket
On 27 Nov 2008 at 8:34pm nicholas e cave wrote:
you shouldn't be on the footpath anyway. its designed for people not vehicles!
going onto it breaks the path, its made from a different material than the road. imagine you have a wheelchair or push chair & had to go into the road risking your child's safety because someones parked on the foot path.
Also if you read the highway code you'll read that you cant use your hazard lights as an excuse for illegal parking, they are to be used for when your vehicle is in a dangerous position.
your back doors open don't mean anything, ive seen people open the back doors & go shopping, not loading or unloading.
the van behind you was on an emergency & there are laws regarding this.
P.s. they are civil enforcement officers not traffic wardens.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 8:57pm Stevie Faithful wrote:
that tall one with dark hair & blue eyes is really gorgeous. i think hes number 15.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 8:58pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
I've had a change of heart NCP arent that bad really. I hope thay serve our streets for next few years.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 8:59pm Rooferman wrote:
yeah, i guess i was wrong. i was on the pavement after all. sorry NCP.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 9:05pm Angry of Lewes (Retd) wrote:
nicholas e cave - and me - you have two things each in common...
1/you are tw@ts
2/ you are tw@ts
1/ because you make this thread impossible to read by posting half way up, and
2/ because you have stupid opinions - how was this poor soul to carry out his livlihood caveman? - and me - APPEAL every ticket is the message
On 27 Nov 2008 at 9:07pm Angry of Lewes (Retd) wrote:
just block the road next time rooferman how stupid to try to be considerate
On 27 Nov 2008 at 9:41pm Spinster Of This Parish wrote:
I'm sure you were on a roofing emergency.
NCP have painted the parking bays outside Homebase to include the pavement (and there is no dropped kerb)!
I've been given a ticket for parking in a permit only area whilst displaying a valid permit!!!! Took them months before they finally acknowledged they were wrong. I agree with everyone above who says "appeal".
On 27 Nov 2008 at 9:46pm nick cave is me wrote:
thats probably because im the same person, captain cretin.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 9:50pm RedNeck wrote:
You shouldn't say someone else's opinion is stupid. Lots of people would say your opinion is "stupid" too.
Calling someone a tw@t as well...classy.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 9:54pm Taylor wrote:
Its not very considerate to block the pavement and make wheelchair users go in the road. Or a mother with a buggy.
On 27 Nov 2008 at 11:08pm s.oliver wrote:
Oh, no, not this old chestnut. It would also be inconsiderate to block the road, and stop traffic including a van containing a wheelchair user, and a people carrier full of pushchair age babies. Sometimes tradesmen have to park on the pavemnet, andd this is specifically acknowledgeed in ESCC documents. How else can any of us living in old streets with narrow pavements get work done? If there was an alternative route for pedestrians/ wheelchair/ buggy users, for the short time loading took place, then I fail to see what the problem is. Leave a metre if you can, and if you get a ticket, draw outside DIY store, which offer less than a metre when vehicles park on both sides at once.
On 28 Nov 2008 at 7:33am Mystic Mog wrote:
Appealing to fine to a point but often the damage is done when one is a visitor to Lewes. There are number of people who fail to return to Lewes after being ticketed or come less frequently.
On 28 Nov 2008 at 1:33pm me(real one) wrote:
use your own name to post!!!!!
On 28 Nov 2008 at 5:49pm Taylor wrote:
Because a people carrier full of pushchair age babies are FAR more likely to come along then a lone woman pushing a buggy.
On 29 Nov 2008 at 2:55pm The Super K wrote:
Illegally Parked ....got a ticket.... Whining about it!!!!
No change on this site since I last popped in!!!
On 29 Nov 2008 at 5:15pm geoff wrote:
You obviously don't read all the posts, super k. there is no evidence that the van was illegally parked. Over two thirds of issued tickets are cancelled by ESCC. How illegal were all those? Why do you think innocent drivers should have to be harassed like this?
On 29 Nov 2008 at 5:23pm geoff wrote:
...and of course a lone pushchair can't simply be wheeled to the other side of the road, whilst people going about their jobs provide us all with necessary services. I do not like cars, or parking on the pavement, but I acknowledge that in a town like lewes, there is often little choice. Even ESCC are more flexible that you, Taylor, because if you read their own consultation documents you will find they agree with me about this, which is also why they shouldn't be supporting such tickets. Sometimes they have to be reminded of what they said before implementing this scheme, and also reminded that this is not suposed to be a punitive scheme that deters shoppers a, nd tradesmen behaving reasonably.
Just parking on a pavement, and blocking buggies/wheelchairs pedestrians because you are too mean/lazy to park somwhere more appropriate is a different matter, but this guy may not have been able to move the roof he was working on, or the building it is atached too, so I am inclined to be a little forgiving!
On 29 Nov 2008 at 7:25pm Hedwig wrote:
erm....parking on the pavement is illegal. Have you read the Highway Code?
On 29 Nov 2008 at 10:02pm geoff wrote:
parking on the pavement is not illegal, it is a grey area. driving on the pavement is illegal though. if you ring up and ask the parking shop, or ESCC Highways they will explain to you when it is acceptable to partially park on the pavement, and when it isn't. scaffolders for example can more or less park where they like, as can fire engines and police cars. you will regularly see commercial vehicles partially parked on the pavement in Lewes, with the permission of wardens.
On 1 Dec 2008 at 2:10pm Blueberry wrote:
it is illegal to drive on a pavement (in order to park, you have to drive onto the pavement).
If you cannot park safely with all four wheels on the road you should not be parking there. The pavement is not the road. It is very easy to understand. Pavements also were not designed to take the weight of vehicles that is why slabs are constantly being broken.
These are not my words.
I can see that this guy had a job to do but at the end of the day he should not have parked like that. Get over it.
On 1 Dec 2008 at 2:11pm Hedwig wrote:
Scaffolders can park where they like??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
On 1 Dec 2008 at 6:25pm Its Not Rocket Salad wrote:
Interesrting point, Blueberry.
Pray tell us then, why the council have marked pay and display bays on the pavement by Homebase. Is this a cunning parking plan devised by the cunningest parking planner to get double bubble by making us pay to park then fining us for parking on the pavement?
On 1 Dec 2008 at 7:20pm Rooferman wrote:
Dear Blueberry,
I had to load my van. i parked partly on the pavement,like the van behind me to allow traffic to flow, due to close proximity of roundabout. How else could i finish my work-come back on a Sunday when the wardens are not working?
I actually drove past this point yesterday and there were five cars parked in the same way,what should happen in this situation ?
On 1 Dec 2008 at 9:39pm Geoff wrote:
Its funny how a number of people on this thread will not take any notice of what I am telling them about ESCC's own policy. The 'you can't park on the pavement' law is a very grey area indeed, and I am afraid you would have troublefinding a lawyer to agree with you that it is black and white. it isn't . It is a very grey area indeed, which is why ESCC's own documents confirm that parking on the pavement is sometimes necessary, and why we have Highway Authority approved parking spaces on the pavement outside the DIY shop. ESCC don't like admitting it, and some of the posters above clearly haven't read the consultation. How do you think various vehicles access paved pedestrian areas all over Britain?
I would agree that no one should in principal park on the pavement, for so many reasons, sadly when it comes to parking in a medieval town which has no other schemes, there has to be a compromise. Roofers shouldn't be discriminated against, particularly as the parking shop van, containing wardens has been seen parking on the pavement outside Clifford Dan.
If you go to the parking shop and ask, you will find that scaffolders have free rein to park where they like, within reason, due to the nature of the job. I fail to see why it should be understood by the parking shop that a scaffolder needs and can have special dispensation, but not a roofer.
Rooferman, I hope you continue contesting the ticket if you think it was unfair, point out the pavement parking issues, and ESCC's endorsement of pavement parking as described above, and also draw attention to Paddock row, where approved spaces force vehicles to drive on the pavement. Make the scaffolding comparisson. You could finish off by asking if they have visited the location where you were parked, and ask where they suggest would have been better.
We want, and need roofers in the town, and wish to encourage you to keep working here, even if ESCC think we can manage without business services.
On 1 Dec 2008 at 9:49pm Lopster wrote:
Geoff - excellent post -if we had a post of the month -or even of the year then that would be it - bravo - unemotional informative supportive
the same goes to all independant traders like rooferman - we want and need them in the town
APPEAL VERY TICKET!!!!
On 2 Dec 2008 at 8:09pm Rooferman wrote:
Thanks for your support and i will keep you updated on developements.
I know it may look petty to some but it has bigger issues at stake, mainly that the attitude of the wardens have to change to traders and the public,then mutual respect will come about.
On 3 Dec 2008 at 1:33am Sashka wrote:
I watched two wardnes today walk straight past an illegally parked ESCC van in Lewes High St, with no permit of any kind on display. When a scheme is unjust, we are obliged to fight it.
On 4 Dec 2008 at 11:42am BETH wrote:
NO THEY CANT THEY SHOULD APPLY FOR A WAIVER
On 12 May 2009 at 9:29pm Mitch Mitchell wrote:
I'm in the process of appealing a ticket I received *after* buying a ticket in the phoenix causeway carpark.
I wonder how much it costs ESCC to put an appeal through the system.
I'm going to find out.
I Reckon if everyone - I repeat everyone - appeals against every single ticket they get, then we can bring the regime to its knees!