just had a court summons!

[G4Z]

As the title says I have on my desk one summons to magistrates court regarding a parking ticket.

Now, back in April I was ticketed for parking on an non-signposted single yellow line outside work on Newcastle Quayside which was very worn, so worn I decided to ask for a court date. I have a picture which I will upload shortly. On my summons the statement from the traffic warden he says and I quote "Close is a restricted street within the parking meter zone, however where this car was parked there was virtually no visible yellow line."

This 'offence' took place on the 17th of April, so it has taken 5 months to get this summons for the 5th of December. The offence I have committed is that I am in 'contravention of a traffic regulation order, namely the Newcastle upon Tyne traffic regulation (consolidation) (can't find one for the city centre on line, 3 outlying areas seem to have documents online however) order 2007 contrary to section 1 and 5 of the road traffic regulation act 1984 9seems to just say that councils can deem a road as resticted for various reasons) and schedule 3 or the road traffic offenders act 1988 (no idea on this one)'

need a little advice on this one, I shall of course be pleading not guilty but any comments by people with any experience would be helpful.

[finlay666]

Head over to the Civic Centre by the universities or the local library and ask for where you can find details on the laws.

[G4Z]

[Andy3536]

There's a very good percentage of those that appeal these have the judge side with them.

Stick it to the man

[staffsMike]

The only partly related thing I can remember is that is the line was worn badly at it's end then you can very much argue it's not legitimate. By the end I mean the part that goes perpendicular to the line to cap it off.

So.. If the line is worn so badly you could suggest it had finished.. then with no perpendicular line to cap it off it becomes.. a worn out line with no meaning.

Might be talking out of my backside of course but that is something I seem to remember.

EDIT: Just seen the pic.. haha.. that's not a line it's a custard accident

[kalniel]

That's not a line, sure there weren't any signs as well? Also how far are you from the pavement?

[Whiternoise]

I believe there's a really really good stock statement you can use against them, something like

"as the line did not conform to section X Y of the highway regulations and something something, i am therefore within my rights to appeal against this judgement"

I'll have a google

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=12441&hl= have a look at that.

[G4Z]

That's not a line, sure there weren't any signs as well? Also how far are you from the pavement?

What you might not see is that its actually a parking bay with a smudge of a yellow line on it, there are two of these bays outside my building and I am well within it.

[Agent]

Traffic Signs Regulations & General Directions 2002
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm

Schedule 6 - road markings:

Diagrams 1017 to 1018.1



The diagram shows a continuous line with T-bars that terminate it. Notice the "Permitted Variants: None" in item 4. I would be arguing that the line does not terminate with a T-bar (by the looks of it) and the line is not continuous, thus varying from the image of the regulation.

See:http://www.roadsidelawyer.co.uk/ques...es-enforceable
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...t-bar-end.html

[iranu]

You should get away with that. The RTA states that the line must be continuous and I'm sure there is a precedent for exactly that. Note Item No 4 - Permitted Variants: None. From here

[Clunk]

[Agent]

[Stoo]

Great minds think alike?

[finlay666]

Great minds think alike?

More don't check before/after posting

[staffsMike]

I would be arguing that the line does not terminate with a T-bar (by the looks of it) and the line is not continuous, thus varying from the image of the regulation.

That's what I said.. sort of

[iranu]

FFS we won't be able to post here with all those yellow lines!