Hi all,
I have also been an unlucky winner and received a letter from MET as attached along with an over view of the signs[IMG]file:///C:\Users\me\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\cli p_image001.png[/IMG], the "driver" visited on 5th Oct, PCN issued 11th Oct, received 16th Oct.
For the "driver" parked in the car park (Park1) passing through the sign visited for stayed for 80 mins out of our 90min allotted time and then moved the car to a different car park (Park2) or so the driver thought.
It turns out that this second car park is an extension of the 1st car park, on entering the other parking area (park 2) the "driver" did not pass or see another sign to indicate the "driver" was still in the MCD's car park.
After receiving the PCN I revisited the car park, and the car park the "driver" had moved into to see if there were signs in it, the"driver" had originally parked in the first slot after the disabled bays with a large van next to the "driver" obscuring the sign.
With the road and signage positioning does the "driver" in your opinion have a case to dispute poor signage and have grounds to dispute the PCN?
The red cross on the MCD's image is the location of the signs and the right hand facing arrow is where the "driver" had parked after leaving the first car park.
Any help and assistance is gratefully received
I have also been an unlucky winner and received a letter from MET as attached along with an over view of the signs[IMG]file:///C:\Users\me\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\cli p_image001.png[/IMG], the "driver" visited on 5th Oct, PCN issued 11th Oct, received 16th Oct.
For the "driver" parked in the car park (Park1) passing through the sign visited for stayed for 80 mins out of our 90min allotted time and then moved the car to a different car park (Park2) or so the driver thought.
It turns out that this second car park is an extension of the 1st car park, on entering the other parking area (park 2) the "driver" did not pass or see another sign to indicate the "driver" was still in the MCD's car park.
After receiving the PCN I revisited the car park, and the car park the "driver" had moved into to see if there were signs in it, the"driver" had originally parked in the first slot after the disabled bays with a large van next to the "driver" obscuring the sign.
With the road and signage positioning does the "driver" in your opinion have a case to dispute poor signage and have grounds to dispute the PCN?
The red cross on the MCD's image is the location of the signs and the right hand facing arrow is where the "driver" had parked after leaving the first car park.
Any help and assistance is gratefully received
Comment