I'm trying to find out if I have any grounds for appeal against a Penalty
Charge Notice. Because of an accident in the Euston Underpass the police
diverted traffic off the Marylebone Road into the Congestion Zone which I
had not intended to use.

I then had to plot a new route crossing Waterloo Bridge, but thought I had
left the zone just before 7.00am. However, it turns out I was caught on
camera at 7.01am. Anyone know if I have good grounds for appeal?

Also, if I pay now it's only £40.00. But if I appeal and lose does that mean
I have to pay £80.00 - or £40.00 if I pay quickly.

Thanks
Steve


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free by AVG
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.534 / Virus Database: 329 - Release Date: 31/10/03

In article , Sqwiggle
writes
I'm trying to find out if I have any grounds for appeal against a Penalty
Charge Notice. Because of an accident in the Euston Underpass the police
diverted traffic off the Marylebone Road into the Congestion Zone which I
had not intended to use.

I then had to plot a new route crossing Waterloo Bridge, but thought I had
left the zone just before 7.00am. However, it turns out I was caught on
camera at 7.01am. Anyone know if I have good grounds for appeal?

Also, if I pay now it's only £40.00. But if I appeal and lose does that mean
I have to pay £80.00 - or £40.00 if I pay quickly.

You would only have grounds for appeal if you followed the diversion
route set up by the police. Probably worth a try though.
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

"Andrew P Smith" wrote in message
...
In article , Sqwiggle
writes
I'm trying to find out if I have any grounds for appeal against a Penalty
Charge Notice. Because of an accident in the Euston Underpass the police
diverted traffic off the Marylebone Road into the Congestion Zone which I
had not intended to use.

I then had to plot a new route crossing Waterloo Bridge, but thought I
had
left the zone just before 7.00am. However, it turns out I was caught on
camera at 7.01am. Anyone know if I have good grounds for appeal?

Also, if I pay now it's only £40.00. But if I appeal and lose does that
mean
I have to pay £80.00 - or £40.00 if I pay quickly.

You would only have grounds for appeal if you followed the diversion
route set up by the police. Probably worth a try though.
--
Andrew

Mmmm! I wouldn't mind trying to appeal, but not if it was going to cost
another £40.00 if I lost. It's not clear what you have to pay if you lose.

Steve


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free by AVG
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.534 / Virus Database: 329 - Release Date: 31/10/03

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 18:53:31 GMT, "Sqwiggle"
wrote:

Mmmm! I wouldn't mind trying to appeal, but not if it was going to cost
another £40.00 if I lost. It's not clear what you have to pay if you lose.

Assuming you appeal within 14 days of receiving the original PCN, you
should preserve the right to pay the reduced charge.

HTH,

Barry

--
Barry Salter, barry at southie dot me dot uk
Read uk.* newsgroups? Read uk.net.news.announce!

DISCLAIMER: The above comments do not necessarily represent the
views of my employers.

In message , Andrew P Smith
writes
Because of an accident in the Euston Underpass the police
diverted traffic off the Marylebone Road into the Congestion Zone which I
had not intended to use.

I then had to plot a new route crossing Waterloo Bridge, but thought I had
left the zone just before 7.00am. However, it turns out I was caught on
camera at 7.01am. Anyone know if I have good grounds for appeal?

Also, if I pay now it's only £40.00. But if I appeal and lose does that mean
I have to pay £80.00 - or £40.00 if I pay quickly.

You would only have grounds for appeal if you followed the diversion
route set up by the police. Probably worth a try though.

Waterloo Bridge is a long way from Marylebone Road. I suspect an appeal
would only succeed if the OP was caught on camera actually on the
diversion in Marylebone (which sounds unlikely from his description).
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...

Waterloo Bridge is a long way from Marylebone Road. I suspect an appeal
would only succeed if the OP was caught on camera actually on the
diversion in Marylebone (which sounds unlikely from his description).
--
I would have entered the charge zone at about 6.40 - 6.45am, so I guess I
wouldn't have been on camera.

Steve

In message , Steevee
writes
Waterloo Bridge is a long way from Marylebone Road. I suspect an appeal
would only succeed if the OP was caught on camera actually on the
diversion in Marylebone (which sounds unlikely from his description).
--
I would have entered the charge zone at about 6.40 - 6.45am, so I guess I
wouldn't have been on camera.

Well, you'd have been on camera, they just wouldn't have logged you as
chargeable. But did you stick to the diversion and exit from the zone as
soon as possible? Sounds to me like you took a chance on rat-running
through the middle before 7am. There's nothing wrong with that, except
it's also nothing to do with the police's diversion.
--
Roland Perry

Seanie O'Kilfoyle wrote:

Well, you'd have been on camera, they just wouldn't have logged you
as chargeable. But did you stick to the diversion and exit from the
zone as soon as possible? Sounds to me like you took a chance on
rat-running through the middle before 7am. There's nothing wrong
with that, except it's also nothing to do with the police's
diversion

This just shows what an unfair extorion racket the CONgestion
"charge" truly is

Why? If the OP chose to leave the official diversionary route then he
simply becomes another motorist moving within the charge zone and hence
subject to the charge. Seems fair enough to me

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , Steevee
writes
Waterloo Bridge is a long way from Marylebone Road. I suspect an appeal
would only succeed if the OP was caught on camera actually on the
diversion in Marylebone (which sounds unlikely from his description).
--
I would have entered the charge zone at about 6.40 - 6.45am, so I guess I
wouldn't have been on camera.

Well, you'd have been on camera, they just wouldn't have logged you as
chargeable. But did you stick to the diversion and exit from the zone as
soon as possible? Sounds to me like you took a chance on rat-running
through the middle before 7am. There's nothing wrong with that, except
it's also nothing to do with the police's diversion.
--
Roland Perry

This just shows what an unfair extorion racket the CONgestion "charge" truly
is

DON'T PAY IT

Appeal in court

"Stimpy" wrote in message
...

Why? If the OP chose to leave the official diversionary route then he
simply becomes another motorist moving within the charge zone and hence
subject to the charge. Seems fair enough to me

Just sent in the appeal. Let you know how it goes.

Steve


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free by AVG
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.567 / Virus Database: 358 - Release Date: 24/01/04