Camden Council - Contravention 30o - Single Yellow Line, BB Holder

I assume the 3 hours and 2 mins comes from when the CEO first noted the car and then when the PCN was produced.

On the PCN the vehicle was observed from 09:46 to 12:48, where the 3 hours 2 mins comes from.

Which Camden officer signed the rejection letter?

The rejection letter was signed by: R Smith

I was hoping it would be the same person as the adjudication.

I would add to the note:

'I copy below the appeal decision for your convenience' and paste the text.

Unless anyone comes up with any better ideas.

I sent the email a week ago and got no response. Received an automated reply, saying they do not deal with PCN over email.

I think the discount period ends on Thursday.

If I wait for NtO and put in a formal reps, would they reoffer the discount again?

I would wait for the NTO. Who is the registered keeper and are the logbook name and address correct.

I'm the registered keeper and the details on the logbook is correct.

The online status now states the "NtO/Enf. Notice Sent." I am just waiting for it to show up in the post.

In the meantime I wanted to draft up my formal reps.

Would I just send them what I emailed over and do I paste the appeal decision for their convenience?

I would wait for the NTO. Who is the registered keeper and are the logbook name and address correct.

I've received the NtO today which includes the representation letter/form. The notice is dated 11/11/25.

Should I submit formal reps indicating "The alleged contravention did not occur" and state the following:
I believe the contravention did not occur as I refer you to London Tribunals case 2240520470 which you attended and invite you to cancel the PCN/NtO.

Do let me know what you think and if I should include the case summary in the reps.

Needs to be a bit longer.

I would say the below but wait for others.There is no rush.

-----------

Further to your rejection of my informal challenge I have researched the alleged contravention and found that it does not exist in law.

The council must be aware that there is no contravention of a blue badge holder being parked for longer than permitted in any location, including on a yellow line.

In this case, the 3 hour exemption accorded to blue badge holders is for parking in a restricted street during prescribed hours; after 3 hours, the only contravention is being parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours (code 01).

The PCN was issued not only for the wrong contravention but one that does not exist.

I have summarised this from the decision in tribunal case xxxxx, which was in Camden, and which I reproduce in full below for your information.

The PCN must be cancelled and I look forward to your early confirmation of such.

I'll wait for others to respond.

Would it be ok to send a screenshot of the case summary instead of pasting it into the reps online form? As, it might not let me paste all of into the reply box and the formatting will look off.

Does the form not allow for attachments? If it do, you can attach a pdf and so keep the formatting.

I added that the tribunal case was in Camden.

The important thing is not to just give a link but show them something, in this a case they ought to know.

Does the form not allow for attachments? If it do, you can attach a pdf and so keep the formatting.

If the form does allow for attachments then I was thinking of the following draft (if it doesn't allow it, I will get back to you):

Further to your rejection of my informal challenge I have researched the alleged contravention and found that it does not exist in law.

The council must be aware that there is no contravention of a blue badge holder being parked for longer than permitted in any location, including on a yellow line.

In this case, the 3 hour exemption accorded to blue badge holders is for parking in a restricted street during prescribed hours; after 3 hours, the only contravention is being parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours (code 01).

The PCN was issued not only for the wrong contravention but one that does not exist.

I have summarised this from the decision in tribunal case 2240520470, which was in Camden, and which I reproduce in full below for your information as attached in the PDF file.

The PCN must be cancelled and I look forward to your early confirmation of such.
-----

If anyone wants to make adjustments then pl let me know. I will try to submit the reps next week as to give time for responses.

It's not further to their rejection of informal reps, that's past.

To flesh out a bit, I would suggest perhaps:

Dear Sir,
PCN **********

I refer to the above and NTO issued on ******. I hereby make formal representations on the following grounds:

Contravention did not occur.

Rather than rehearse my informal reps in everyday motorists' terms, I shall instead reproduce verbatim and rely upon the decision of Adjudicator Stanton-Dunne of the Environment and Traffic Adjudicators when allowing an appeal on 18 February 2025 on identical grounds, coincidentally against your council which was actually represented at the hearing.

'This PCN ......not exist'.

I don't think I could add to his reasoning and therefore I am content to let his words form my representations. I have attached the ETA Case No. should you wish to verify the above - *************.

The PCN must be cancelled.

Yours,