I have this Wigan Council PCN for “(52) Failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle”. I appealed on the basis that the PCN does not specify the prohibited class of vehicle.
See the PCN, Appeal, Notice of Rejection and the only Traffic Penalty Tribunal case I could find on the matter, at the google drive link:
In the Notice of Rejection the council states “While London must use suffixes, any local authority outside of London do not need to use them”
1. Is this true? Clarification would be appreciated. The only TPT case I can find in the spreadsheet is Daniel Ballinger v Herefordshire District Council (HE00017-2404, 2 July 2024), which supports the Councils statement. I feel like I have read this before, but it would be good to get some clarity on that.
2. Can they also omit the prohibited class of vehicle though? Surely that must be included, right?
Furthermore, Regulation 6(6)(a)(ii) of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022 (S.I. 2022/576) mandates that a Notice of Rejection must "indicate the nature of an adjudicator's power to award costs".
In their Notice of Rejection, the Enforcement Authority merely stated:
"There is no charge for appealing and costs are not normally awarded. Details about when an order for costs can be made can be found on the website, or by calling the number above."
I acknowledge the High Court authority in Halton Borough Council v Road User Charging Adjudicators [2023] EWHC 2927 (Admin). In Halton, the notice on its face actually attempted to explain who could be awarded costs and on what grounds (even if narrowly expressed).
By contrast, the wording used in this case provides no substantive indication whatsoever as to who may be awarded costs or on what legal threshold costs apply or the extent of the adjudicators powers to award them. Stating that "costs are not normally awarded" and directing the motorist to a phone number or external website delegates the statutory duty away from the notice itself.
The statute explicitly requires the decision notice to inform the recipient of the nature of the power (i.e. that an Adjudicator has statutory discretion to award costs against either party for frivolous, vexatious, or wholly unreasonable conduct). Outsourcing this mandatory statutory requirement to external web links or telephone hotlines surely fails to satisfy Regulation 6(6)(a)(ii)?
I don't usually bother appealing these, as we get them quite frequently. Drivers will go northbound on Winwick Lane to get to a delivery site. Then they will come back the same way, not realising that there is a restriction on the same road for southbound traffic.
I thought I'd test the water.