Free Traffic Legal Advice

When did you submit the representations against the Notice to Owner, and how did you submit them ? Under the Traffic Management Act 2004, they have 56 days to respond. If this is exceeded, you win by default. The 56 days is counted from the date the council receive the reps.

Part of the council's reasons for rejecting your reps was that the alternative of paying by phone was available and should have been used. IMO, it is therefore totally contradictory to insist that a pay and display ticket or voucher was required to be displayed. IMO, their own statement supports your claim and I would start your appeal with this. IMO, the correct grounds of appeal are 'tne penalty demanded.....circumstances of the case'. 

I would also add another point which is procedural impropriety. The NOR must, among other matters:

ii)indicate the nature of an adjudicator’s power to award costs, and

(iii)describe the form and manner in which an appeal to an adjudicator must be made, and

The NOR states:
'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..'

The regs provide at para. 13 of Schedule 1 to the Appeals regs:
3), an adjudicator may make an order awarding costs and expenses—

(a)against a party (including an appellant who has withdrawn an appeal or an enforcement authority which has consented to an appeal being allowed), if the adjudicator considers that—

(i)the party has acted frivolously or vexatiously, or

(ii)the party’s conduct in making, pursuing or resisting an appeal was wholly unreasonable;

(b)against an enforcement authority, where the adjudicator considers that the disputed decision was wholly unreasonable.

IMO, 'costs are not normally awarded' does not meet the requirement for what the NOR must 'indicate'. What the authority have done is to signpost where, outside of the NOR, the mandatory info may be found.

cp has experience of this issue i.e. the distinction which the courts draw between whether something is presented e.g. evidence, as opposed to simply being referred to in another place e.g. a link.

I would add that this point is fundamental to the way most authorities outside London structure their NORs and therefore might be finessed by an adjudicator if they're minded to allow an appeal on the first grounds.

WaIt for others.