First Draft - Let me know what you think:
To whom this way concern,
I am writing to formally challenge Penalty Charge Notice BM40248575 issued on 22nd July 2024.
I request the PCN’s cancellation based on the following:
Compelling or Other Mitigating Reasons
Birmingham City Council’s discretion policy includes a section titled “compelling or other mitigating reasons,” which outlines that cases requiring individual consideration may warrant cancellation. I do not believe that the response provided by the Council sufficiently considered the circumstances or the mitigating factors in my case. There was no clear explanation as to why my first-time mistake did not justify cancellation, indicating a potential failure to consider the individual merits of my situation.
Incorrect Contravention Code
The alleged contravention cited as: "Parked in a car park without clearly displaying a valid pay and display ticket or voucher or parking clock". However, I paid for my parking using the Pay by Phone service, which does not require a physical ticket to be displayed. Given that there was no requirement to display a ticket, the correct contravention code should have been: "Parked without payment of the parking charge." As I complied with the parking terms by paying via phone, this penalty appears unjustified. I respectfully ask that you reconsider this error.
Birmingham City Council's Policy on First-Time Mistakes
In my appeal, I wish to reference Birmingham City Council’s own policy regarding the handling of Penalty Charge Notices.
The policy clearly states that for first-time mistakes, such as issues with vehicle registration or payment, there is a provision for cancelling the charge. Specifically, at the Notice to Owner (NTO) stage, it is stated that:
"In cases of first-time contraventions where a mistake has been made, including incorrect Vehicle Registration Mark (VRM) or method of payment errors, we may cancel the PCN."
Birmingham City Council’s policy also refers to the consideration of "similar circumstances" where mistakes such as incorrect VRM can lead to cancellation. It is clear that my case falls within these guidelines, as this is the first time such an error has occurred. Therefore, in line with your discretion policy, I urge you to cancel this PCN.
Given the above points and the lack of evidence showing that my case was considered under the "compelling or other mitigating reasons" category, I believe I have grounds for cancellation of this PCN. Should this matter proceed to adjudication, I am confident that the adjudicator will recognise the failure to appropriately apply your own discretion policy and the fact I have made a payment for time spent in the car park and cancel the PCN on that basis.
I look forward to your favourable response and the cancellation of this Penalty Charge Notice.
