Author Topic: Blackfriars/Playhouse Yard area PCN Contravention Code 40  (Read 188 times)

0 Members and 58 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Blackfriars/Playhouse Yard area PCN Contravention Code 40
« Reply #15 on: »
These were my representations:

"I am challenging the PCN on two grounds.

1. Procedural impropriety - the PCN is not compliant as it does not state the time of contravention, only the date. The time is a mandatory item under the legislation.

2. Procedural impropriety - at no point did I prevent service of the PCN either to me or on my car. I had a conversation with the CEO in which I said I had just completed a drop-off as an Uber driver and he advised me it would be better to wait on yellow lines.

I request that the PCN be cancelled."

Re: Blackfriars/Playhouse Yard area PCN Contravention Code 40
« Reply #16 on: »
They took the simple and lazy way out, as I feared.

The PCN is flawed because it omits a date. A non-mandatory element cannot replace a mandatory one, IMO at all but certainly without an explanation. This is not a guessing game where the keeper is required to join up dots.

The Traffic Signs Regs state:

Where the bay is reserved for an individual disabled badge holder, an alphanumeric identifier, with or without the word “ONLY” may be added after “DISABLED”.

But when so reserved, the upright traffic sign must include the alphanumeric identifier, otherwise the road marking and sign would conflict.

Contrary to their assertion, an upright traffic sign may include the word "ONLY".

It makes you wonder whether there is a TMO in this case and what it provides.

Re: Blackfriars/Playhouse Yard area PCN Contravention Code 40
« Reply #17 on: »
Just a note to say that photographs are not a legal requirement on a PCN or, indeed, to accompany it, therefore the PCN is still non-compliant. They are bluffing their way, as usual.


Re: Blackfriars/Playhouse Yard area PCN Contravention Code 40
« Reply #18 on: »
So tincombe was right to anticipate their reference to pictures but that doesn't rescue the PCN.

Note it's the time not the date that is missing.

The rejection also doesn't deal with the service issue in my view.

The legend/sign is a possible third line issue.

You should appeal and ask for a telephone or online hearing.


Re: Blackfriars/Playhouse Yard area PCN Contravention Code 40
« Reply #19 on: »
Many thanks for all your help so far.
I've drafted my tribunal appeal based on your advice. Before I submit it, would you mind having a quick look to see if there's anything you would change or add?

Ground of Appeal: Procedural Impropriety

I rely on the following grounds.

1. The PCN does not state the time of contravention.

The PCN states the date of the alleged contravention but does not state the time of contravention as a mandatory item on the notice itself.

In its Notice of Rejection, the authority contends that the timestamp shown on the accompanying photograph satisfies this requirement. I do not agree.

A photograph is not a mandatory component of a Penalty Charge Notice and cannot be used to supply information which the legislation requires the PCN itself to state. The authority has therefore failed to comply with the statutory requirements.

2. The authority has failed properly to address the issue of service.

I explained in my representations that I returned to my vehicle, had a conversation with the Civil Enforcement Officer and that at no stage did the CEO attempt to serve a PCN on me or affix one to my vehicle.

The Notice of Rejection merely repeats the statutory wording that the vehicle was driven away before service could be effected. It does not address my account or explain how I prevented service.

I respectfully submit that the authority has failed properly to consider my representations on this point.

3. Signage (if appropriate).

If the authority relies upon the particular signing of this bay, I invite it to produce the relevant Traffic Management Order and any authorisation relied upon in support of the signage, as questions have been raised regarding whether the bay is correctly signed and authorised.

For the above reasons I respectfully ask the Adjudicator to allow the appeal.

Re: Blackfriars/Playhouse Yard area PCN Contravention Code 40
« Reply #20 on: »
I would suggest:

1. The PCN does not state the time of contravention, which is a 'regulatory matter', contrary to para. 3(1)(b) of Schedule 2 to the General Regulations.

This omission on the face of the PCN is not contested by the authority who nonetheless contend that the time of contravention can be found 'in red' within a timestamped photograph included within the PCN.

Firstly, I contend that s3(1)(b) requires the 'regulatory matters' to be printed on the face of the PCN, which objectively it is not. Secondly, given that this photo shows only the rear of my car at some point during the CEO's consideration of the issue, then I submit that it has no evidential value whatsoever in terms of specifying the moment at which the CEO's thoughts crystallised into a determination that a contravention had occurred, which is what the regulations demand. 

Like Like x 1 View List

Re: Blackfriars/Playhouse Yard area PCN Contravention Code 40
« Reply #21 on: »
Opt for a telephone or online hearing. I will be surprised if they contest it.

----------------

See tincombe's link as I linked to old regs.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2026, 06:11:59 pm by stamfordman »
Like Like x 1 View List

Re: Blackfriars/Playhouse Yard area PCN Contravention Code 40
« Reply #22 on: »
These regs have been superseded, it's now these:

These Regulations, together with the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022 (S.I. 2022/XXXX), provide for the civil enforcement of...
legislation.gov.uk


No difference in substance, just terms and format.
Like Like x 1 View List