Free Traffic Legal Advice

Presumably this was a virtual permit, so you typed a '0' instead of an 'O'. The official font for number plates has no '0', the number plate maker uses the same character for both, so an easy mistake and one that has won appeals at London Tribunals, but we  have no way of looking at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal statutory register.

If you're prepared to take Bradford there, then you would have a good chance of a win, but you'd have to risk the full PCN penalty. There are no additional costs, and if you win you pay nothing, of course. But first you would have to go through the rigamarole of submitting an informal challenge, (optional), and then waiting for the Notice to Owner. This is sent to the owner's address as recorded on the V5C Registration Certificate.

So, are you the owner ? If not, who is, because the owner has legal responsibility for all PCNs ?

Hi,

Please see my draft below:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I write to make formal representations against the above PCN.

A visitor permit was validly purchased and active for the relevant date, time and location. However, when entering the vehicle registration, I made a genuine typing error. The correct registration is BT14OCZ, but it was entered as BT140CZ, mistakenly using the number “0” instead of the letter “O”.

This is a minor keying error involving a single character. The registration entered is clearly very similar to the correct vehicle and does not represent a different or unrelated vehicle.

The permit itself was valid and paid for, and the vehicle was entitled to park. There was no attempt to avoid payment or the parking restrictions, and there has been no financial loss to the council.

I appreciate that the VRM must be entered correctly, however I respectfully ask that discretion be applied in this case. The purpose of the scheme has been fulfilled — a valid permit was in place — and the penalty has arisen solely due to a minor human error.

In light of the above, I request that the PCN be cancelled.

You are making informal, not formal, reps.

The permit was not valid, it was displayed in the wrong vehicle. But it was valid(as far as we know) in all other respects other than the typo error.

...as the authority will see(from its records/the copy permit enclosed and the CEO's photos(presumably), I was displaying a permit which was valid in every regard other than a '0'/'O' typo. * I hope that it can be seen that I made every attempt to pay and I apologise for my error which I hope will not cost me £** !

Obviously, use your own words.

*- I understand stamfordman's question because normally a '0' for a 'O' is not a typo because they're not adjacent on a keyboard(certainly not mine). I wonder whether there's anything else you could throw into the mix e.g. only had the car a short while/you are not the owner(and therefore can only see the VRM which would look like a '0' etc.

Have you posted the PCN, my link doesn't work.

Thanks for the reply.

Just to add some context — this was for my sister who has recently passed and this is her first car. She sent me the registration to input for the visitor permit as she was coming over to visit.

We live on a permit holders only street with Bradford Council, so I had to arrange and pay for a visitor permit for her to park there.

I’ve clearly made a genuine mistake when entering it, mixing up the letter “O” with the number “0”. The permit itself was active and paid for, and the vehicle was entitled to be parked there.

Having read tincombe’s reply, I understand the importance of VRM accuracy, but this is a single-character error and the entered VRM is very close to the correct one, not a completely different vehicle.

There was no attempt to avoid payment or gain any advantage — just a simple input error.

Do you think this is something worth pursuing on the basis of a minor keying error and genuine compliance?