Author Topic: Southwark PCN – Order for Recovery received – police report later revealed TRACE relocation  (Read 167 times)

0 Members and 41 Guests are viewing this topic.

Vehicle: GJ69XKY

PCNs:

JK17263522 – alleged contravention on 02/10/2025 (Crampton Street)
JK17298185 – alleged contravention on 07/10/2025 (Crampton Street)

Timeline:

Vehicle was parked on Amelia Street.
02/10/2025 – PCN JK17263522 issued.
07/10/2025 – PCN JK17298185 issued.
11/10/2025 – Vehicle reported stolen to the Metropolitan Police.
21/11/2025 – Representations submitted against JK17263522.
18/12/2025 – Notice of Rejection issued for JK17263522.
No appeal lodged with London Tribunals.
Charge Certificate later issued for JK17298185.
June 2026 – Order for Recovery received for JK17263522 (£175, deadline 21/06/2026).

The key issue is that in April 2026 I obtained a Metropolitan Police report relating to the theft report.

The report contains the following entry:

"TRACE check shows as removed from Amelia Street as a street to street move on 25/09/25."

The report also records that the vehicle was later seen in Crampton Street.

Our position has always been that the vehicle was originally parked on Amelia Street and was not left by us in Crampton Street.

At the time representations were made and at the time the tribunal appeal period expired, we did not have the police report or the TRACE information. We only obtained that report in April 2026, several months after the appeal period had expired.

For context, during this period my husband was working as an NHS doctor and we had a newborn baby at home. While I appreciate that this does not excuse missing deadlines, it does explain why the matter was not pursued as actively as it should have been at the time.

I have now requested from Southwark:

Vehicle relocation records
TRACE records
CEO notes
Relocation logs
Photographs

I am not looking to make any inaccurate witness statement. The Notice of Rejection for JK17263522 was received by email, so I do not believe I can honestly rely on a TE9 ground based on non-receipt.

My questions are:

Is there any procedural route available in respect of JK17263522 now that an Order for Recovery has been issued?
Does the later discovery of the police report and TRACE relocation information change anything procedurally?
Is there any argument that the second PCN (JK17298185) was not properly considered, given that subsequent correspondence referred to both PCNs but Southwark stated that only JK17263522 had been challenged?
Am I now entirely reliant on Southwark exercising discretion, or is there any other route available?

I can upload the Order for Recovery, Notice of Rejection, correspondence and relevant page of the police report if helpful.

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook



You have not posted either of the PCNs, so we don't know what Act it was served under. So please help us to help you by posting the documents. 

It seems the PCNs were for parking, and if so, this is under the Traffic Management Act 2004. For PCNs under this Act you can submit a Witness Statement against the Order for Recovery, but there are only a limited number of situations you can report. The form is Form PE3, but looking at your narrative, none of them fit your circumstances, and you are dependent on the goodwill of Southwark, because you did not do anything after receiving their rejection of your reps. See here for the form: -

Form PE3: Challenge an unpaid penalty charge notice.
gov.uk


You do not seem to have done anything at all about PCN PCN JK17298185, so the enforcement process will have run its inevitable course, but it would seem is now at the Charge Certificate stage. With no reps submitted, it's difficult to see this one ending favourably.

Unfortunately your story is an example of what happens when a PCN recipient doesn't respond fully to documents and lets things slide. Once matters get beyond the OfR stage, you'll be getting bailiff letters. The first is the Compliance stage, and adds £75 to what you owe the council.If the bailiffs visit you, another £235 is added on. These amounts are statutory, by the way. I'm afraid civil enforcement is as harsh as the old criminal law enforcement, and maybe more harsh when one looks at the sums that can accrue.

Something is dreadfully wrong here procedurally.

Trying to separate the PCNs:

Car parked in Amelia St. on or before 25 Sept.

"TRACE check shows as removed from Amelia Street as a street to street move on 25/09/25."[presumably to Crampton St]

PCN **522
Issued 2 Oct, 1 week after car moved for contravention ?
'11/10/2025 – Vehicle reported stolen to the Metropolitan Police.', 16 days after being initially parked.
'21/11/2025 – Representations submitted against JK17263522.' 50 days after PCN issued!
'18/12/2025 – Notice of Rejection issued for JK17263522.'
'No appeal lodged with London Tribunals'. But if the reps were against the PCN served on the car, then an appeal is not the next step anyway!

June 2026 – Order for Recovery received for JK17263522 (£175, deadline 21/06/2026).

The key issue is that in April 2026 I obtained a Metropolitan Police report relating to the theft report.

I think not!

1. IF a Notice of Rejections against formal reps was issued on 18 Dec.
Then IMO, you have grounds to submit an OfR.
2. IF the Notice of Rejection related to a challenge against the PCN on the car.
Then IMO you have grounds to submit a WS.

OP, what's missing in this thread is the Notice to Owner, the PCN for Amelia Street etc.

What PCN for Amelia?
They cannot move a car unless a PCN has been issued. But so far we have only 2 PCNs, both presumably for Crampton! Unless perhaps the two PCNs were issue in Amelia and the car moved on the second one??

Who knows?

OP, check your V5C pl. Does it have you correct address as at the dates of the contraventions?

Thanks for the responses. I've now gathered together all of the paperwork and can hopefully clarify the position.

The vehicle was parked on Amelia Street. According to the Metropolitan Police report, a TRACE check later showed the vehicle had been moved from Amelia Street as a street-to-street move on 25/09/2025. The vehicle was subsequently reported stolen on 11/10/2025.

I think some confusion has arisen because my original representation was poorly expressed. I referred to having a resident parking permit, but I was not arguing that a resident permit was valid in a pay-by-phone bay.

The point I was trying to make was that the vehicle had originally been parked lawfully on Amelia Street and was later no longer where it had been left. The permit was simply background information, not the basis of the challenge.

A further complication is that multiple PCNs were issued after the vehicle appeared on Crampton Street:

* JK17263522 – 02/10/2025
* JK17309044 – 06/10/2025
* JK17298185 – 07/10/2025

All three relate to the same alleged contravention (11u) at the same location.

Southwark later cancelled JK17298185 because it had been issued within 24 hours of JK17309044.

For JK17263522, I received:

* Notice to Owner dated 06/11/2025
* Notice of Rejection dated 18/12/2025
* Charge Certificate dated 20/02/2026
* Order for Recovery received June 2026

I accept that I received the Notice of Rejection and did not appeal to London Tribunals. At the time I believed the matter was still being investigated because I was trying to obtain evidence regarding the vehicle's movement and theft report. The police report was only provided to me in April 2026.

I have attached in link here:

1. Notice to Owner – JK17263522
2. My representations
3. Notice of Rejection
4. Charge Certificate
5. Order for Recovery
6. Police report / TRACE evidence
7. Cancellation letter for JK17298185

My main question is:

Given that I received the Notice of Rejection for JK17263522 but did not appeal to London Tribunals, is there now any procedural route available in respect of the Order for Recovery, or am I entirely dependent on Southwark exercising discretion after seeing the TRACE/police evidence?

Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.

There is no procedural route once the debt has been registered, and the circumstances of the case do not match those listed on the Statutory Declaration. The basic fact is you submitted reps, they rejected them, then you did nothing, until the Charge Certificate arrive and jolted you into action, but it was too late. So essentially you can only rely on the goodwill of Southwark.

The above is my opinion, others may differ, or even suggest a route to redemption.

IMO, they cannot move your vehicle to another road(as opposed to a place not on a road(the 'pound') unless it has already been issued with a PCN.

But according to you, they did because there's no mention of a PCN issued in Amelia.

And IMO, they cannot move to another place on a road which is itself restricted if prospectively the vehicle would again be in contravention, which is what's alleged here.

IMO, something is missing from this account


IMO, something is missing from this account
Sight of at least some documents. (Its the way we understand events)


Just to clarify, I have already submitted requests to Southwark for:

* TRACE records
* vehicle relocation records and logs
* CEO notes
* photographs
* records showing the reason for the relocation
* any suspension, roadworks or filming records relating to Amelia Street

Southwark have advised that these requests may take up to a month to process, which unfortunately means I am unlikely to receive the records before the Order for Recovery deadline on June 21st.

The reason I have not yet been able to explain why the vehicle was moved is that I simply do not know. The only evidence currently available to me is the Metropolitan Police report recording that a TRACE check showed the vehicle as having been removed from Amelia Street as a street-to-street move.

Assuming those records do not arrive before the Order for Recovery deadline, what would members do in my position?

Would you pay to avoid enforcement fees and continue pursuing the relocation evidence afterwards, or take a different approach?

IMO, they cannot move your vehicle to another road(as opposed to a place not on a road(the 'pound') unless it has already been issued with a PCN.

But according to you, they did because there's no mention of a PCN issued in Amelia.

And IMO, they cannot move to another place on a road which is itself restricted if prospectively the vehicle would again be in contravention, which is what's alleged here.

IMO, something is missing from this account


Perhaps I've misunderstood, but isn't the OP saying that the TRACE check provided by the police shows that the car was TWOC'd from Amelia Street on 25 September and moved to Crampton Street before the PCNs were issued?  That's the only move the OP is referring to.

ie the PCNs were incurred by the TWOC'ers and not the OP or her husband.

What the OP hasn't explained is when the car was left on Amelia Road (sometimetime on or before 25 September presumably) and why it took until 11 October to report the car as missing to the police...
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 06:45:14 pm by ManxTom »

I'm working on this from the OP's first post:

'TRACE check shows as removed from Amelia Street as a street to street move on 25/09/25."

Which suggests it was moved by the council or other authorised person.

Further to my previous post, I can clarify the timeline regarding when the vehicle was reported missing.

At the time we lived in a block of flats and did not have a dedicated parking space. We parked using a residents' parking permit.

The vehicle was last parked by us on Amelia Street on 12 September 2025 and was not used daily.

At some point afterwards I saw the vehicle in Crampton Street with a PCN attached. Because there had been a short period during which the residents' permit had not been renewed, I assumed the PCN related to that issue, collected the ticket and paid it.

I also assumed either that I had simply misremembered where the vehicle had been parked or that my husband had moved it. As a result, I did not appreciate at that stage that there might have been an issue regarding the vehicle's location.

It was only when we went to use the vehicle on 11 October 2025 that we discovered it was no longer there and reported it to the Metropolitan Police.

I appreciate this may not have been clear from my earlier posts.

The car may have been relocated by the council probably because you had been in a suspended bay on Amelia Street. One of the pics for PCN JK17263522 shows a steering wheel lock. If it had a resident's permit they should have relocated it to a permit not a pay bay.

Or maybe Crampton Street was where it was all along...

The amount owing is £175 I would just pay it as if you do nothing the next stage is bailiffs.

The other live PCN is JK17309044 - this is at charge certificate stage, amount £165. Did you do anything about this one?



« Last Edit: Today at 05:19:03 pm by stamfordman »

OP, I agree that your best course at present is to pay, contrary to my earlier post when I thought that you had not received the NTO, but you have now confirmed that you did.

Your report to the police that your car was stolen FROM CRAMPTON ST is not relevant for our purposes because you saw it there and there are photos of it. You said to the police that subsequent to the last of the 3 PCNs being issued it 'went missing' from there[that is CRAMPTON ST].'If so, that's another matter.

I strongly suggest you draw a veil over the police report.

Back to the facts: your car was in a pay by phone parking place in Crampton on 2 October.

If moved there by the council, then IMO you have strong grounds for complaint outside the PCN process. So I suggest you pay the OfR and then let's focus on how it came to be in Crampton with its steering lock in situ.