Free Traffic Legal Advice

I am helping a friend and I do not need any assistance with the actual alleged contravention so will not upload pictures.  The procedural issues are as follows:

1. The person mislaid the original PCN and, despite receiving correspondence from the council stating she should e mail to receive a copy, they reneged.

2. I advised her what to write regarding the alleged contravention and they sent their reply to the wrong address!

3. I then phoned them (having been authorised)and  they still refused to send a copy PCN. So, I asked what it contained as per the 28 days served wording and made another representation which was rejected and sent to me. Amongst other things, they say: "Please be advised that the Notice to Owner has not yet been sent, nor is having the initial PCN on hand a pre-requisite of appealing when the Notice to Owner is issued."  Also, they failed to consider my point about the 28 days.

4. The NtO has arrived and it contains no errors sadly. 

5, I am aware of cases won concerning the grounds expressed on their website which are below*

Is it a good idea to raise point 5 now at the NtO stage or best to leave it for the Tribunal stage?

*

Website grounds:

Please view the reasons and then enter your explanation below.
Click your reason or search for it below
Parked there before
If you did not get a Penalty Charge before, perhaps it was because there were no Civil Enforcement Officers nearby.
Select this reason to use it in your challenge
Didn't see/understand the signs
Your Penalty Charge was issued for contravention 27: parking against a stretch of lowered, sloping kerb. These places are visible so they do not need signs or road markings beside them. Kerbs are built like this to allow easy access across them. They exist at different locations for different reasons: to help pedestrians cross the road, especially people with prams or wheelchairs; to allow cars access to garages; and to allow cycles to cross from roads to cycle tracks.
Select this reason to use it in your challenge
Nowhere to park
We don't usually cancel Penalty Charges for this reason.

Parking pressure is high, especially in areas where there are schools, blocks of flats, households with more than one car, or shops that people drive to. We cannot guarantee everyone a space, including permit holders. Although we understand the difficulties you may have had trying to find somewhere to park, you still have to obey the parking rules.
Select this reason to use it in your challenge
Was loading/unloading
We will reconsider if you upload a copy of your delivery note, receipt/invoice for goods or job sheet. We will check that your document was valid.

We will reconsider your case if you provide us with more information. Depending on what you were loading or unloading, we may need to see a delivery note, a receipt/invoice for goods or a job sheet. And please describe the loading or unloading activity. Among other things, we will check: that what you were doing counts as loading or unloading; and that you only parked as long as necessary for the loading or unloading that you did.
Select this reason to use it in your challenge
Vehicle broke down
We will reconsider if you upload a copy of your breakdown company report or a receipt for parts, removal or repair. We will check that your document was valid.

Among other things, we will check that: the breakdown was unforeseeable rather than, for example, running out of fuel; the document is from a proper organisation; and the vehicle was not left for longer than 24 hours before being removed.
Select this reason to use it in your challenge

If you select search for other reasons: Lost PCN

*****

The Notice to Owner is dated 9th May so the deemed service date is 13th May which takes us to Sunday 9th June. I am tempted to advise (as the illustrious Dancing Dad would most probably agree!) making online representations on the 9th since I know how trigger-happy RBK have been in the past. But I guess the 7th would be safer.  Any thoughts how to play this are most welcome.  Meanwhile, I can only describe this situation with my usual adjective:  bolleaux.

I am having to recuse myself for the time being for personal reasons.

QT08674559  VRM FH19FYP

https://kingston.self-serve.co.uk/

B****y Barbour Logic.

Tis not the NTO is the problem, rather the challenge as per their website v the PCN as per the link.

Is it a good idea to raise point 5 now at the NtO stage or best to leave it for the Tribunal stage?

Leave it for the skeleton argument at the tribunal stage.

Dear Sirs

Ref: PCN QT08674559               VRM FH19FYP

On behalf of my client (Miss Moneypenny  ) I make the following formal representations.

1. I require you to consider all previous correspondence in this matter.

2. I recite that the PCN was mislaid. I cite from your correspondence with my client: "I would advise you to challenge the PCN online with the details I gave you above and ask for the letter to be resent, this will benefit you more as it will put the case on hold." I also refer you to your website which, amongst other matters, includes "Lost PCN" as a ground to select. Furthermore, it also states "  If you’ve lost your PCN or do not know your parking charge notice number, call us on 020 8547 5995 (Monday to Friday, 9am to 5pm)."Therefore, your refusal to provide the original not only reneges upon a wholly reasonable legitimate expectation to be sent a copy of the said PCN but also flies in the face of natural justice. Indeed, in terms of your conduct, this means that the only opportunity to view the PCN would be at the Tribunal stage which is wholly anomalous. This is a major procedural impropriety. Even though I phoned the council, and was refused and, indeed, was told of the 28 days statement on the first page, I subsequently made representations on this issue which have not been considered at all.

3. Your initial rejection was sent to the wrong address. Even though the recipient gave it to my client, this is still a procedural impropriety since my client cannot be expected to rely upon a matter of chance in order to progress her case.

4. Your letter to me of 4th April states this: “I regret to inform you that I cannot accept any further challenges at this stage.” It is averred that nowhere in the Statutory Instrument is it stated that representations are limited to one. Furthermore, as I have not seen the PCN, I am severely prejudiced by not viewing any statements concerning  representations. Therefore, the said statement constitutes yet another procedural impropriety since it fetters your discretion. Your further statement corroborates this: “Please be advised any further correspondence received prior to the Notice to Owner will not receive a response.”

5. You have failed to consider my submission regarding the discrepancy on the PCN in terms of “served” rather than “date occurred”.

In light of the above, please cancel the PCN and NTO.

007   

Well, after an adjournment, they retreated! Their website in terms of select a reason is like a game of Scrabble. And it denies you one statutory ground as unavailable viz. P.I.!  2240304431

I am attempting to help another recipient in similar terms. This RBK outfit are mugging people and this is a Public Law issue. The worst website of several that we know. At least Havering get their grounds right - even though the wrong ones for respective contraventions!

I'm not planning on changing my approach, the more notice they have the more time they have to try and concot a response.