Free Traffic Legal Advice

That is literally the rationale for rejection, the rest is how to pay and how to take to the tribunal. Mr representation was:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to formally challenge the issuance of Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) reference BC72470937, which I received on 24/10/24 for an alleged contravention of "Parking without a valid residents permit on display."

The PCN states that the location of the alleged contravention was "Back Rochdale Old Road, Bury." However, this location does not exist. The photographic evidence taken at the time of the alleged contravention clearly shows that my vehicle was actually parked on Rectory Lane. The incorrect location on the PCN constitutes a fatal error that renders the notice invalid.

Legal Basis for Appeal

1. Failure to Accurately State the Grounds for the Charge
Under Regulation 8(1)(a) of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007, a PCN must state "the grounds on which the civil enforcement officer believes that a penalty charge is payable."

Since "Back Rochdale Old Road" does not exist, the grounds for the charge are inaccurate and unclear, making the PCN invalid.



2. The Contravention Did Not Occur as Stated
Under Regulation 4(4)(e) of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, a valid ground for appeal is that "the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case."

Because the stated location does not exist, the alleged contravention as described in the PCN did not occur, meaning the penalty should not have been issued.



3. Precedent from Parking Adjudications

In multiple cases, parking adjudicators have ruled that a PCN with an incorrect location is a "fatal flaw" that invalidates enforcement.

Furthermore, it is not within the council’s authority to reissue or amend a PCN with a corrected location after the fact.




Request for Cancellation

Given the above legal requirements, it is clear that the PCN is invalid and unenforceable due to its failure to correctly identify the location of the alleged contravention. I, therefore, request that the PCN be cancelled immediately.

The photographic evidence your CEO provided clearly supports my representation and request written confirmation of the cancellation. Should the council choose not to cancel the PCN, I require a full explanation detailing the legal basis for its continued enforcement despite the incorrect location.

That would be great thank you

No no discount re offered unfortunately.

Extra photos attached

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

.....

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

.......

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

....

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

If that is the envelope the NoR arrived in, the NoR is dated 26/02/2025 and the postmark is the 27/02/2025.

IIRC they should be the same date -  a small point, but one to mention in passing in yr appeal to TPT.  .

This is a case from London. While location isn't a mandatory item on a PCN, in practice it needs to be accurate to inform the registered keeper (who may not be the driver) where the contravention took place as well as being a record to guide an adjudicator that the PCN was properly served at the correct location (on windscreen or by CCTV), and that the council dealt with objections to accuracy in its rejections.

----------

Case reference   2240333815

The Appellant’s case, set out in his representations to the Council, is that the location of the contravention was incorrectly described on the PCN as “Libra Road” whereas the vehicle was in fact parked in Hunters Walk. His photographs appear to show that this is so, and the Council has not dealt with the point at all, either in its Rejection Notice or in its case summary. I consider it highly probable that he is correct.
Although it is of course the case that the driver would in normal circumstances be expected to find the PCN on the vehicle and know where the location was this will not always be the case, and the Owner of the vehicle may well not know the details of the contravention. It seems to me that on this basis both the PCN and NTO w are defective, and no payment may be demanded on the basis of them. The Appeal is therefore allowed.