Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello all,

I need help challenging this PCN.

Link below to pictures and the PCN Contravention Code List in an ibb image folder.




https://ibb.co/album/3yJ1NZ



Please can you help me check if this PCN has been issued correctly, or if there are any procedural improprieties.

My main point is that there is no suffix on the contravention code CC23 on the PCN. According to the CC List, CC23 should have a suffix to fully describe the contravention.

Another point: the picture of the signage/template taken and uploaded onto the Croydon website is not very clear (blurry). It cannot be read legibly. Will that make a significant difference?


Did the contravention occur? Does the penalty exceed the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case? Is the Traffic Order allegedly contravened invalid? Are the mitigating circumstances and evidence sufficient for cancellation?


**Background story:**

I have mobility issues and find it challenging to walk long distances. I cannot walk very fast. I parked to get some medication from Savers across the road.

I had barely entered the shop and looked back when I saw a parking attendant standing by my car, logging into his machine. The PCN was issued within 1 minute. I did a U-turn and started walking back towards my vehicle. It had just stopped raining, so the ground was wet and very slippery, so I had to be extra cautious not to slip or twist my knees/legs.

I believe he saw me coming and hurriedly issued the ticket. The ticket was quickly crumpled into the yellow envelope; it wasn't even folded properly and was stuck on the windshield by the time I got to him. He was moving away, and I stopped him and tried to speak to him, but he was very rude, arrogant, and dismissive. He said, "I don't want to hear anything, you can appeal and explain that to the council." I asked if he could put a note in his log book as this would corroborate my appeal, but he was basically shouting that he didn't want to hear anything.

I left him and went to pick up the medication I purchased from Savers. I have the receipt.

I also have a letter for my physio assessment and appointments. I have medical evidence of my mobility issues.

Also, I looked at contravention code 23, and it says "suffix required to fully describe contravention." No suffix was issued with code 23 on this PCN. The suffix on the CC Sheet looks like "2". I have uploaded a copy of the CC sheet. Is this a valid challenge? Please see the PCN.


Please, what is the best way to appeal this PCN successfully? Ideally, I would like to preserve the discount. It is showing as £80 on the website.

Thanks

There are a few cases won where the PCN doesn't describe the contravention and I think we've seen another case in Croydon we had a go at. 

There are a few cases won where the PCN doesn't describe the contravention and I think we've seen another case in Croydon we had a go at.

Please can you sign post me to these cases so I can have a look. Do you have links to them.
Thanks

No need to crop the PCN, we need to see everything pl.

You parked in a Goods Vehicle only loading bay. Yours is not a goods vehicle.

So you're left with proving an exemption or that there has been a procedural impropriety on the authority's behalf, for example the PCN not accurately giving 'the grounds on which the civil enforcement officer issuing the notice believes that a penalty charge is payable,'.

As regards the PCN, numbers and alpha suffixes aren't the issue because a motorist wouldn't have, and is not expected to have, any knowledge of these which are for administrative purposes only. What the PCN lacks is sufficient specificity as regards the contravention. This is provided for in LC's contravention descriptions as 'goods vehicle loading bay'.

IMO, your informal reps should address this omission, for example:

I am making representations on the grounds that the contravention did not occur because I am unclear as to why my vehicle was not permitted to park in the parking place. The PCN simply states.....class of vehicle. I am not an expert on vehicle classes and therefore am at a loss to understand what I did wrong. When I opened the PCN I looked around and saw a sign regarding goods vehicles and loading, but if this relates to my PCN why was this not included in the contravention grounds instead of the non-specific wording which was used?

Since starting to draft these representations I have been referred to the approved descriptions mandated by London Councils which state clearly that a 'suffix is required to fully describe the contravention'.

If the authority wish to pursue this penalty then they must explain why they have failed to use the specified description.

OP, I'm simply trying to tease out as much, or reveal how little, reasoning the authority use in any rejection which IMO would better inform any decision as to whether to pursue this to the NTO stage.

But the bottom line is at the top! You were parked in a goods vehicle only bay and whether you wish to pursue the argument above I leave to you.

I didn't crop the PCN. I am aware that all the details needs to be visible.
The first picture I uploaded was horizontal even though the actual picture was taken vertical.

I can see the full PCN in the new link I have removed the old link.

Please recheck the link.


What is your take on the blurred signage that was uploaded by the CEO and the 1st blurred photo of the PCN affix to my car. The 2nd picture seen a bit clear?

I can see the full PCN now, thanks. So, it's Church St, Croydon o/s no. 35.

Photos aren't required.

Library pictures or GSV would be available. You're not disputing the contravention, are you?

Stick with substantive issues IMO.

It's far easier to use mobility issues if you can get a blue badge. I managed to get one as I too have difficulty walking very far and have some invisible things wrong. It's worth mentioning i suppose, but there again may be better to use the council's failings to your advantage.

#Roythebus



How did you go about applying for the blue badge?

Thanks