Free Traffic Legal Advice

So I would need a letter from 319A or 57, as they are residental doors next to the drop kerb enterance?

In the letter would the below suffice, I assume it would have to be in the past,

Dear Council

I am the occupier of the residential premise XXXXX abd I confirm that XXXX came to seek my permission to park in front of the our access that is on Shelley Avenue on XX/XX/XX, to which I approved. He has received a ticket, although I had not called the council to report a contravention or a block, which would be the case if one had not informed me before parking.

Signed *Name of residential owner*
*Address of residential owner*

A devils advocate question

1. As it says " or with the consent (but not consent given for reward) of the occupier of the prem." in the case the occupier is the commerical shop owner, what difference would it make as this latter statement does not mention residential or if anything implies otherwise, as the first statement specfically stated 'Residential'?

2. It's deffinitly not a share drive, so it would need to the letter to state and clarify this if we were to assume the occupier was the commercial owner? Just because it sits alongside a residential property doesn't have to mean automatically its shared?

Thank you.

OP, you posted:

Great wil do that, as I've spoken to the shop owner the day this happened and prior to parking and after the PCN.

Therefore according to your account unless they reside at 319D whoever does would not be telling the truth.

There's a reason for pre as opposed to post-PCN permission because parliament was conscious that fraud should be addressed hence:

3)The second exception is where the vehicle is parked outside residential premises by or with the consent (but not consent given for reward) of the occupier of the premises.

Sorry guys, back on this PCN, now that the other one has been tackled NTO responded:) I must say this forum and you all have been immensely helpful, hoping the that gets overturned, then this be the 3rd!

But yes obviously one fundamental problem with the initial draft is that you cannot say consent was given ahead of time if that was not true, as that would be a false representation and would amount to a criminal offence.

What if the consent was given ahead of time, ie I asked the guy can I park and he said yes, then surely it is ok no? or am I missing the point?

Are we saying the wording you provided would be the best way to go ahead to cover points discussed around the bay being shared or resided in or not etc I've re-arranged
one line, which may leave the let open around residing or not and not pin us down, let us know your thoughts

"I am aware that on (date) a PCN was issued to XXX for parking in front of my drive (319D High Street North). I hereby confirm that XXX had my consent for parking in front of my drive on this occasion."

Should the letter be dated and a address added in the top right corner to make it more formal?

A question thats crossed my mind but how do the Council know or verify this, as in theory anyone can just say this letter was from X person but write and sign it themshelves? Should I be getting something else from the guy to add to verify the letter?[/quote]

Having spoken to the person in question and I have asked him to write a letter using the template provided, he has said the address is 57B Shelley Avenue, so I assume I should go with this in the letter,

If someone can confirm in respect to making it a formal letter with a Address in the top right? I assume we are not to date it based on previous discussions.

Hi All,

Got a response and they rejected it! its shocking because the first resposne said they would have considered a letter but it was not provided,, in this response with it provided they didnt even acknowledge it!

They seem to be set on its not allowed to park on a dropped kerb (outside of restricted hours), which I have done for years on the opposite side and never received a ticket and have seen others not receive a ticket with it parked on the side in question.

See attached - https://imgur.com/a/vedI1F8

They've also offered a discounted price again!

As I understand it, when distilled to its essence your argument is to the effect that you were exempt from the prohibition because:

3)The second exception is where the vehicle is parked outside residential premises by or with the consent (but not consent given for reward) of the occupier of the premises.


I suggest you show us your reps including the letter which you submitted to provide proof of your entitlement to rely upon this exemption.

I don't want to get embroiled in procedural issues until you've posted your reps.

Any thoughts, just conscious I have 6/7 days left to reply to adjudication.

Can I use pictures ive taken daily of cars parked on both sides with dropped kerbs and no tickets as evidence to back up the fact theyve never issued such tickets unless they are called for an obstruction?

Also they have a dropped kerb at the start of the road for pushchairs and prams etc that they've mentioned.