Free Traffic Legal Advice

Quote from your PPP post

HI - I recieved a PCN for an alledged overstay on an electic charge point.
I have challenged this and it's been declined. As in other cases I have had they have only selectively addressed the points I have raised

The first point I would like a view on is what evidence to the LA need to win the case at tribunal please? I am asking as the pictures only show the car at circa 16:22 and not at 9:58 which is the time that the officer claims to have seen my car there. Should there be a picture or can the LA rely soley on the officers notes for the time s/he first saw the vehcile?

We need to see all the paperwork...
Please post both sides of the PCN, a copy of your challenge and of their letter of rejection, any council photos and a GSV link to the location.

I find using https://imgbb.com/ and uploading each image separately means you can scroll down past each image and copy each BBCcode into your post here, thus displaying them here and saving having to look at websites.

Here's the rejection


And some of the Council photos











The PCN is cropped and upside down - I think you need to flatten, re-photo and repost.

Thank you - I was just about to upload new picturs.
I actually can't remember as there ever day and very stressed with a situation where a tenant passed with no next of kin and now dealing with the flat, refurb, freeholder deadlines etc.

Re: the tyre postion then - so they don't have to show that picture in the evidence, simply have a note of it? Also maybe it's corrrect but seems unliekly that they log the tyre positions of every car they see and then return or perhaps they pick random samples. If it's the case they don't need the opening time picture I'll simply have to pay it - mainly to reduce stress. I likly overstayed anyway in total but probably not aligned with their times as car didn't charge and app supposed to altert when charged but didn't etc.

Thanks

Thanks for your response.
Sorry if I am being dim - but are you saying I should asked the LA for the officers evidence before deciding on an appeal and if so do they have to supply this or are you simply saying the the appeal should ask for them ( should I go down that route)?

Thanks again

Thanks for you reply

The tenant situaiton is that the person sadly passed away late last year with no next of kin so it's been a night mare sorting out the legal fall out of that, regianing possession, dealing with LA re public funeral, LA searching the flat for wills, assests for public funeral ( think The Sweeney! ) tring to get gas service back etc. And then, as he was a hoarder, dealing with his stuff, then the freeholders before finally staring to refubish the flat ( which has been full of stress and challenges.)

I don't think that in itself is going to be mitigation for an alledged breach. However what I do believe is that it sets a context for why I am not absolutly aserting with 100% assurtity I did/didn't overstay etc. This is because since about Feb when i got possession back I am pretty much there 6 andsometimes 7 days a week so days meld into one. However generaly if the car needs charging I charge it ( staying up the 4 hours allowed ) - then if it's in morning I sometime pop for materials, get some lunch then come back and top car up before going home or simply use visitor permits off the electric bay.  Since my last post I have checked my credit card and did visit toolstation, screwfix and ITS on the day concerned. Now sometimes I walk to the first 2 but not ITS as that's close to a mile from the flat so I wouldn't have wanted to take that much time out the day to walk there and back. Also checking the historic weather for Oct 13th it was rainy that day which seems to suggest I would have jumped in the car. However I am so stressed with this project I can't be 110% and that's why I am/was focusing on the evidence the LA have that I didn't leave the point/ did leave the point as return. This is where the car not charging element comes in ( this has happened in the past).

The officer has car there ( no pics but note book - according to LA challenge respponse ) - 9:58 am. I could have well gone round there, dirven off and picked up materials and then popped car back to try and charge. As far as I know ( and I am writing back to ask LA this ) - a return is not forbidden unless their interpration to the sign is that you are only allowed a total of 4 hours stay at anytime between the times on the signage plate. It doesn's say no retrun or no return within x hours. So in theory, although against the spirt of keeping the points accessible to others, you could drive off go round the block and straight back on. Again if this was the first time the car not charging on point had happened I would remember it what I did that day but it's happened quite a fews times on these points and sometimes on the BP points which are local to the property too.

I have written to LA asking them to confirm re: returning to the point and what specific evidence they have re: car not moving off etc and explaining about the receipts etc. I am probably be niave but surely if they have tyre positions or something of that nature they could simply tell me that as part of the evidence against me / to help me make an properly information decision whether to simply accept that I may have been so busy / stressed that day I forgot the car, relied on app alert to tell me car was charged which I didn't get and forgot or as above and most likely given material receipts moved it and come back.


Thanks again

Thanks I am the keeper
However I still don't understand why the issue of being there and returning isn't relevant

Thanks - yes I had read the costs point - hence exactly why I'm trying to be sure.
Not sure why you say I didn't when I can't remember / have receipts from trips to material stores during the day. Yes sometimes walk to screwfix / tool station but not to ITS takes too long out of the day. But if in these case the balance of proof is for me to prove I did leave and return rather than the other way round I'll have to simply pay it sadly.