Free Traffic Legal Advice

In June I received a parking fine in the post from Islington Council ("IC") for parking in a suspended parking area. I was parked in an area that I have a permit for but I didnt notice the the suspended parking sign.The first I knew about was when I received the letter in the post. As the original fine that was left on the car had not been paid in time the letter informed me that I was being charged an additional penalty

I appealed online to IC about the additional charge explaining that I didnt find any ticket on my car and that it must have been moved by weather/kids/other. I was not contesting the initial charge and wanted to pay it, but not the extra charge as I should not be held responsible for a ticket I did not see/circumstances out of my control.

IC rejected my appeal saying I had received the fine,  providing photos of the ticket on my car as proof! They obviously did not read/take onboard my explanation that I was not contesting the penalty or that it had been left on my car, only that I had not seen/received it.

To reappeal the above decision I had to submit an appeal to London Tribunals.  I reappealed by post as I was had issues in appealing online (I got a letter and number confused so I couldnt find my penalty). 


Some time later I received another letter in post chasing for the payment. I managed to get online this time and explained that I had already submitted my appeal by post and repeated the details.         

I then (bear with me:)) got a letter from London Tribunals saying I had not appealed in the required timeline and had to pay the fine.


I rang London Tribunal and spoke to a member of staff explaining that I had posted the appeal by post within the timeline.  She could see on my records my explaination that I had posted the appeal however I had input this information in the wrong section line, however it was still in my record and she found it immediately. She told me to submit my explanation online (in the right section) explaining that I had sent the original appeal by post and had posted my appeal online but in the wrong area.   She seemed understanding, it didnt seem to be an issue and I took reassurance from this and followed her instructions.

Today I received a letter to say my appeal with London Tribunals was refused as 1) the appeal was outside of the time I should have submitted it (my appeal explains that I did appeal within the time by post) and 2) the ticket had been let on my car. In both appeals they dont seem to be taking onboard the fact that I am not contesting the fine but 1) I should not be penalised for the fact I did not find the penalty notice on my card (it cannot be the first time this has happened) and that 2) I did appeal by post in the required timeline but it was not received/misplaced.

  They are now saying I have to pay the fine (doubled in cost) or they can repossess my goods. I have tried to contest an unfair decision and it has resulted in increased costs. I am now scared to continue to contest. Does anyone have any advice, this seems so unfair.  Thank you in advance

Post the documents so we can see what's what.

Sounds like you've been misled by the tribunals office.

It's unusual for a council not to reoffer the discount if you say you didn't get the windscreen PCN.

And communications from London Tribunals

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

OP, let's be clear and piece together the key events - source is the Tribunal's correspondence.

Date NOR - 16 Sept. (deemed served 18th)
Your application to register appeal received:  25 Oct. (38 days)
Tribunal's letter refusing to register appeal: 14 Nov.
Your phone call to Tribunal: 6 Dec.
Your application to review their decision to not register received: 30 Dec.(43 days/19days/24days respectively)
Their letter advising that your application for review had been rejected(NB. not the outcome of such a review but refusal to consider a review by virtue of unjustified lateness): 9 Jan. (presumably sent as email attachment which you printed off and posted here on 9th)

In short, IMO you left matters too long. But I'm unclear from your account why there was such a delay between 18 Sept. and 25 Oct. Also you refer to a tel. call but your narrative suggests this was in the context of the first refusal, but the Tribunal records only a call on 6 Dec??