I have a case tomorrow on the same issue so I will report back. Relax. "The PCN is somewhat schizoid and this problem is further exacerbated by the amalgamation of various grounds pertaining to a plethora of legislations as published on their website."
My speech tomorrow.
And I will be wearing the shirt.
https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/how-do-we-get-more-people-to-fight-their-pcns/msg41917/#msg41917ETA Register of Appeals
Register kept under Regulation 20 of the Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators) (London) Regulations 1993, as amended and Regulation 17 of the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022.
Case Details
Case reference 2240327073
Appellant Kuttykrishnan Ramswaroop
Authority London Borough of Havering
VRM LB60LLU
PCN Details
PCN HG61195227
Contravention date 29 May 2024
Contravention time 18:26:00
Contravention location Main Road / Upper Brentwood Road
Penalty amount GBP 130.00
Contravention Entering and stopping in a box junction
Referral date
Decision Date 03 Sep 2024
Adjudicator Henry Michael Greenslade
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction
cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.
Reasons
At this scheduled personal hearing the Appellant was represented by Mr Morgan, who attended in person but the Enforcement Authority did not attend and were not represented.
Under Paragraph 11(1) in Part 7 of Schedule 9 to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 a box junction marking conveys the prohibition that a person must not cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box marking due to the presence of a stationary vehicle.
The Penalty Charge Notice was issued under Section 4(1) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 on the basis of information provided by a camera or other device. There appears to be no dispute that the vehicle was at this location, as shown in the closed-circuit television (cctv) images produced by the Enforcement Authority.
The Appellant’s case is that the Penalty Charge Notice is not compliant as regards the ground for making original representations to the Enforcement Authority.
Paragraph 1(4) in Schedule 1 to the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 provides that the grounds are:
(a) that the recipient (i) never was the owner of the vehicle in question; (ii) had ceased to be its owner before the date on which the penalty charge was alleged to have become payable; or (iii) became its owner after that date;
(b) that there was no (i) contravention of a prescribed order; or (ii) failure to comply with an indication; or (iii) contravention of the lorry ban order, under subsection (5) or (7) of the said section 4 as the case may be;
(c) that at the time the alleged contravention or failure took place the person who was in control of the vehicle was in control of the vehicle without the consent of the owner;
(d) that the recipient is a vehicle-hire firm and (i) the vehicle in question was at the material time hired from that firm under a vehicle hiring agreement; and (ii) the person hiring it had signed a statement of liability acknowledging his liability in respect of any penalty charge notice issued in respect of the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement; or
(e) that the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case.
The grounds for representations stated on the Penalty Charge Notice are:
* The alleged contravention did not occur
* You
– were never the owner of the vehicle in question
– had cease to be the owner owner before the date on which the alleged contravention occurred, or
– became its owner after that date;
* The vehicle had been permitted to remain at rest in place in question by a person who was in control of the vehicle without the the owner’s consent
* That you are a vehicle-hire firm and –
– the vehicle in question was on hire under a vehicle hiring agreement at the time of the contravention, and
– the person hiring the vehicle had signed a statement of liability in respect of any penalty charge notice served during the period of the hiring agreement;
* The penalty charge exceeds the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case.
* The traffic order (except where it is an order made under Schedule 9 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984) which is alleged to have been contravened is invalid.
The wording on the Penalty Charge Notice does not comply with the strict requirements of Paragraph 11(1).
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
