Author Topic: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster  (Read 705 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #30 on: September 21, 2023, 12:05:14 am »
So that we can get a clear picture of what happened (and bearing in mind we might need to make everything crystal clear to an adjudicator), could you annotate a map showing were you parked and all the various movements up to the point where you returned to the car?
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

neverpaying

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #31 on: September 22, 2023, 04:54:39 pm »
I have created one here: https://i.imgur.com/nKEeQlu.jpg

I have until the 26th to decide what to do with this case [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #32 on: September 23, 2023, 11:38:22 am »
Draft reps:

Dear City of Westminster,

I challenge liability for PCN WE51358534 on the ground that the alleged contravention did not occur.

I understand why the CEO would have issued the penalty charge, what the CEO could not have known is that at the time I was assisting my mother in alighting the vehicle to a nearby restaurant. Unfortunately my mother suffered a fracture to her foot as a result of a vehicle hitting her in a recent accident, I attach medical evidence of this. Because of this she requires assistance to walk and I could not have left her to make her way to her destination on her own.

I had originally hoped to park next to the restaurant, and before stopping on Litchfield Street I did enter adjacent roads to try and find a parking spot but I didn't find any available parking spaces so I expanded my search further out, turning into any road I could until I gave up and stopped on the double yellow lines on Litchfield Street.

The intention had originally been to go to the Barshu restaurant, but as we were walking there my mother realised that she had forgotten to make a booking. On the spur of the moment a decision was made to go to the Rasa Sayang restaurant instead, which I was familiar with because I had eaten there once before. I quickly escorted her down the road and left her in the restaurant where a friend of hers would join her, and I returned back to my car.

I have uploaded a map illustrating the journey from the car to the restaurant at (link) and as you might imagine my mother was not able to walk at a brisk pace.

In light of the above, at the time my vehicle was stopped for the purposes of assisted alighting which is permitted at this location, it follows that the alleged contravention did not occur and the PCN should be cancelled.

Yours faithfully,

I will PM you a link to put in the representation, it will redirect to imgur.com/nKEeQlu but if you give them the link I'll PM you, we can use the click count to confirm whether they've looked at it or not (obviously do not click on that link yourself as we want the click count to remain at zero). If they don't click on it, we can then prove they've failed to consider all of the evidence. If they say in the rejection that they've considered all the evidence, we've got them for lying as well.

Obviously don't upload the picture to the council website or that would deny us the potential failure to consider.
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

neverpaying

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #33 on: September 23, 2023, 04:42:44 pm »
Thank you for the draft representation.

If this representation is rejected, do they re-offer the discount? I'm just curious because if they do not re-offer the discount, then proceeding now will be a commital decision and I'd like to know how you would assess the likelihood of the appeal succeeding.

neverpaying

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #34 on: September 25, 2023, 12:09:27 pm »
Where do I submit the representations? I have not received an NtO in the mail and the original site (https://pcnpayment.westminster.gov.uk/pcnonline/step2.php) does not let me challenge twice.

Additionally, it is saying that the penalty is at full rate 130 now. Which would be incorrect based  on "Payment at the reduced rate can be made within 14 days from the date of this letter (12/09/2023)" - so I should have still had until tomorrow to pay the reduced rate for what it's worth.

« Last Edit: September 25, 2023, 12:19:19 pm by neverpaying »

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #35 on: September 25, 2023, 06:46:34 pm »
You'll have to wait for the Notice to Owner and then use my draft to make formal representations against that.
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Like Like x 1 View List

neverpaying

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #36 on: October 19, 2023, 01:24:15 am »
I have received the NtO and just now submitted the representations against it.
Like Like x 1 View List

neverpaying

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #37 on: December 15, 2023, 06:24:30 pm »
Date of notice (NtO): 17/10/2023
Formal representations submitted: 19/10/2023

56 day period ended on 14/12/2023, which was yesterday and I have still not received a reply from the council.

Are councils still bound by the 56 day rule for parking penalty charges?

John U.K.

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 448
  • Karma: +9/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #38 on: December 15, 2023, 07:02:25 pm »
What is the online status of the PCN?

Incandescent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Karma: +27/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Crewe
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #39 on: December 15, 2023, 07:24:53 pm »
+1
Be aware that the 56 days is from when they receive your representations, not the date you send them off.

neverpaying

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #40 on: December 18, 2023, 02:38:45 pm »
I've just now checked the online status and was highly surprised to learn that the council allegedly replied on the 14th of November:

Quote
You have already challenged this PCN and we replied on Tue, 12 Sep 2023. You cannot challenge twice
You have already made representations for this PCN and we replied on Tue, 14 Nov 2023. You cannot make representations twice

I obviously haven't received anything in the post and I haven't received an email either in that time.

How should I proceed as the online portal is also warning me that the fee is about to increase to 195.00

Incandescent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Karma: +27/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Crewe
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #41 on: December 18, 2023, 10:41:12 pm »
Quote
How should I proceed as the online portal is also warning me that the fee is about to increase to 195.00
Worry not ! Letters from councils are going astray more and more often.

ALl you do is now wait for the Charge Certificate to arrive, (the 195), but do not pay it, and at the end of the period given in it to make payment, after about a week, you phone the Traffic Enforcement Centre, and ask whether the PCN has been registered. When the council register the debt, they will send out an Order for Recovery. However, as you have had one document fail to arrive, you mustn't miss this final OfR stage, so by contacting TEC at weekly intervals, until the PCN is registered, you can then, even if the OfR has not arrived, submit a Statutory Declaration (Form PE3) and the matter will be reset to the Notice to Owner stage, (reps submitted). On the PE3 you tick the box for "submitted reps but got no reply".
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-pe3-challenge-an-unpaid-penalty-charge-notice

I can hear you saying, "but what if I don't get the Charge Certificate ?". Answer to that is you'll have to contact the council, but if the amount is now showing 195 it would seem they are about to send it out, or have already done so.

It is now plainly obvious that the process relying on Royal Mail 1st Class post is no longer viable with the chaos in Royal Mail. The law needs to be changed urgently to mandate tracked delivery. This would cost the councils slightly more money, but they're making millions already so could afford it.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2023, 02:13:22 pm by cp8759 »
Like Like x 1 View List

neverpaying

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #42 on: December 19, 2023, 01:16:42 pm »
What a nuisance that is. The council provides an online portal and are able to parrot back to me, by email, the representation I've submitted, but somehow can't email out the NoR as well.

@cp8759 Did we at least catch them with the tracked link in the representation?

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #43 on: December 19, 2023, 02:15:12 pm »
@neverpaying yes, they've not opened the link so we've got them on that.

Honestly I wouldn't faff about with the whole Traffic Enforcement Centre thingy, if you want to send me a letter of authority I can just file an out of time appeal with the tribunal and I can't imagine it would be refused.

I've sent you a PM.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2023, 02:17:10 pm by cp8759 »
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Like Like x 1 View List

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Litchfield Street, parked on double yellow - City of Westminster
« Reply #44 on: February 12, 2024, 09:58:32 am »
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order