Free Traffic Legal Advice

Reg. 5 of the 'Appeals' regs:

Representations against the enforcement notice
5.—(1) The recipient may make representations against the enforcement notice to the enforcement authority which served it on the recipient.

5(2) The representations must be—

(a)made in the form determined by the enforcement authority, and

(b)to either or both of the following effects—

(i)that in relation to the alleged contravention, one or more of the grounds specified in paragraph (4) apply;

(ii)that, whether or not any of those grounds apply, there are compelling reasons why, in the particular circumstances of the case, the enforcement authority should cancel the penalty charge and refund any sum paid to it on account of the penalty charge.


Initiating an appeal

2.—(1) An appeal must be made by delivering a notice of appeal to the proper officer.

(2) A notice of appeal—

(a)must be in writing and signed by—

(i)the appellant, or

(ii)a person authorised to do so by the appellant,

(b)must state the name and address at which the appellant wishes documents in connection with the appeal to be sent,

(c)must state the date and any reference number of the disputed decision and the name of the enforcement authority, and

(d)may include any representations which the appellant desires to make in addition to the original representations.


Further representations by the parties
4.—(1) Any party may deliver representations in relation to the matters referred to in regulation 5(2)(b), 8(5) or 11(3), as appropriate in the circumstances, to the proper officer at any time before the appeal is determined.

Thank you

"Action upon receipt of notice of appeal and copy of such notice
3.—(1) Upon receiving a notice of appeal the proper officer must—

(a)send an acknowledgement of its receipt to the appellant, and

(b)enter particulars of the appeal in the register.

(2) If the proper officer is satisfied that the notice of appeal is made in accordance with paragraph 2, the proper officer must send to the enforcement authority—

(a)a copy of the notice of appeal, and

(b)the directions extending the period for appealing (if any).

(3) Where an enforcement authority receives a copy of a notice of appeal sent to it under sub-paragraph (2), the authority must, within seven days of the day on which it receives that copy, deliver to the proper officer of a copy of each of the following—

(a)the original representations,

(b)the relevant penalty charge notice (if any), and

(c)the notice of rejection."

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2022/9780348231564

I'm not certain what point you're making.

Nothing comes to you until a minimum of 7 days before the hearing. As I understand it, the purpose of what you've posted (which by the way is the draft SI and not the final version which is here:https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2022/9780348232752/schedule/1) is to ensure that the administrative loop is closed- remember, all that the tribunal know is that you have submitted a form/completed online requesting a hearing to dispute what you claim is a PCN and NOR at which point they don't know if this is proper or not (e.g. that you're not an armchair anarchist trying to throw the tribunal into disarray with specious applications). Sending this to the authority and getting the underlying specified docs closes this loop and means they're dealing with a proper application.

Nothing comes to you until a minimum of 7 days before the hearing.

No sure what you mean by that, I've got some cases where the tribunal scheduled the case months in advance (typically where I've been lucky enough to get a Saturday hearing slot, which get booked up months in advance) and I have had evidence packs from some authorities as much as 2 / 3 month prior to the hearing.

I've also had cases where the authority submitted its evidence a couple of days before the hearing and the adjudicator wouldn't disregard it and simply adjourned the hearing to give me time to respond.

You could mention the matter of the expired permit. It looks like Newham are attempting to imply that even if the disabled bay was not correctly positioned on the ground in compliance with the traffic order, then you were still in contravention as you were parked where a Resident's Parking Permit was required.

Hoever you only have to answer to the contravention alleged and not some similar contravention. The PCN says "Parked in a permit space or zone without a valid virtual permit or clearly displaying a valid physical permit where required (dedicated disabled bay)". So the allegation is specific to a "disabled bay", of some flavour. Not just any Resident Permit Only bays.

I suggest you mark up a copy of the map that's in the evidence pack, show where you were actually parked, in relation to the the disabled bay they say is shown on the map. Scan and upload the marked up map in your evidence pack, to support your assertion that the bay is not where it should be.

Also in your opening post you've put the below. Did you include that in your submission to the Tribunal? It's worth a shot but I believe there is permission for the sign. See do they produce the authorisation. Actually is it in the evidence pack? If so then please post it up. That said, to the best of my knowledge we've never won a case against Newham challenging this sign where there is also a DISABLED legend on the carriageway. Maybe somebody else can produce such a case?

"Ground 3

The sign governing the bay is not contained within The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 nor have the Council obtained DfT permission to use it. There is no provision within the legislation to use the term "Residents" nor a permit identifier for anything other than a dedicated bay reserved for an individual disabled person.Therefore the traffic sign is a nullity and cannot be enforced, making the PCN invalid."

@HCAnderson

Transfer of liability
I have reported last year on issues concerning the transfer of liability when the
registered keeper of a hired vehicle seeks to transfer of liability to the hirers.
Adjudicators have found that despite the restrictive statutory provisions which are
re-stated in case law, parties are still not grasping provisions. Adjudicators noted that
some authorities have allowed transfer even when the required evidence has not
been provided. Adjudicators are then required to deal with appellants’ submissions
that their representations have been accepted by some but not other authorities.
Adjudicators would urge hire companies and authorities to pay greater attention to
the legal issues and consider the evidential requirements for a transfer before the
matter reaches the appeal stage.

I opened the link in Firefox, highlighted, right clicked and copied in the usual way.

@taffer87 please show us all pages of evidence item B.

@cp8759 here is full section B. Only traffic order was missing in previous upload.

@cp8759 I have shared with you via DM as its not redacted. Will try and share a redacted version here later today.,