3. Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent  (Read 1517 times)

0 Members and 127 Guests are viewing this topic.

Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« on: »
Picture upload is not working so I have posted links to the evidence here:
https://imgur.com/a/qwvMePW

Back of the PCN here:
https://imgur.com/gallery/vuIIsqY


UPDATE: Ashford BC have declined my appeal, to which their response I have attached in the attachment sections.


I have tried to type this according to the Forum guidelines but if i've missed anything please let me know and I will edit this post with the required details.

Dear all,
I recently parked in a council car park in a space which was apparently permit holders only. As per the photo evidence attached, the sign is very small, a piece of paper attached to the fence behind, no bay markings or anything "noticeable". Personally i'm shocked this has happened as I legitimately didn't see the small-ass sign. I paid for a full days ticket £5.80 via the RingGoApp (I have evidence of receipt but can't attach) and have confirmation of receipt. However the issue is that this space is permit holders only. Can you please tell me, from the evidence pictures attached, if this is fair and justified? I didn't even see the sign behind as it's not displayed clearly and in a noticeable place. I drove into the car park and only noticed the space was free and available after driving past it and seeing it in my rear view mirror. I reversed in so didn't even see the sign! How could I see that!? I then got out my car, grabbed my bag and went on my way. I didn't buy a physical ticket as I parked up and walked straight out paid my ticket on the RingoApp. To add to that, I was in a rush to catch the train so nothing caught my eye to allow me to realise that I shouldn't park there? If someone ripped that sign off, or if I was dyslexic there is no way to tell that this particular bay has special conditions. Any honest replies most welcome. I've already appealed online and I may want to take this further but need help first to see if I have grounds to take this to court if they reject my appeal (which knowing my stupid luck, they will). Thoughts? Pay up and shush up? Or throw my toys out the pram and take it further? I can pop down to the car park and take a video of the place if needed to get some perspective. Sorry for my rushed post, I'm just angry and frustrated.

The Ashford Borough Council PCN Challenge and Payment website is: https://www.ashford.gov.uk/parking/penalty-...parking-ticket/
The PCN is AS09113666
Reg: GF23OER

Many thanks. Circle. [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: July 07, 2023, 04:24:04 pm by Circle87 »
Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #1 on: »
I've had a few PCNs from Ashford before, never paid one though.

This is fairly clear-cut, as the terms and condition board makes no mention of permit holders, so there's no reason why you would look for permit holder signs. Here's some draft reps you can send when you get the Notice to Owner:

Dear Ashford Borough Council,

I contest liability for PCN AS09113666 on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur. The terms and conditions board which is required to convey the main requirements created by the off-street parking places order makes no mention whatsoever of any permit parking places, it simply indicates that payment must be made, vehicles must park wholly within a marked bay, and vehicles parked in a disabled persons' bay must display a blue badge.

I have complied with all of those requirements, and it follows that on this occasion a contravention did not occur.

Yours faithfully,


Don't expect them to accept, but I think they'd really struggle at the tribunal with this one.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2023, 04:30:44 pm by cp8759 »
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #2 on: »
Thank you. There is a notice board which is across the other side of the car park and the text is not visible from that far away. But as you rightly pointed out there is no mention of any "permit holder" on the board. It does say "reserved bay" so can I say that a reserved bay and permit holder bay are two separate things? If so I will copy and paste your appeal text into the Challenge and Appeal box on the council's website. Here is the link to the evidenced notice board again if you need it:

Parking Ticket https://imgur.com/gallery/qwvMePW
It's pictures 4 and 7.


I have also had a reply declining my appeal which I hastedly sent off before coming here. It's attached in the documents upload section.





[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: July 07, 2023, 04:56:34 pm by Circle87 »
Logged
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #3 on: »
Yes I've read all of that, and my advice remains to wait for the Notice to Owner and then send what I've drafted. Nothing on the main terms and conditions board makes any reference to permits, so the point still stands.
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

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
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #4 on: »
Ok perfect! Yes very clear cut (I edited my reply post with a few details) and I understand.

So, I'll wait for the Notice To Owner and write with the exact text. Thank you!
Logged
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #5 on: »
You knew the car park otherwise you would have checked the noticeboard. You're a frequent flier, yes?

So you're presumed to have read the noticeboard, not reading it is not a defence.

The sign in the bay is clear IMO.

But there's nothing in the noticeboard to alert a driver to the presence of permit bays or the penalty for misuse.

It could go either way at adjudication IMO depending on the council's reasoning. I've won similar cases but IMO any reps after a NTO must be smart and not just say 'but the noticeboard doesn't say'.

If it were me, I would make reps*. I would not pretend I did not see the sign, it's clear. Your argument would be that when you checked the board you couldn't find any mention of the existence of permit bays and so thought that the sign must have been left over from a previous use. As the council's case is based upon a breach of the terms and conditions and as they must accept that there isn't any reference on the noticeboard then they must explain why they consider that for every other condition of use they consider it necessary to set these out on the board but for the use of this bay by permit holders only they consider that it is sufficient and legally acceptable to hang a notice on chicken wire at the back of a bay.

Test their reasoning by asking directed and targeted questions because how they respond, if at all, and their reasoning could be powerful weapons at adjudication.

*- are you the registered keeper and are your V5C details current?
Logged
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #6 on: »
Thank you. I'm not saying me not seeing the sign is a valid reason for parking there. I legitimately did not see or notice the sign there. However, the notice board I did see, because yes I frequent the carpark and because it's a massive board, unlike the A4 paper stuck behind the bay on the fence with chicken wire.

I am the owner and registered keeper of the car, correct.

I will wait for the NTO to come through the post.
I will copy and paste the appeal text in which CP8759 has kindly drafted above. Should I also include something along the lines of:
"I have checked the board and could not find any mention of the existence of permit bays and so I thought that the sign must have been left over from a previous use. If this case is an apparant breach of the terms and conditions, the council must accept that there isn't any reference on the noticeboard to any permit holder bays.
I therefore ask you to explain why the council consider that for every other condition of use they consider it necessary to set these out on the board, however, for the use of this bay by permit holders only they consider that it is sufficient and legally acceptable to hang a notice on plastic wire at the back of a bay?".

I am preparing my draft to appeal so that when the NTO comes through I am fully prepared.

Just FYI as I mentioned earlier they have already refused my appeal within the discounted rate period (attached) and I hope this and my initial appeal email will not jeopardise this. Thanks for all your help again.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: July 08, 2023, 12:07:48 am by Circle87 »
Logged
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #7 on: »
Quote from: Circle87 on July 07, 2023, 11:57:13 pm
Should I also include something along the lines of:
"I have checked the board and could not find any mention of the existence of permit bays and so I thought that the sign must have been left over from a previous use.
Well you can't say that because it's not true: you've told us you didn't see the sign, so it would be a false representation to say that you saw it and thought it didn't apply. Making a false representation to the council is a criminal offence, see https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/576/regulation/18

Representations should not include demands for explanations, they should simply put your case forwards (maybe it's just me but saying "I therefore ask you to explain why..." reminds me too much of FMOTL arguments along the lines of "I require you to do X or else you agree you owe me £1,000,000"). It's a representation, not a fishing expedition, if they don't bother to explain their position that's their problem.

What you could say is "even if I had seen the sign, I would have assumed it didn't apply because...".
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

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
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #8 on: »
Thank you. That makes sense. To clarify, I didn't see the sign attached on the fence at the back of the bay, but I have seen and read the board.

In which case, I will stick to simply appealing with your original text. I will wait for the NTO and refer back here when that time comes.
Logged
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #9 on: »

Representations should not include demands for explanations,

This is simply a personal preference, there's no legal or IMO logical impediment to doing so. Why, who, when, what are the staples of good set-ups in formulating arguments. They cause the recipient to consider their own logic and reasoning as well as making it clear that the questioner is on to them. FMOTL arguments are misguided statements of law, not directed questioning.

But if you claim you didn't see the sign until after the PCN was issued - you did see the sign, you just didn't see it before the PCN was issued - then say so. My suggested reps could be tweaked to accommodate this variation.
Logged
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #10 on: »
Thank you. You make a very valid point.
My next step now is to wait for the NTO through the post and then to draft my response with the points raised above and post it here for alterations and amendments (bear with me I'm not at good at this!).

My appeal rejection was Friday just gone (7.7.23) and so I guess I'll have to wait another couple of weeks.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2023, 10:04:25 am by Circle87 »
Logged
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #11 on: »
Quote from: Circle87 on July 08, 2023, 08:18:53 pm
In which case, I will stick to simply appealing with your original text. I will wait for the NTO and refer back here when that time comes.
Yes, that would make things nice and simple.
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

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
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #12 on: »
Hello again. I've received the NTO in the post this afternoon (limited to 4 pages in one post attached here, I hope they upload correctly, with the 5th posted below. let me know if I need to re-upload blanking out my personal info).

I will check the first box on page 3 "The alleged contravention did not occur".
Please be so kind as to reconfirm the presentation text for me to write in the box on page 4. If the original text still stands I will write:

"Dear Ashford Borough Council,

I contest liability for PCN AS09113666 on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur. The terms and conditions board which is required to convey the main requirements created by the off-street parking places order makes no mention whatsoever of any permit parking places, it simply indicates that payment must be made, vehicles must park wholly within a marked bay, and vehicles parked in a disabled persons' bay must display a blue badge.

I have complied with all of those requirements, and it follows that on this occasion a contravention did not occur.

Yours faithfully.
Allan Cadenhead"

Is there a need to mention  that I didn't see cardboard sign scrupulously hung up on the back of the bay with chicken wire but did take note of the board which has no mention of permit bays? I admitted this in my informal challenge to the PCN which I know is not an excuse.

As a side note, that very piece of cardboard currently, today, is now unreadable as the weather has worn the colour and text away and is white (surprised it's still hanging on the fence).

Many thanks for your assistance.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
Logged
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #13 on: »
5th photo attached.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
Logged
Re: Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent
« Reply #14 on: »
In addition to this, what are the chances that my representation gets refused and I have to go to tribunal?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
« previous next »
  3. Code 85 Parked without a valid virtual permit, Ashford, Kent