Author Topic: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)  (Read 687 times)

0 Members and 418 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hi everyone - moving this over from pepipoo:
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=149716&view=findpost&p=1776962


Please see attachments:
PCN Front: https://ibb.co/D4wmjPM
PCN Back: https://ibb.co/hLLgWhW


Informal Rejection 1: https://imgbb.com/D9JyXQJ
Informal Rejection 2: https://imgbb.com/sFBftyZ


NtO (received 09/06/23)
NtO_Pg1: https://imgbb.com/LvjqJ0R
NtO_Pg2: https://imgbb.com/sq1HKxk
NtO_Pg3: https://imgbb.com/XFGvvd9
NtO_Pg4: https://imgbb.com/56r2RT8


Was given helpful advice to draft reps based on:
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=149716&view=findpost&p=1783935


some outstanding questions:
1) scheduled a move in the coming weeks (2nd week of July) - is there anything to be done regarding the new address notification to LBBD?

2) I have tried to navigate the lBBD site for challenging the PCN and note that the challenge options given there are quite different to those in the NtO, e.g. there is no option for "procedural impropriety" online. The NtO mentions statutory representations, but I can't see mention of this online either, the website just mentions appeal scenarios / categories.

Also, it only allows me to select one option only. should i select "None of the above: Any other reason" then and submit the reps below in the text box? It does say this at the top though that "We will consider your appeal according to our appeals policy. If your reason for appeal is not listed in the policy, we are unlikely to accept it. However we will still consider your case individually."

Does that mean that if I select "none of the above" then realistically, i am looking at a rejection at this stage as well? There were some previous posts on pepipoo which did talk about restricting grounds to one to be a ground for appeal as well - is that the case here too?


2) I was asked about finding the LBBD appeals policy in pepipoo. Whilst I have sent an FOI email requesting for it, but I just noticed CP's PCN spreadsheet and there does seem to be a policy there, although I couldn't find anything relevant there (in my layman's reading): http://bit.ly/2L9M2dl

The draft reps:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am making writing to you to make representations against the PCN issued to me on 29/03/23. The Notice to Owner (NtO) dated 07/06/23 mentions that representations can be made online and provides some statutory grounds for the representations.
However, it is quite confusing that the grounds mentioned in the NtO are different to the “appeal reasons” available on your website (https://www.lbbd.gov.uk/parking). In additions, the website only allows the option to select a single reason for appeal.

The website further mentions that “We will consider your appeal according to our appeals policy. If your reason for appeal is not listed in the policy, we are unlikely to accept it.” Given the differences between the reasons mentioned on page 3 (HOW TO MAKE REPRESENTATIONS) of the NtO and the reasons provided on the website, it is not clear at all how the statutory representations align with the policy appeal reasons mentioned on your website. Further, I am unable to find your appeals policy on your webpage: https://www.lbbd.gov.uk/council-and-democra...cy-and-guidance
and nothing relevant is returned when doing a search for the appeals policy on LBBD's website search-engine.

Nevertheless, I am making representations due to there being a procedural impropriety in the PCN on the part of yourselves, the enforcement authority.
The PCN has omitted a key piece of information regarding what to do if informal reps have been submitted, and a Notice to Owner is received, without any response to the informal reps.

Extract from the The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022:
Information about right to make representations or appeal to be included in regulation 9 penalty charge notices and enforcement notices
3.— (1) A regulation 9 penalty charge notice must include the following information—

(a)that a person on whom a notice to owner is served may, in accordance with these Regulations, make representations to the enforcement authority against the penalty charge and, if those representations are rejected, appeal to an adjudicator;
(b)that if, before a notice to owner is served, representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified in the notice for the purpose those representations will be considered by the enforcement authority;
(c) that if a notice to owner is served despite the representations mentioned in sub-paragraph (b), representations against the penalty charge must be made to the enforcement authority in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner.

Given the above noted omission of mandatory information in the PCN, the PCN must be cancelled.
Yours sincerely,


please let me know if this is good to go, or should i wait till closer to the 28days or if this can be strengthened further.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2023, 12:52:05 pm by BertieW »

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Re: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #1 on: »
Firstly I would give the new address to the council now (I don't see them turning this around that quickly, but even if a letter arrises before you move in, presumably the new occupier can just leave it there for you).

The appeal scenarios mentioned on the website are largely irrelevant, as you can simply spell out the ground you rely on in the text of the representations.

If the council fails to properly consider the merits of your grounds that in itself is a procedural impropriety. A scenario that is outside of their policy is a ground which they would have to consider with an entirely open mind, or else they risk unlawfully fettering their discretion.

I would make the representations much shorter and to the point:


Dear London Borough of Barking and Dagenham,

The PCN served in this instance fails to convey the matters required by regulation 3(1)(c) of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022, that is a procedural impropriety as a result of which the PCN must be cancelled.

Yours faithfully,


If they come back with a rejection that just drones on and on about the contravention and doesn't mention the procedural impropriety, you've got them dead to rights on a procedural impropriety.

The underlying procedural impropriety you are making representations about is something that adjudicators often differ about, on the other hand if you can get a clear-cut failure to consider, then it's an easy win at the tribunal.
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: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #2 on: »
Thanks, i will submit per your suggestion then and also inform about the address change within the same text.

Whilst I will have post redirection setup, coming and collecting post from current address will not be possible.

Re: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #3 on: »
Sorry, just to double check, is there any benefit in holding off submission till close to the 28days deadline? Can't remember where, but read somewhere to buy as much time as possible....

Re: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #4 on: »
For reference, here is the map tile: https://store.traffweb.app/barking-dagenham/documents/parkmap/msched/AB5_rv5_1.pdf

You've lost the discount by not challenging the NTO within 14 days of the date of issue, but there's no point in delaying further as we're not waiting on any EIR / FOI request to come back, so you might as well submit something now.
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: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #5 on: »
Hi
I will submit now, but the NtO has no mention of 14 days discount. It only mentions the 28days in there. The original pcn had a mention of the 14days in it and my initial appeal was submitted within the time. what have i missed please?


Re: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #6 on: »
You haven't missed anything, the NTO cannot mention the discount because by law, it just can't. However we know as a matter of practice that if you challenge an NTO within 14 days, the discount is always re-offered, the only exception to this rule is Nottingham City Council.
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: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #7 on: »
Oh no! I think that was the time when the pepipoo forum was down! anyways, I have submitted now per your suggested wording.

I will update once I hear back - thanks again.

Re: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #8 on: »
Firstly I would give the new address to the council now (I don't see them turning this around that quickly, but even if a letter arrises before you move in, presumably the new occupier can just leave it there for you).

The appeal scenarios mentioned on the website are largely irrelevant, as you can simply spell out the ground you rely on in the text of the representations.

If the council fails to properly consider the merits of your grounds that in itself is a procedural impropriety. A scenario that is outside of their policy is a ground which they would have to consider with an entirely open mind, or else they risk unlawfully fettering their discretion.

I would make the representations much shorter and to the point:


Dear London Borough of Barking and Dagenham,

The PCN served in this instance fails to convey the matters required by regulation 3(1)(c) of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022, that is a procedural impropriety as a result of which the PCN must be cancelled.

Yours faithfully,


If they come back with a rejection that just drones on and on about the contravention and doesn't mention the procedural impropriety, you've got them dead to rights on a procedural impropriety.

The underlying procedural impropriety you are making representations about is something that adjudicators often differ about, on the other hand if you can get a clear-cut failure to consider, then it's an easy win at the tribunal.

Received the response from LBBD now, which is a rejection of the representations. Luckily I had postal redirection in place, which worked as despite giving LBBD the new correspondence address, they posted to the old one!

Please see the redacted letter received. It is dated 25/07 and received on 27/07.

What are my options now please - my reading of the letter does not show that they addressed the procedural impropriety, but I have a vested interest so may have missed it... they do also seem to have re-offered the discount.

8Pages: https://imgur.com/a/JVUCear



Re: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #9 on: »
The arguments I can see are:

1) Duplicity, the PCN is too vague in terms of what it alleges.

2) Failure to consider the formal representations: the representations make a very specific point about the wording of the PCN. The Notice of Rejection purports to deal with this by stating "You explained in your correspondence that you believe the PCN was issued incorrectly because the PCN has been served incorrectly", this is a meaningless statement that simply proves the author of the Notice of Rejection did not understand the point being made, so that point cannot have been considered.

3) The regulations require the Notice of Rejection to be served on the person who made the representations, where that person gives an updated address the Notice of Rejection must be served at that address as per Natalia Skorosz v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (2190347315, 12 October 2019).

I cannot guarantee the outcome, but I can tell you this case is winnable.

Would you like me to represent you at the tribunal?
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: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #10 on: »
Thank you, yes please, it would be great if you can represent me!

The only thing with point 3 is that unfortunately, I don't have a screenshot of this. LBBD throws up a  "contact details" type of screen after submitting the representations where I had entered the new address but in my earnest to submit, forgot to take a screenshot of it. Nevertheless, i definitely did provide them with the new address in that screen and that was part of the submitting reps process. I do have the envelope though with redirection sticker on it and the notice itself mentions the old address.


Would it still be an arguable point?

Please let me know what are next steps for you to be able to represent me. Many thanks
« Last Edit: July 29, 2023, 11:46:54 pm by BertieW »

Re: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #11 on: »
Would it still be an arguable point?
Yes, as the council is required to provide a true copy of your representations to the tribunal. If they don't, that in itself is a procedural impropriety.

Please let me know what are next steps for you to be able to represent me. Many thanks
I'll drop you a PM.
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: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #12 on: »
Ok thanks

Re: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #13 on: »
Case won at tribunal - fully credited to cp8759  :)

Re: LBBD Code 12 parked in a shared use parking place St Anns (Barking)
« Reply #14 on: »
Outcome (more by luck than design, but I'll take it).
« Last Edit: September 26, 2023, 09:27:20 pm by cp8759 »
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