Author Topic: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.  (Read 2317 times)

0 Members and 197 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #15 on: »
TFL seem to think that there is a possibility that your car has had a change of registration. There's a known issue with the DVLA and the ULEZ databases in cases of a change of VRM, whereby a vehicle's emissions status and or data doesn't necessarily transfer to the new registration for several months. And sometimes never. Affects private plates, new VRMs from the DVLA due to cloning and vehicles imported from abroad. TFL manually updates their database in such cases.

Your car has a Northern Ireland VRM. Does any of those scenarios apply here? EG is it a private plate as opposed to the original VRM?

Did you say anything in your formal representation to suggest there has been change of VRM? Or that the car is actually ULEZ compliant? The copy of the reps you posted above on July 8th suggest you didn't?

Your car is a diesel. A diesel car doesn't actually have to be fully Euro-6 compliant to be exempt. It just has to meet the Euro-6 NOx standard and PM (Particulate Matter) standards.

Hence they want to check the V5c logbook. And the certificate of conformance if there is no emissions data.

Incidentally "Nitrates of Oxide". Long time since my school chemistry, is there even such a thing? I believe they meant to say Oxides of Nitrogen.

I'm checking with my sister, but I'm pretty sure the VRM is the original number. The vehicle model does match when we check against TFL's website so just assumed the penalty is completely legitimate. I'll get her to send me the documents to respond either way - turns out I can upload to the original appeal on their website, so no need to post to their physical address!  :)
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #16 on: »
That's a 2013 petrol Hyundai I30 according to the MOT checker.

If so it must be Euro 4 (since 2005) which is what it needs for compliance.

I reckon that's compliant if the vehicle type is as per DVLA.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2024, 07:30:47 pm by slapdash »
Funny Funny x 1 View List

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #17 on: »
That's a 2013 petrol Hyundai I30 according to the MOT checker.

If so it must be Euro 4 (since 2005) which is what it needs for compliance.

I reckon that's compliant if the vehicle type is as per DVLA.
No it's not. It's a an I30 Active Blue Drive CRD. That's a 1.6 diesel.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Update.

Actually the MOT checker says it's petrol and the VED checker says it's diesel. So my apologies to slapdash. Something is amiss.

@Charsiu
Please check if the I30 is petrol or diesel?
« Last Edit: July 31, 2024, 08:01:52 pm by Enceladus »

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #18 on: »
It's definitely a diesel, here's the emission part of the V5:





Based on the age, I'm guessing it's likely to be non-compliant.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2024, 09:55:38 am by Charsiu »

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #19 on: »
V3 NOx 0.142 = Not compliant. The limit is 0.08g/km.

Odd that the MoT checker said it was petrol though.
Like Like x 1 View List

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #20 on: »
Well TFL asked for all pages of the V5, so send them all pages of the V5c.

"Particulate Matter" is explicitly mentioned and that only applies to a diesel. I doubt if TFL would bother checking the MOT status.

You should be able to upload the V5c online using the "Update your representation" button on the TFL site when you view PCN XJ31678760. Make sure you make reference to "further evidence".

Let's see what the Notice of Rejection actually says, if they continue to reject.
Agree Agree x 2 View List

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #21 on: »
So my SIL received the rejection letter today, but confusingly it quotes a PCN and date not related to her case:

Quote
Our records show that a Penalty Charge Notice - YJ38857187 was issued to you on 09/07/2022 which you paid. We believe this was sufficient notice given to you to make you aware of the ULEZ and the need to correctly purchase a charge for each day of entry into the ULEZ

The wording of the sentence above suggests that the reviewer may have waived the second PCN, had they looked at the correct PCN charge in question and realised there was not enough notice for my SIL to realise the penalty.

Anyone know of a way to ask TFL to re-review the above, without having to proceed to the next formal stage?

To clarify the sequence of events in terms of payment and issue dates:

Friday 23rd June - ENTERED ULEZ
Sunday 25th June - EXIT ULEZ

Wednesday 3rd July- First PCN Received (XJ31432319)
Wednesday 3rd July - First PCN PAID

Friday 5th July - Second PCN Received (XJ31678760)






Remaining Pages
« Last Edit: August 27, 2024, 01:46:02 pm by Charsiu »

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #22 on: »
What do the TfL timelines show for each PCN?

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #23 on: »
What do the TfL timelines show for each PCN?

First One

PCN status history
19 August 2024   Representation Rejected
TfL has rejected a representation received for this PCN.

03 July 2024   Email dispatched to: xxx@gmail.com Subj Receipt E112465931 for your payment
N/A

03 July 2024   Paid
TfL has received full payment for this PCN.

29 June 2024   PCN Batched
N/A


Second One

PCN status history
19 August 2024   Representation Rejected
TfL has rejected a representation received for this PCN.

02 August 2024   On Hold: SUS26 - Representation Received
N/A

23 July 2024   On Hold: SUS29 - Further Evidence Requested
N/A

11 July 2024   Representation submitted Under review
N/A

10 July 2024   Email dispatched to: xxx@gmail.com Subj Representation receipted
N/A

10 July 2024   On Hold: SUS26 - Representation Received
N/A

02 July 2024   PCN Batched
N/A

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #24 on: »
You've shown us page 1 of the Notice of Rejection. Please post up the remaining pages.

..................
Quote
Our records show that a Penalty Charge Notice - YJ38857187 was issued to you on 09/07/2022 which you paid. We believe this was sufficient notice given to you to make you aware of the ULEZ and the need to correctly purchase a charge for each day of entry into the ULEZ

The wording of the sentence above suggests that the reviewer may have waived the second PCN, had they looked at the correct PCN charge in question and realised there was not enough notice for my SIL to realise the penalty.
.................

The TFL website shows PCN Y338857187 to be a ULEZ PCN for the same car, that was paid in 2022. The V5c was last updated in Feb 2021 so the RK hasn't changed. Hence it's hard to see how your sister can now argue that she was unaware of the ULEZ? It's the expansion of the zone that she fell victim to.

What exactly did your represenations say?
« Last Edit: August 28, 2024, 10:38:54 am by Enceladus »

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #25 on: »
Post deleted
« Last Edit: August 28, 2024, 08:57:21 am by MrChips »

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #26 on: »
You've shown us page 1 of the Notice of Rejection. Please post up the remaining pages.

..................
Quote
Our records show that a Penalty Charge Notice - YJ38857187 was issued to you on 09/07/2022 which you paid. We believe this was sufficient notice given to you to make you aware of the ULEZ and the need to correctly purchase a charge for each day of entry into the ULEZ

The wording of the sentence above suggests that the reviewer may have waived the second PCN, had they looked at the correct PCN charge in question and realised there was not enough notice for my SIL to realise the penalty.
.................

The TFL website shows PCN Y338857187 to be a ULEZ PCN for the same car, that was paid in 2022. The V5c was last updated in Feb 2021 so the RK hasn't changed. Hence it's hard to see how your sister can now argue that she was unaware of the ULEZ? It's the expansion of the zone that she fell victim to.

What exactly did your represenations say?

There was another 7-8 pages of the rejection, so I had just linked to the album on my previous post (Remaining Pages). But here it is again REMAINING PAGES AGAIN

It didn't occur to me to check the "incorrect" PCN, and you are absolutely right! Their vehicle was caught in ULEZ back in 2022, I noticed the e-mail receipt was to the husband - I wonder if he ever told her back then!  ;D

In this case, I might just tell her to just pay up - bit much to ask TFL for leniency when the car was fined previously,  not plausible in their eyes which I understand.

My representation was essentially stating the facts of the events (as I have on this post) and asking for leniency and waiving of the second PCN. The PCN from 2022 completely skewered that for both my SIL and myself, I suspect she's having words with the other half!
« Last Edit: August 28, 2024, 11:14:14 am by Charsiu »

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #27 on: »
If the historic PCN was sent to her husband, has the registered keeper changed since then from hubby to mrs? Or did he open her mail? Just because "the car" has been clocked in the ULEZ before doesn't mean it was with the same RK, so that argument may be irrelevant.
Bus driving since 1973. My advice, if you have a PSV licence, destroy it when you get to 65 or you'll be forever in demand.

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #28 on: »
If the historic PCN was sent to her husband, has the registered keeper changed since then from hubby to mrs? Or did he open her mail? Just because "the car" has been clocked in the ULEZ before doesn't mean it was with the same RK, so that argument may be irrelevant.

That's a good point, they would not have made changes to the Registered Keeper, so I suspect he either intercepted the PCN fine, or I imagined she would have opened it and gave it to him to handle.

Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
« Reply #29 on: »
If the historic PCN was sent to her husband, has the registered keeper changed since then from hubby to mrs? Or did he open her mail? Just because "the car" has been clocked in the ULEZ before doesn't mean it was with the same RK, so that argument may be irrelevant.
The last V5c update was Feb 2021 and that well predates PCN Y338857187 referenced in the NOR, so the RK hasn't changed.

TfL reoffered the discount in the NoR. The discount window expires close of business on Sunday the 1st Sep. Our Administartor @cp8759 seems confident that if you submit an appeal to the Adjudicator within the discount windows then TFL will accept the discount rate if you lose the appeal. I'm aware that that happens with TFL PCNs, but usually when it involves a business and a parking contravention.

So if you have nothing further to lose by having a go at an appeal then I would do so. But it seems to me risky as to the discount. If they won't accept the discount rate if you lose the appeal then you would, or rather your sister, be in for £180.

Other than the NoR is some sort of a bad attempt at creating a one size fits all rejection I don't see much to put before the Adjudicator. It's a bit black & white. Were you in the ULEZ at the time alleged, yes you were. Was your car emmissions compliant, no it wasn't, so there is no exemption that applies. The Adjudicator has no discretion regarding mitigation so it's highly likely you'd lose. Probably the best you can hope for is that TFL "do not contest".

See what others have to say and PM @cp8759 and ask him to look at the current status of your cases.
Is it worth a shot with the Adjudicator? On balance I feel you might be best of paying it at the discount before Sunday.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2024, 04:36:34 pm by Enceladus »