Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi,

This is something I was getting support with on the other forum so we're already as far as a "Notice of Rejection of Representations" which came today. So we're at the stage where we can appeal to the Parking adjudicator.

I will add all the scans in subsequent posts so please bear with me.

The background is as follows. My partner parked on the road to pick up the kids from school. She knew there were parking restrictions in place but the road has double yellow lines in large sections. She parked where there are no road markings, assuming the restrictions only cover the marked areas. It's a residential parking zone and we have subsequently found out that road markings are not required.

Her first informal appeal was that the road markings are confusing and she was not parked on any yellow lines as per their own evidence (photos). This was rejected.

The more formal appeal was more based around missing information on the PCN. This was rejected by letter today.

I will scan and add the various letters next. Any help for the adjudicator stage would be much appreciated.

Location: https://maps.app.goo.gl/p2BTyf56uB92yjqGA


[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

This is the text we used for the appeal to the council which has led to the "Notice of Rejection of Representations" letter in the next post.

"I appeal the provided PCN due to multiple procedural improprieties.
The wording used on the PCN did not include legally mandated text and as such is invalid. Specifically, as per The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022 the PCN is required to contain the following information:
“(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.”
The PCN also misstates the authority's power to serve a NTO. The PCN states that the authority may serve a NTO 'after 28 days from its[the PCN's] date of service' whereas the regulations state that the authority may serve a NTO once ' b)the period of 28 days specified in the penalty charge notice as the period within which the penalty charge is to be paid has expired without that charge being paid,' (regulation 20(1)(b) refers).
This is also a procedural impropriety.
For this purpose, it is immaterial that the PCN's wording adds a day to the mandated period, the meaning of this period is required to be conveyed accurately and not unilaterally amended by the authority or their agent.
Given that these are formal representations whose grounds demonstrate substantive failures on the part of the authority, then I should be grateful if whoever considers them takes legal advice and does not simply respond to the effect that the wording must be compliant because it's been agreed by the enforcement authority.
I would also like to raise the inappropriate use of road markings within this area marked as residents only. Larger sections of the area contain single yellow road lines which would indicate parking restrictions and areas without yellow markings indicating unrestricted parking. The vehicle in question was not parked on any road markings and as such it was assumed the restrictions only applied to the areas marked with yellow lines. Can it be clarified what purpose the road markings have in this area as they seem to have no purpose other than to be confusing to the average road user."

I would say it is TPT time.  I expect cp8759 will be along shortly. Omission of statutory text does not equate to making matters easier to understand.

@lofi234 it's a permit parking area, you can see the PPA sign here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/m6e2EmZQRFLG8WTZA

That being said, the council seems to be in complete disarray, they don't seem to know the difference between a PPA and a CPZ, they've got no evidence of signage (do not point this out to them!), and I suspect that by now the sign is completely engulfed in foliage.

To top it off the discount is not on offer, so there's no reason not to appeal and see what they put in the evidence pack.

I'm going to drop you a PM in case you would like to be represented.

We’re prepared to go as far as the adjudicator. Of they disagree with appeal we wouldn’t go any further. Mainly due to time and effort vs reward.

I mean going as far as and including adjudication but accepting whatever outcome that leads to.

I’m not saying we’d accept that nonsense reply from the council.

Of they disagree with appeal we wouldn’t go any further. Mainly due to time and effort vs reward.

The first PCN I fought 16 years ago took me weeks.  It was worthwhile even if I had lost;  but, I won and the rest is history.  If anyone wants to mug me for £130, they have to pay for it. I would take up cp's offer.

@lofi234 we always recommend you just register the appeal with "I rely on my formal representations in the first instance" and wait and see if the council contests, and what evidence they provide. There is literally zero to be gained from showing your hand first.

With the traffic penalty tribunal everything is done online from start to finish, you just need to go to https://foam.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/ to register the appeal.

Once you have the council evidence (assuming they contest) post it on here and we'll take a look.