Free Traffic Legal Advice

Obviously the CEO is blameless, as all he saw was a car parked beyond the paid time, knowing nothing about the circumstances. However, staff in their parking department are obliged to consider any representations you submit, so it would be best if you submitted informal reps against the PCN giving the circumstances, and backing this up with some evidence of your fall. Statutory guidance has something to say on this: -

An authority has a discretionary power to cancel a PCN at any point throughout the process. It can do this even when an undoubted contravention has occurred if the authority deems it to be appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

Under general principles of public law, authorities have a duty to act fairly and proportionately and are encouraged to exercise discretion sensibly and reasonably and with due regard to the public interest. Failure to act in accordance with the general principles of public law may lead to a claim for a decision to be judicially reviewed.

Enforcement authorities have a duty not to fetter their discretion, so should ensure that PNCs, NtOs, leaflets and any other advice they give do not mislead the public about what they may consider in the way of representations.

They should approach the exercise of discretion objectively and without regard to any financial interest in the penalty or decisions that may have been taken at an earlier stage in proceedings.

You can read the guidance here: -
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-enforcement-of-parking-contraventions/guidance-for-local-authorities-on-enforcing-parking-restrictions

Under the Traffic Management Act, councils must have regard to the guidance.

So, if you're going to submit reps, post a draft here first for review. Then after submission, post up their reply when you get it.

Draft reps below for comment, the letter from The Community House should be with me tomorrow morning.

Dear Sir/Madam
I am writing with regards to PCN TK03017674. On arriving at the bay I paid for parking until 11.01 as I was attending a meeting which was due to last until 10.30 and this time allowed for any overrun of the meeting. I left The Community House at 10:55 to make my way back to my vehicle, however, as I was exiting down the steps of the building I slipped and fell, twisting my ankle and injuring my knee. One of the Trustees of The Community House who I had met with came to my assistance and took me back into the building to administer First Aid, including cleaning my knee and strapping my ankle. After First Aid had been administered I made my way back to my vehicle, arriving back to it around 11.18 which was the earliest that I could do given the unexpected delay, injury, and it then taking me longer to walk to my vehicle on the way back.

I attach a letter from The Community House confirming that I attended a meeting there, and that they administered First Aid as a result of me slipping on the steps when leaving the building.

For later:

The Borough of Thurrock (Stopping, Waiting, Loading and On-street Parking) Order 2017
Notice of variation of charges

You may wish to repost with your name & address redacted.

Thanks John!

Here's the response below, they have just classed it as an overunning meeting and not acknowledged that it was due to an injury that I was delayed returning to my vehicle. Any suggestions as to next steps from here?

Yes, but why do you say they have taken your witness statement as an over-running meeting if it describes your fall and subsequent delay in getting back to your car ?  Is the witness statement specific on this fall ? You might care to post it here, suitably redacted, of course.

Where they get "over-running meeting" from is for them to show in the letter. It is just typical of venal and rapacious councils, so Thurrock can now join the Hall of Infamy. It fuller every year !
I would persist to adjudication if it were me. The adjudicator will decide "on the balance of probabilities", but first you have to go through the Notice to Owner stage and get reps against that rejected.

I'm pretty set on seeing the process through now. With that in mind is it worth getting a stronger version of the above statement, say with times included?

It would be better if you can, but the existing letter seems OK to me because it says nothing about the "meeting over-running", which the council seem to have made up, but does confirm your narrative of falling.