Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello there,

Essentially, I would be grateful if any of you could advise if this PCN is defective as I believe it is.

Background: Our resident parking permit recently expired and initially we tried to renew however the website was not letting us renew - the helpline was not open and we had to take our three-year old daugher to the nursery and then go to work. Later in the day, we attempted to renew and pay again however this time the website was not accepting our payment. After persisting for 40 minutes to an hour, the website eventually it accepted the payment. There was no issue with the cards or funds. We then discovered that earlier in the day, our car received a PCN,


We've already made an informal representation where we outlined the issues with the website but they have declined to cancel the PCN. However, we also argued that the PCN is defective and they also declined to cancel the PCN on this point.

Can anyone advise whether this PCN is defective? The CEO has not printed the PCN properly so crucial info is obfuscated and/or missing. Regulations state the PCN should have

• the date and the time at which the alleged contravention occurred – this is obfuscated due to the malfunction
• that if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the period of 28 days referred to in subparagraph (g), a notice to owner may be served by the enforcement authority on the owner of the vehicle – this is not visible at the back due to the portion that was printed.
  

Thank you for your help!

5 days after the permit expired we tried to renew. My partner says she didn’t see an email but the council’s website says they don’t accept that as an argument. Their system actually in the end issued an email stating we have a permit from midnight that morning so technically we had a permit when we received the ticket.  The system is not great.

What would be a killer argument for a defective PCN?  It’s not just the front. Key info is missing from the back as well. The legislation clearly states what must be on the PCN so they should abide by those rules.

Thanks for your note. They have apologised for the “misprint” in the informal response but not rescinded the PCN - I think they will when I lodge a formal representation. I agree with not labouring the other points.

Thank you, Yeah I had seen that document on Scribd but didn’t call it out in my original email. I later found it again on the phenomenal Google Sheet on this forum and emailed them to ask. No response. I think the email address is manned by a private company so I suspect they mostly reject informal representations.

great news.
for future reference it would have been good for the forum to see a copy of your reps and, importantly,their rejections, to note any failings in them.
do you have the tribunal ref No.