3. Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent
« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent  (Read 77 times)

hamag, MissArtFart and 11 Guests are viewing this topic.

Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent
« on: »
Hi everyone

I would appreciate some advice regarding a Brent Council pedestrian zone PCN.

My elderly father, accidentally drove into a pedestrian zone. He was genuinely lost at the time and his mobile phone was not working, so he was unable to use navigation or contact anyone for help while trying to find his way home.

He is diabetic and was urgently trying to find a toilet, which added to his confusion and distress.

There are council photos and video evidence, and we are not disputing that he entered the pedestrian zone.

Do we have any realistic chance of a successful appeal, and if so, on what grounds?

I understand that being lost is not normally a legal defence, but would Brent Council consider exercising discretion due to his age, medical condition and the overall circumstances, particularly if this is a first offence?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.


20260620 112213 hosted at ImgBB
Image 20260620 112213 hosted on ImgBB
ImgBB · ibb.co

20260620 112140 hosted at ImgBB
Image 20260620 112140 hosted on ImgBB
ImgBB · ibb.co

20260620 112116(1) hosted at ImgBB
Image 20260620 112116(1) hosted on ImgBB
ImgBB · ibb.co


PCNbrent Ped hosted at ImgBB
Image PCNbrent Ped hosted on ImgBB
ImgBB · ibb.co
« Last Edit: June 24, 2026, 03:06:06 pm by hamag »
Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent
« Reply #1 on: »
I understand that being lost is not normally a legal defence, but would Brent Council consider exercising discretion due to his age, medical condition and the overall circumstances, particularly if this is a first offence?

The standard answer is yes, they may cancel the PCN at any time, even on the grounds of mitigation/compelling reasons.

But an adjudicator may not do so. They must apply the law.



From the Chief Adjudicator's Annual Report 2024/2025:

There is very limited scope to argue that a diagnosed mental (or physical) health condition should lead to the cancellation of a penalty. Adjudicators must approach an appeal on the basis that the driver possesses the standard of a reasonable and prudent driver with the skill level which enables the driver to pass a UK driving test.
 
If a health condition has an impact on one’s driving, the driver is obliged by law to notify DVLA so that DVLA can decide whether the driver can continue to hold a licence, or whether conditions must be imposed on the licence. A health condition does not lower the driving standard so that the contravention can be excused.

However, the report goes on:
Claims for reasonable adjustments [under The Equality Act 2010] are often raised in representations to the authorities. Adjudicators think that authorities need to make a bigger effort to address these claims in the Notices of Rejection.

One of our posters is adept at spotting technical defects with these PCNs so I suggest waiting until they comment.

Latest date of the representations period is 15 July.
Logged
Re: Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent
« Reply #2 on: »
Thank you for that!
I will await for further input from others as you mentioned.

I will draft the appeal in the meantime, hopefully someone can have a look and share their feedback on that as well. 

Logged
Re: Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent
« Reply #3 on: »
My representation:



Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to make representations against this Penalty Charge Notice and respectfully ask Brent Council to exercise its discretion in light of the exceptional circumstances surrounding this incident.

I fully accept that my vehicle entered the pedestrian zone and I am not seeking to dispute the evidence provided by the council. Rather, I ask that the council carefully consider the circumstances that led to this isolated incident.

I am an elderly driver (69 Years old) and on this occasion I became genuinely lost whilst trying to find my way home. Unfortunately, my mobile phone was not functioning, leaving me unable to use satellite navigation or contact anybody for assistance.

At the same time, I am diabetic and was urgently trying to locate toilet facilities, which added considerably to the pressure and confusion of the situation. I did not enter the pedestrian zone deliberately, nor did I obtain any advantage from doing so. This was a genuine error made whilst attempting to safely find my way home under difficult circumstances.

I appreciate that being lost or having a medical condition does not in itself provide a legal defence to a traffic contravention, and I am not suggesting that these factors excuse the contravention as a matter of law.

However, local authorities retain the discretion to cancel a Penalty Charge Notice where there are compelling mitigating circumstances, and I respectfully ask Brent Council to exercise that discretion in this case.

I would also ask the council to give proper consideration to my medical condition and my individual circumstances when assessing these representations. If any aspect of my diabetes amounts to a disability for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, I would ask that the council has due regard to its obligations under that legislation when considering this request.

This is not a case of deliberate disregard for the restrictions, but rather an isolated and unfortunate incident involving an elderly driver experiencing genuine difficulty.

If this is my first such contravention, I would be grateful if the council would also take this into account and consider cancelling the Penalty Charge Notice as an act of discretion.

Thank you for taking the time to consider these representations.

Yours faithfully,
Logged
Re: Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent
« Reply #4 on: »
OMO, you might want to revisit this part:

At the same time, I am diabetic and was urgently trying to locate toilet facilities, which added considerably to the pressure and confusion of the situation. I did not enter the pedestrian zone deliberately, nor did I obtain any advantage from doing so. This was a genuine error made whilst attempting to safely find my way home under difficult circumstances.

Taking the position of the Devil's Advocate, if the driver was lost why would they hope to find toilets in an area completely unknown to them? Was it a deliberate act in order find toilets, or the act of a confused and stressed driver?
Logged
Re: Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent
« Reply #5 on: »
Hold fire please.
Logged
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"
Re: Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent
« Reply #6 on: »
I make this collateral challenge as follows:

The PCN is missing mandatory information as provided at Para. 4 (8 ) (v) of


London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003
legislation.gov.uk


(v)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable.

Clearly, this refers to Para. 4 (8 ) (iii):

(iii)that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice;

Therefore, it follows that the statement: "If you fail to pay the Penalty Charge or make representations before the end of a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice an increased charge of £240 may be payable” adds to the lack of clarity by its omission. Even on its own, whether the required information was included or not, it is also arguable that it conflates the two periods using the word "or" which many would view as being conjunctive. Furthermore, even if the statement were to be interpreted disjunctively, there is still no clarity due to the missing information. So, it follows that it cannot possibly be interpreted disjunctively.

In addition, there is yet another phrase in parenthesis, which in its context, refers to date of service which exacerbates the lack of clarity further.

Finally, your website has been found to be unfair as in case Nos  (First two - do not cite the whole cases):

In light of the above, please cancel the PCN.

Mashood Perwez Haque v London Borough of Brent (2240386185, 9 November 2024).pdf
Google Docs · drive.google.com


Timur Tagirov v London Borough of Brent (224040544A, 25 November 2024).pdf
Google Docs · drive.google.com


You can select various phrases though.

draft first please.
Logged
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"
Re: Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent
« Reply #7 on: »
Firstly, Thank you so much for your input. I must say, I was a little confused as to what it meant, but with the help of ai I think I get it.

I will attach my draft below.

Secondly, I have not made mention of the previous draft about medical grounds and being lost and needing the loo etc....
or shall I add that as well as a secondary point?

If they refuse the appeal and it goes to tribunal, I am not sure my father is able to deal with the legislation involved as it is quite intricate and he is elderly, not to mention the technical side of attending online etc.
but lets see how it goes.
Logged
Re: Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent
« Reply #8 on: »
I make this collateral challenge on the basis that the Penalty Charge Notice fails to comply with the mandatory requirements of Schedule 1 to the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003.

Paragraph 4(8 ) (a)(v) requires a Penalty Charge Notice to state:

Quote
"that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable."

The "28 day period" referred to in paragraph 4(8 )(a)(v) is plainly the period prescribed by paragraph 4(8 )(a)(iii), namely:

Quote
"the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice."
However, the PCN does not convey this mandatory information. Instead, it states:

Quote
"If you fail to pay the Penalty Charge or make representations before the end of a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice an increased charge of £240 may be payable."

This wording is defective for several reasons.

First, it omits the mandatory reference to the statutory payment period beginning with the **date of the notice**, substituting instead the period beginning with the **date of service**.

Secondly, by using the phrase "pay the Penalty Charge **or** make representations", the PCN conflates two distinct statutory periods into a single statement. A recipient is left uncertain as to which statutory period governs the issue of a Charge Certificate. The use of the word "or" does not resolve this ambiguity and, if anything, compounds it.

Thirdly, the parenthetical reference elsewhere on the PCN to the "date of service" further adds to the confusion by repeatedly directing the recipient to a different statutory date from that prescribed by paragraph 4(8 )(a)(iii).

The statutory requirements are mandatory. Parliament has prescribed the information that a Penalty Charge Notice must contain. A PCN that fails to accurately convey that information does not comply with the requirements of the 2003 Act.

Finally, I note that Brent Council's online representations process has previously been found by London Tribunals to be unfair in respect of motorists' ability to make representations. While those decisions concerned different issues, they demonstrate the importance of strict compliance with the statutory requirements governing civil enforcement. Please see the attached tribunal decisions in **Mashood Perwez Haque v London Borough of Brent (2240386185, 9 November 2024)** and **Timur Tagirov v London Borough of Brent (224040544A, 25 November 2024)**.
For all of the above reasons, I respectfully request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »
  3. Pedestrian Zone PCN - Brent