Author Topic: Hounslow PCN - 82u: Parked after the expiry of paid for time - Heston Park Leisure Centre  (Read 296 times)

0 Members and 84 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hi

My wife recieved a PCN from Hounslow Council for an overstay in Heston Leisure centre car park. Street view image here:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/aCwikDTdETjAkvvj8

She parked at 10:43 on the 21st June and rang the pay by phone number to start her 3 hours free parking session. The car park allows 3 hours free parking and up to 4 hours in total. Unfortunately when she returned to the car a short while later the key got stuck in the door lock (the remote switch on the key fob stopped working a while back) and the blade of the key came completely detached to the plastic body. She was able to source some WD40 and pliers from some local shops and free the key, but it wouldn't turn so she couldn't gain access to the vehicle.
She then searched for local key cutting services and had to try several branches of Timpsons before finding one that had the right key and facilities. During this time she rang the pay by phone number to extend her time and having gone through the process, was told by an automated message that her time had been extended (this was without any request for payment).
She got a replacement key at 15:02 and was back at the car by 15:38, to discover a PCN issued 5 minutes earlier at 15:33. Here it is:<br><br>



<br><br>

She then sent an informal appeal on the 6th July:<br>





[/i]<br><br>

The council then sent a rejection letter, where they seem to ignore the point of appeal (vehicle prevented from moving due to circumstances beyond the driver's control):


<br><br>

We've now received an NTO:





<br><br>

Any advice on how to proceed please? It seems very unfair to penalise someone due to circumstances beyond their control.<br><br>

Thanks

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


As you have an NTO you must make formal representations and it looks like they sent a boilerplate rejection with no 'consideration' of your initial challenge, which you can now put to them again.

I expect we can beef up the reps - my initial thought is the challenge was too long and needs to focus on the exemption upfront.

For me just send the same again. The argument re unable to move is strong but if their considerations are just the same then you have a very good chance of winning on a failure to consider PI