Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: RW468 on February 29, 2024, 02:44:45 pm
-
ok thanks - i don't seem to have that at the moment (sorry!) I will just submit reponse saying I was assisting a minor to board etc - no brainer as you say as no cost to do it. thanks
Well let's see a draft before you submit it please.
-
she is 7
-
How old was the child and dothey have any specific needs for assistance.
It feeds into necessity. eg a 5 year old and a 15 year old may be considered diffirently. Policy may also be relevant as to what the school demand.
-
ok thanks - i don't seem to have that at the moment (sorry!) I will just submit reponse saying I was assisting a minor to board etc - no brainer as you say as no cost to do it. thanks
-
thanks so much - I have posted documents to my latest post - can you see them?
Yes, but cp8759 wanted to see the Notice to Owner.
Clearly their letter was in response to reps against that, and they haven't re-offered the discount, so it is now a total no-brainer to take them to adjudication because the penalty does not increase, and there are no additional costs.
-
thanks so much - I have posted documents to my latest post - can you see them?
-
They say 'where your vehicle is parking it is permitted to stop for as long as is reasonably necessary for the purpose or picking or dropping passenger however you are not allowed to leave your vehicle there.
This is total tosh. There is no legal requirement for a driver to remain with the vehicle when carrying out boarding/alighting activities. You were engaged in what is called "assisted boarding", which involves collecting a vulnerable person from a safe place and escorting them to the car to board. The same applies with alighting.
So if it were me, I'd be taking them to adjudication. However, please do as CP8759 asks, and post the documents.
-
Hi Everyone - thank you for the replies. Sorry for the slow update. So I had a letter (attached) basically saying I still have to pay as contravention code 01 applies saying that light goods vehicles are allowed to stay for 2 minutes. Incidentally they state the officer saw my vehicle from 17.23-17.35 and no unloading or loading - although the photos show my car door open. They say th notes say he had a conversation with me stating he had been there for 3 minutes prior to issue of PCN -so in there view that takes it to a total of 5 minutes.
There apparently was a no waiting restriction sign 1 meter away - is that the same as a no loading sign?!
I'm not sure whether to contest further. I thought there wasn't a sign- does the no waiting sign mean no loading too.
They say 'where your vehicle is parking it is permitted to stop for as long as is reasonably necessary for the purpose or picking or dropping passenger however you are not allowed to leave your vehicle there.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
@RW468 please post up the notice to owner and a draft of your response. There's not much point in coming here for advice if you're going to go off and do your own thing. I also suggest when you next respond you tick the "Notify me of replies" box under "Attachments and other options".
I'd also like to check the traffic order, but I can't as you've given us absolutely nothing to work with.
-
^^ This.
There can be fatal flaws. How can you be certain it hasn't come as a result of a transfer of liability from the lease co ?
It may be perfect, in which case you will have merely wasted a little of you time, but it may not. It will determine the required approach.
Your description suggests it was a restricted street.
-
it's really just a standard letter though
How would you know?
Do you know the mandatory content for such a notice?
-
Thanks it's really just a standard letter though of how to appeal etc. It only says 'the vehicle was allegedly involved in the following parking contravention : 01 - park i a restricted street during prescribed hours in X road at 17.25"
It was a single yellow line parking that resulted in the PCN (not a restricted dsteeet as far as I'mn aware!) and orginal PCN states the single yellow line as the offence
-
Please post up all sides of the NtO, redacting only name and address.
There are often mistakes in the 'small print'.
-
Thank you so much everyone. What a helpful place. And to those of you who were upset I didn't reply for a along time - i'm so sorry! It's my first time using the forum and I didn't realise how active it was. I have jsut logged in to read all the replies!
I was awaiting getting something in the post - from either the council or the lease company. Thankfully it came direct from the council as a notice to owner letter with a link for another appeal option.
I plan to reply following @NightSoul 's advice (thank you!)
I'll keep you updated.
-
Apart from Motability I'm not aware of any leasing companies putting the lessee's name on the V5C?
If you mean leasing in terms of a real operational lease as per PCH/BCH then I agree entirely.
If you mean leasing in terms of the description of PCP as a form of HP then not so much (It is commonly described as a lease in advertising and on the sales floor).... My daughters V5c with a BMW via their internal finco was in her name as was a merc via their internal finance.
When I acquired a BMW on finance for an inducement pre settlement it was in Alphabet's name though I signed with BMWFS.
-
That ship has sailed: I appealed and it was rejected on this first round of appeal
OP, it is frustrating when OPs start a thread, in this case on 29 Feb, 3 weeks ago, and are then asked to post the regular notices and docs following which we get radio silence despite you asking for 'Advice please!'
If you made unsuccessful reps against the PCN and were able to post on 29 Feb. then, even without seeing their rejection, it's possible to deduce that any re-offered discount has lapsed and that at any time the authority will issue a NTO to the lease company - it can't be Motobility because you would hold and would have told us that you hold a BB. So, your lease company gets the NTO and unless you've taken pre-emptive action with them you could find yourself faced with a contract charge equal to the full penalty plus any admin. fee.
-
Numerous leasing entities commonly register the lessee's name on the V5 document, thereby ensuring the receipt of correspondence. Given your possession of the PCN, you are empowered to articulate your perspective through representations to the authority.
Apart from Motability I'm not aware of any leasing companies putting the lessee's name on the V5C?
However as this appears to be a roadside PCN, anyone can challenge it.
-
Numerous leasing entities commonly register the lessee's name on the V5 document, thereby ensuring the receipt of correspondence. Given your possession of the PCN, you are empowered to articulate your perspective through representations to the authority.
Your representation ought to articulate that you received a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) while picking up your daughter from a school with no parking. The PCN states a two-minute observation window, though photos show you loading your child with the doors open, and the officer's report mentions over five minutes. You believe you're entitled to a reasonable loading period, especially as there are no restrictions signposted. The council suggests a three-minute loading limit, which conflicts with the PCN's details.
-
Your lease should have a section as to what they will do and charges involved.
Typically they will charge an admin fee of around £25 to transfer liability. The highest I have seen was a staggering £63.
Quite often, but by no means always, they will undertake to refund if rhe ticket is eventually overturned.
They may fail to transfer properly which can be an appeal ground in its own right.
Many, if they receive a second notice, will simply pay it and charge you for the privilege.
It may be sensible to contact them to find their policy.
Sometimes where the lease car is provided by an employer, and that employer is noted as the hirer the employer will simply pay it and deduct from salary dependant upon their own internal conditions.
-
@RW468 it's nothing to do with 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 minutes, you're entitled to take as long as is necessary but not a second more.
For us to give proper advice, please post up the PCN in full as explained here (https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/).
-
This is nothing to do with loading.
You were engaged in assisted boarding. Boarding/alighting are exemptions to yellow lines, and it is a well-established principle that board/alight is more than just letting a person board or alight at the roadside, it include fetching vulnerable persons from a safe place and accompanying them to the car, or the opposite; taking a person from the car to a safe place. Of course the law says the activity may take as long as is necessary. So no side activities lie having tea waiting for a person te get ready to go out, for instance.
-
Your contract(nothing to do with parking) will not allow you to require your lease company to take specific action such as to transfer liability to you as the hirer. But you may ask them to do so.
But let's see the PCN, your reps and their reply first pl.
-
please upload all docs as per this
https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/
-
i received a PCN on my lease car which was parked on a single yellow line while I picked up my young daughter from school (- of which there is no on site parking and there were no available spaces on the road bays). The PCN states it was observed from 17.23 - 17.25. The photos taken show me at the car with my child and with the doors open and the report by the officer says he witnessed the car for "more than 5 minutes'. At the time I said to him "I was 3 minutes", and he said "you were FOUR". Either way the photos are of me at the car and the PCN details only 2 minutes. I appealed and it was rejected on this first round of appeal
1) Am i correct that i am entitled a short period of time to load? there a no 'no loading signs or marks on the pavement to indicate i can't load' The county council notice that arrived in response to my appeal said loading must not be for longer than 3 minutes. Well, only 2 mins were listed on my PCN, but the statement from the officer says 5. I thought I was entitled to a reasonable amount of time.
2) I have been told that if I wish to continue to appeal further I have to wait for a Notice to Owner. This is a lease car. I'm worried they will pay the fine and charge me the fine and an admin fee. However I am told that only after receiving a Notice to owner can I "make representations challenging it" (i'm not sure what that even means!?). My concern is I will not get this notice posted to me and as such won't be able to appeal
Thanks in advance for any thoughts. i did read all the FAQs - i'm so sorry if i've missed a thread on this!!