Fingers crossed! Absent any letter I'm not sure yet if it's set to 0.00 as it's on hold, or has just been cancelled. I wouldn't have thought they'd set it to £0 during informal reps in case someone had a change of heart and wanted to pay?No, if someone pays while a challenge is outstanding they throw the challenge in the bin and laugh all the way to the bank.
If you can post or send any response to the orders you requested if you get one that'd be much appreciated - not least for my own interest!Sure thing.
(https://i.imgur.com/46QxQtU.png)Result, they must have realised the traffic order doesn't exist!
(https://i.imgur.com/46QxQtU.png)Result, they must have realised the traffic order doesn't exist!
Thank you for your representation, which has been allocated to the above Penalty Charge Notice. The case is now on hold until a response is sent to you either by email (if an email address has been provided) or by post.
Where a PCN is issued under the Traffic Management Act (TMA) 2004, the council will respond to your challenge within 56 days of the date it was received.
If you challenge your penalty charge notice within 14 days from the date of service of the notice, known as an informal challenge, where the notice was placed on the vehicle or handed to the driver. Then it will then be held at the reduced rate and a further 14 days will be given, from the date of our correspondence, to pay at the reduced rate if your challenge is not accepted.
Any PCNs issued by a camera, such as bus lanes, no entry restrictions, motor vehicle restriction zones, pedestrian zones in pursuant to the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984 (as amended), London Local Authorities 1996 and Transport for London Act 2003 will be responded to as soon as possible. There is no corresponding provision within the Acts relating to bus lane and moving traffic contraventions which require that an Enforcement Authority must respond within a statutory time limit.
Thanks gents, so to be clear, there is presumably no legal basis by which vehicles can be issued with a PCN or removed from this road purely for being in contravention of the purported control?? Is there any alternative legal mechanism they could claim to be exercising this power under?If the traffic order doesn't exist then it doesn't exist. In the past where councils have rejected representations despite the lack of a traffic order being raised in the formal representations, the tribunal has held this to be wholly unreasonable and has made a costs order against the council.
Dear London Borough of Newham,
Having viewed the photos taken by the civil enforcement officer I do not believe that you can evidence a contravention, as there are no road markings shown indicating parking controls on the point the vehicle is stopped. It would appear the PCN must have been issued in error. I trust you will arrange for its prompt cancellation.
Yours faithfully
Dear Sir/Madam,
I write with reference to PCN**** issued to my vehicle ****** on Albert Road on 31 March, 2023. I wish to make representations regarding this PCN, which are set out below.
I parked in the location specified because I had been of the understanding that Easter Sunday is a Public Holiday, and that therefore, permit and shared use bays within Controlled Parking Zones are not enforced. I now understand this not to be the case. Regardless, my first representation is the fact that enforcement continues on Easter Sunday is not clear from your website, which does not make clear what is defined as a Bank holiday and Public holiday (GOV.UK only lists Bank Holidays - your additional reference to un-referenced Public Holidays therefore creates ambiguity). Given this was a genuine mistake, I would like you to consider cancelling the PCN as a gesture of goodwill and mutual understanding.
Having looked into this matter in more detail, I wish to make a second representation, which is that in the event, I do not believe that Newham Council is able to properly enforce the purported parking controls at the specific location in question. From review of your CEO's evidence, there is no visible white bay marking where the vehicle is parked, and the impression could therefore be given that a controlled parking bay does not exist at that location. Given the absence of the required markings, I do not consider that Residents Parking controls should have been subject to enforcement at this location. This inadequate marking must have been clear to your CEO who proceeded to issue the PCN regardless. I consider the PCN is not enforceable and therefore your CEO could not, if they were acting properly, have had reasonable cause to believe a PCN was payable given the clearly defective road markings.
I would ask that my representations are reviewed and that the PCN is cancelled as it was issued as a result of genuine error on my part, and ultimately, it also does not seem to be legally enforceable.