Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Unimexsol on September 08, 2024, 02:34:59 pm
-
Please quote the Penalty Charge Notice number, the vehicle registration and your address details in all written correspondence. We cannot accept verbal challenges in person or on the telephone.
Any challenge made is against the full charge and the 14 day discount will not be offered."
The second part has been dealt with.
As regards not accepting verbal challenges AKA all challenges must be in writing, IMO it's a no-hoper. Considering challenges is a legal process.
In addition, 'Under general principles of public law, authorities have a duty to act fairly and proportionately and are encouraged to exercise discretion sensibly and reasonably and with due regard to the public interest. Failure to act in accordance with the general principles of public law may lead to a claim for a decision to be judicially reviewed.' IMO, an authority cannot discharge this duty without the arguments being in writing.
But the OP's neighbour can try, but IMO no-one would get to this point given that we're told that the location is not part of a road or off-street parking place designated by the council and therefore does not fall within Schedule 7 to the TMA.
-
Well, if I want to avail myself of sarcasm, I'll talk to my grandchildren.
I do not need lessons in how to complain to councils, government or win cases.
If people want to hide behind their keyboards, I would rather resolve issues face to face. We can meet at Furnival Street. I'll let you know when I am next there. 23rd, 30th, 8th, 14th etc.
I'll wear my Third Musketeer costume. ;D The administrative staff's nickname, not mine.
-
Don't mind Hippocrates - he's temporarily mislaid his oath.
-
So not bothered that you replied to tell us how unbothered you were. Thanks for that, it's a shame you aren't bothered because IF the wording on this ticket is contrary to the Equality Act 2010 and IF that does, by itself, make this ticket unlawful, then it will mean that every LB Havering ticket issued with that wording will be unenforceable. I'd have thought that will be of great use to the members of this forum, which is why I started this whole thread, but don't let it bother you.
-
I really cannot be bothered with this thread anymore.
-
Thanks for all the replies so far.
It's interesting that they've withdrawn the 50% discount, and I think I do agree with H C Anderson that they may well be able to without invalidating the PCN, however I strongly believe that by stating that ""We cannot accept verbal challenges in person or on the telephone." they are acting contrary to the Equality Act 2010 and as such I believe that will make any PCN on which they state this unlawful.
This isn't the only defence against the PCN (which is actually for a neighbour of mine which is why I can't post all the details - they are not mine to post.) I am 100% certain of the other grounds of the challenge against the PCN but having seen this new wording I wanted particular advice on that.
As anyone who was on Pepipoo may remember I had a regular and particular problem with Havering attaching PCN's to my car when the car was parked entirely legally. I have won EVERY challenge, representation and tribunal hearing that I have undertaken on this issue and it seemed in the last 18 months as if Havering had finally realised that they had no reason to issue these PCN's. All I can assume is that there is a new Enforcement Officer who is unaware that our private car park is, in fact, a private car park and thus issued a PCN to my neighbour.
I shall, of course, keep this site updated with their response.
Once again, many thanks to all.
-
Hi John,
I don't need advice on anything other than the specific wording that I've quoted so I'd rather not waste everyone's time by posting the PCN and location etc. It's only this new specific wording that I am after an opinion on.
So, you know what you can do.
-
Unfortunately, the OP doesn't want advice on basics, only their narrow question.
But it would be useful if they expanded the scope of their enquiry because their current approach would be unsuccessful.
-
@Unimexsol You come onto this website and refuse to enter your details. :o Therefore, are you seriously interested in receiving advice or not? If the latter, I will report your posts to the Moderator and Administrator as we have better things to do. For example, cases have been won today by our members. I include myself. And our Administrator who is like Mozart.
-
On the OP's only question, IMO their argument is a no-hoper.
The council are entitled to not re-offer the discount in respect of unsuccessful challenges. It was never mandatory. In fact most councils don't promise the discount in these circumstances but say they will 'generally' do so.
Their committee report which discussed the matter made a clear recommendation and brought the decision maker's attention specifically to the SoS's Stat Guidance. IMO, there's no mileage in this argument.
The guidance does not recommend that authorities re-offer the discount, instead 'the Secretary of State recommends that the enforcement authority should consider re-offering the discount for a further 14 days to incentivise payment.'
And they have.
https://democracy.havering.gov.uk/documents/s74951/181.%20Parking%20PCN%20Discount%20Non-key%20Decision%20July%202024-Final.pdf
-
The OP is well known to us and will no doubt see off this PCN as he has all the many others.
Let's see what Havering does when he challenges.
-
This is winnable at the Tribunal due to the website errors.
-
There is no right in law to be re-offered the discount if representations are rejected, other than if the rejection is received within the discount period, then the discount is still available no matter what they may say. Under the 1991 legislation, there was no right to the discount, but most councils did re-offer it. When the Traffic Management Act 2004 took over, it was accompanied by Statutory Guidance. In the Act it says enforcement authorities "must have regard to the guidance". The guidance recommends that the discount is re-offered when refusing informal challenges.
I would add that in my opinion, stating that you are no longer going to follow the guidance because it's costing you money is a blatant disregard to it, but that's just my opinion.
Nottingham lost a case on the discount some years ago in relation to a bus lane PCN, where there is no informal challenge facility. The appellant tried to pay within the discount period having got fed-up waiting for a reply and payment was refused. The adjudicator ruled that the discount is a right in law, provided payment is made within its timeframe regardless as to whether representations had been submitted.
-
Please: go to the website as if to challenge and screenshot the grounds then post them here.
-
Interestingly, I've just had a look on Havering's own website and it links to their policy on Enforcement and Cancellation of PCNs.
There's a link here - https://www.havering.gov.uk/downloads/file/96/policy-for-enforcing-or-cancelling-a-pcn
If you scroll to the bottom, you will see Appendix A, where you can see that it lays out an application to the London Councils Transport and Environment Committee. It is dated 2013, but has not been updated or confirmed as to whether or not the application was agreed either way look at Point 8, and then Point 15.
I would argue (and in fact shall be arguing as one of the points in my defence of this PCN) that where this PCN states - "We cannot accept verbal challenges in person or on the telephone." which is in bold on the PCN, that this fetters discretion and is in direct contradiction to the council's published policy. That the statement is in bold is, in my view, important as it suggest that this is an absolute. I think that because the PCN says something that is in direct contradiction to the council's own published policy of enforcement/cancellation of PCNs that it is automatically unenforceable.
I would appreciate the thoughts of others on this matter.
-
Yes we've noted Havering's change on PCNs in not offering the discount on challenge. There is contradictory info on its website (or was).
There is no regulation on this I believe so Havering seems to have broken ranks on custom and practice. Whether they are following through on this I don't think we don't know yet as it's recent but I expect they've calculated that cutting the volume of challenges is worth the trade-off in possible extra tribunal cases given there's no reason not to take things all the way on rejection.
-
Do not pay this as their website is in disarray.
-
I think you'll need to post the whole thing.
However - but be warned that this is only a personal pedantic hobbyhorse of mine and I'm not saying it has any merit - I'd be complaining that they say they won't accept "verbal" challenges.
Written challenges are "verbal" challenges.
What I think they mean to say is that they won't accept spoken, vocal, oral or other non-written challenges.
I suspect that like many public bodies their software doesn't like the word "oral"... :)
Assuming that they do mean spoken or vocal etc... I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable to say if such a restriction is lawful or not
-
Hi John,
I don't need advice on anything other than the specific wording that I've quoted so I'd rather not waste everyone's time by posting the PCN and location etc. It's only this new specific wording that I am after an opinion on.
If you really need me to I'll post everything up but because of the very specific advice that I'm after I'd rather not.
-
For meaningful advice, please to have a read of
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/
and post up here
both sides of the unredacted PCN,
any Council photos,
and a GSV link to the location.
Imgur allows you to use BBCodes which pasted here put the images directly in your post.
----
That said, for not re-offering the discount when rejecting early challenges see this thread
https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/london-councils-who-do-not-reoffer-the-discount-in-the-formal-notice-of-rejectio/
especially Reply#7
whih points at
https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/haringey-52(m)-pcn-nor-help-(downhills-park-rd-n17)/
-
Hi there,
LB Havering has issued a PCN for parking in our own car park. I've won over 50 previous challenges against PCN's issued for exactly the same thing so I'm on pretty certain ground BUT LB Havering have changed the wording on their PCN and it's this I would like clarification on. The reverse of the PCN now says,
""Please quote the Penalty Charge Notice number, the vehicle registration and your address details in all written correspondence. We cannot accept verbal challenges in person or on the telephone.
Any challenge made is against the full charge and the 14 day discount will not be offered."
Is this wording legal? Firstly, can they refuse to accept verbal challenges, and is this contrary to any anti-discrimination laws? Secondly, can they refuse to offer the 14 day discount if any challenge is made?
Thanks in advance.