Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Feline_Foxy on October 09, 2024, 09:07:05 pm
-
Got this by email:
Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000
Environmental Information Regulations 2004
Reference No: 28835157
Thank you for your recent request.
Your request is being considered and you will receive a response within the statutory timescale of 20 working days, subject to the application of any exemptions. Where consideration is being given to exemptions the 20 working day timescale may be extended to a period considered reasonable depending on the nature and circumstances of your request. In such cases you will be notified and, where possible, a revised time-scale will be indicated. In all cases we shall attempt to deal with your request at the earliest opportunity.
There may be a fee payable for the retrieval, collation and provision of the information requested where the request exceeds the statutory limit or where disbursements exceed £10. In such cases you will be informed in writing and your request will be suspended until we receive payment from you or your request is modified and/or reduced.
Your request may require either full or partial transfer to another public authority. You will be informed if your request is transferred.
If we are unable to provide you with the information requested we will notify you of this together with the reason(s) why and details of how you may appeal (if appropriate).
Please note that the directorate team may contact you for further information where we believe that the request is not significantly clear for us to respond fully.
Kind regards
FOI Team
Information Security & Governance
Chief Executive’s Directorate
Lewisham Council
-
Just post here pl.
-
Done. Do you have an email address so I can send it to you if/when they reply?
-
Why not submit an Environmental Information Regulations request to the council:
https://lewisham.gov.uk/mayorandcouncil/aboutthecouncil/access-to-information/environmental-information-regulations
Please supply copies of all current traffic orders which regulate that length of Wearside Road from its junction with the B236 to Whitburn Road.
-
What's a PAPL? I am happy to help you if I can - although I am not sure mine is a stong enough case for misinformation, disinformation & threats?
-
@Feline_Foxy There is a way actually since their website has and still is guilty of misinformation and disinformation via its threats. I am considering a PAPL against this and one other authority and would need assistance!
-
Other than a bit of time (and annoyance) I haven't really incurred any expenses, I haven't missed work or anything
It is bad though (morally) how they play it right up until near the end - all because they know that most people won't go as far as tribunal
That's why it's so good that you guys stick up for ordinary people in these David & Goliath situations
-
Have Lewisham behave "wholly unreasonably" ? This is the test for a costs application. Why not claim them at the tribunal ?
-
Happy New Year to all you lovely warriors. And Forza to any of you doing the dreaded Tax Return today!
I just wanted to let you know that Lewisham have decided to not appeal at Tribunal! They must have realised all the things you had already spotted. Woo Hoo!
Thank you for your help xxx
-
When you have a case number we can start to put further representations together.
The arrangement of signs at the site is as a minimum conflicting and therefore confusing and at most unsupported by a traffic order.
You CANNOT have a SYL (which conveys a part-time waiting restriction) at the same location as a 24/7 loading place, it's simply contrary to law.
When the authority upload their traffic order you'll be able to see what's what and refer to it specifically and in detail.
-
2240396848
Same to you. :)
-
So I submitted the form (to Adjudicators) today (actually technically yesterday, ie. 24th Dec).
I believe I am able to amend or add things, so if anyone has anything important they think I should add (esp whether it actually even counts as a loading bay if it has a yellow line through it, and also no times on the sign) please let me know.
Otherwise I wish you all a good Christmas break with your loved ones :)
-
I need to submit today... What grounds should I appeal on? (Contravention Did not occur / Traffic Order Invalid / Procedural Impropriety / Charge Exceeded Amount Applicable ???)
Any other answers to the above also welcome :-)
You can tick more than one, but the obvious one is "the contravention did not occur", because you were engaged in an exempt activity to the yellow line.
-
I need to submit today... What grounds should I appeal on? (Contravention Did not occur / Traffic Order Invalid / Procedural Impropriety / Charge Exceeded Amount Applicable ???)
Any other answers to the above also welcome :-)
-
@Incandescent : That Jane Packer Flowers case is good, thank you.
@Hippocrates : I can't find that case you won for 'Chaseman'. Also I've attached above the screenshot you asked for.
A few other questions:
1. Earlier on someone said that this technically is not a ‘loading bay’ – you cannot have a yellow line within a 24/7 so-called loading bay. Is that true? What does that mean?
2. What Statutory Grounds should I select?
3. Should I repeat what I wrote (in my formal appeal) about the council’s inconsistencies re dates?
4. More generally, will the adjudicator read my earlier formal appeal as well or most likely just read this ‘adjudication appeal’? (how much to rewrite, esp as I have to submit tomorrow I believe!)
-
Here is a screenshot, taken just now
(https://i.imgur.com/s5AQBuc.png)
-
Please check the website payment status, screenshot and report back.
-
Go to London Tribunals and look at the Key Cases register here: -
https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/key-cases?field_subjects_value=Loading%2FUnloading+exemptions&combine=
in particular, the Jane Packer Flowers case
-
I guess their argument is that, since the loading was not observed the PCN was (legally) correctly issued. End of! In a way they are right because in that sense it was legally issued.
However I thought they were supposed to take into account evidence of loading?
Also what you say here makes sense to me : "There is no requirement for the vehicle to be continuously attended, as this would be an impossibility in most cases".
Are there any good cases I could point to for both these 2 points (taking into account proof of loading & the no requirement for vehicle be continually attended?)
-
Could you explain please what you mean by "the activities encompassed within the loading exemption".
Also even if various activities have been confirmed as valid in previous adjudications, what if they are not OBSERVED in those 5 minutes? (even if they were taking place and evidence later supplied)
Thank you
A lot of those activities would be taking place within the premises where the goods are being delivered or collected. All the CEO sees is a vehicle on yellow lines, and doesn't know where the driver is, so a PCN is served. There is no requirement for the vehicle to be continuously attended, as this would be an impossibility in most cases. The adjudicator applies the civil law test of "on the balance of probabilities", so it is a matter of who he believes, you or the CEO who will not be at the adjudication, or, indeed, any other council staff either. Councils make such huge sums from PCN penalties, they just never attend and are prepared to lose adjudications because >95% of people just cough-up when they get the PCN.
An adjudication is nothing to be scared of, but of course there is no discount option.
-
Could you explain please what you mean by "the activities encompassed within the loading exemption".
Also even if various activities have been confirmed as valid in previous adjudications, what if they are not OBSERVED in those 5 minutes? (even if they were taking place and evidence later supplied)
Thank you
-
Maybe try to emphasise more strongly the council's complete lack of knowledge of the activities encompassed within the loading exemption. Activities which have been confirmed as valid at adjudications going back decades to the original 1991 legislation.
-
So it looks like they didn'yt notice that I was 3 days late. And I have now received a Notice of Rejection of Representations - rejected not for being 3 days late but because they still insist I was not loading when I was! They are still ignoring the evidence: "Your vehicle was observed for 5 minutes with no loading or unloading observed"
I attach the NOR. I'd like to appeal to adjudicator.
Do I simply repeat what I said in my original appeal or should I add more?
(https://i.imgur.com/7tu7NG1.jpeg)(https://i.imgur.com/tsoFr6E.jpeg)(https://i.imgur.com/TCj6hAY.jpeg)
-
Their power is to disregard late reps, NOTHING to do with payment.
Get something in ASP. You don't have time for refinement.
-
Nooo! It says the fine is going up on 20th Nov so I thought that was my deadline. Shall I still submit? (and if so using which grounds)
-
What?
Date of NTO 17 Oct.
Deemed date of service 21 Oct.
Last day of 28-day period 17 Nov.
You're late already.
-
Am going to submit it tonight, before it goes up tomorrow - Which statutory grounds (listed on the NTO) should I select?
-
Absurd was the very word used by the court, but in a slightly different context.
IMO, you should make more of their statement:
I have noted your comments and proof. I can advise that the PCN was issued as the vehicle was seen parked in a loading bay without active loading being seen.
The courts have already determined that loading/unloading and delivering/collecting fall within the same umbrella term 'loading' and may in part take place away from the vehicle. Indeed, they commented on the absurdity of interpretations such as that applied by your authority because unloading is simply the preliminary activity to delivering and vice-versa i.e. collecting preliminary to loading. Being away from the vehicle is permitted and the authority should apply the correct frame of reference. If officers are in doubt then they should take advice from their legal officers.
-
This is absurd. I won a case re this nonsense re timings very recently for chaseman.
-
Looks OK, and bear in mind they will reject anything you say anyway, so be prepared to take them to London Tribunals. The penalty does not increase and there are no additional charges.
-
Ok so I have drafted something. Would the following be ok? Please feel free to amend!
Also which statutory grounds (listed on the NTO) should I select?
Dear Sir or Madam, On 10th September I bought a rug from a carpet shop in Lewisham. Because the rug was large & heavy when rolled up, I went & got the car and parked in the loading bay in front. I went in to get it and one of the carpet shop guys helped me carry it out & load it into my car. However by the time we got to the car with it, I had a ticket. Contravention 25 “Parked in a loading place during restricted hours without loading”
I appealed the PCN that evening. In my appeal, I explained I was loading. The carpet shop wrote me a note to confirm that I was indeed collecting a rug, which I attached. The manager gave her name and confirmed that Lewisham Council can call her at the carpet shop to confirm. I therefore wrote in my appeal that Lewisham Council are welcome to call the carpet shop to confirm that I was loading, and I attached one of their business cards.
However I have received a rejection, which said:
“I have noted your comments and proof. I can advise that the PCN was issued as the vehicle was seen parked in a loading bay without active loading being seen.”
Given that I supplied evidence from the carpet shop – and even suggested that you might call the carpet shop for confirmation that I was loading – I believe that this amounts to failure to consider evidence.
Furthermore I believe there was procedural impropriety in the process because on 14th October Lewisham Council threatened to serve a charge certificate, before I had even received a Notice to Owner. (I attach screenshots from Lewisham Council’s website on 14th October which stated, in a red box “The amount outstanding on the Penalty Charge Notice will increase to £195 very soon. Please pay £65 now”)
On 16th October, the message in this red box changed to “The amount outstanding on the Penalty Charge Notice will increase to £195 very soon. Please pay £130 now”
The next day, on 17th October, that red box was yellow instead of red and stated “The amount outstanding on the Penalty Charge Notice will increase to £195 on Wed 20th Nov 2024. Please pay £130 now”
This red box flagging, on the official website, that the fine was going to be increased to £195 “very soon” was inaccurate because in reality a penalty can only be increased by 50% upon the issuing of a Notice to Owner. It gave me a false sense of panic and on reflection I feel it was an abuse of statutory process.
I also note that, on each screenshot there is a blue box which states “You have already challenged this PCN and we replied on Wed 18 Sep 2024. You cannot challenge twice” I have two things to say about this.
First I feel that saying “you cannot challenge twice” is misleading because in actual fact there *is* the opportunity to challenge again - after receiving a Notice to Owner. This is particularly egregious when coupled with threats to increase the fine to £195 “very soon” before any Notice to Owner has even been received.
Secondly, in the blue box Lewisham states that they replied on Wed 18 Sep 2024. This is incorrect. I did not receive a reply until 27th September 2024. Indeed Lewisham’s own letter is dated 27/09/24.
Finally, quite apart from the fact that I was loading, this technically is not a ‘loading bay’ – you cannot have a yellow line within a 24/7 so-called loading bay.
-
You must make representations to the NTO or pay. If you do nothing you'll be chucking a lot of money away.
+1
-
You must make representations to the NTO or pay. If you do nothing you'll be chucking a lot of money away.
-
Should I do something now or should I wait for this 'charge certificate'?
-
So the Notice to Owner arrived on 17th Oct. Here is is:
(https://i.imgur.com/P8zj0X6.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/US2JvPz.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/qBRlFPr.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/WSDvdQr.jpg)
What should I do now???
-
Yup
-
The dates show that the owner will receive a Notice to Owner very soon because it's been posted.
If you're the registered keeper then sit tight, it'll be plopping onto a mat near you soon.
Are you the registered keeper with current DVLA records?
-
On 14th & 15th October the fine remained at £65 (and the box saying it would go up to £195 on 14th Oct changed, so it now said it would go up to £195 "very soon")
Then on 16th October the fine increased to £130 (and the message in the box said "The amount outstanding on the PCN will increase to £195 very soon. Please pay £130 now.") See here: (https://i.imgur.com/UuAoce3.png)
Now today (Oct 17th) the box says "The amount outstanding on the PCN will increase to £195 on 20th Nov. Please pay £130 now" See here: (https://i.imgur.com/VcCztmY.png)
Does this help my case?
Do I still sit tight and wait for the Notice to Owner?
-
So shall I check on Monday (14th) to see if it goes up?
You can and take a screenshot too.
-
So shall I check on Monday (14th) to see if it goes up?
-
Okay, will do.
Just so I know, is a 'charge certificate' the same as 'Notice to Owner'?
(apologies if this is a silly question)
https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/understanding-enforcement-process/parking-penalty-charge-notice-enforcement-process
The process explained. If they issue an increase on 14th, then this will constitute an abuse of the statutory process - many councils do this believe it or not.
-
Okay, will do.
Just so I know, is a 'charge certificate' the same as 'Notice to Owner'?
(apologies if this is a silly question)
No it isn't, they are two separate statutory documents.
If a PCN is served at the roadside to a car or the driver, and the recipient does not pay it, or submit representations, the council are entitled to serve a Notice to Owner on the keeper of the vehicle as recorded by DVLA, and which is shown on the V5C. This is because under the legislation, the owner of the vehicle has legal responsibility for paying or appealing the PCN. If nothing is paid when a Notice to Owner is served, the council can then serve a Charge Certificate. This increases the penalty by 50% and cannot be appealed, only paid.
-
what if NTO disappears in post and only the Charge Certificate arrives?
they mail these PCNs without tracking and then claim it was dispatched at a certain date...
-
Okay, will do.
Just so I know, is a 'charge certificate' the same as 'Notice to Owner'?
(apologies if this is a silly question)
-
Just wait for the NTO and do nothing. If they issue a Charge Certificate , get back to us.
-
I’m not sure what a ‘charge certificate’ is but you are correct that I have not received a Notice to Owner. In fact their letter says that if I wish to contest further I should wait for a NTO (which will be sent if no payment received)
So what should I do now? Should I wait for the NTO, or write something now?
-
And it isn't a 'loading bay' - you cannot have a yellow line within a 24/7 so-called loading bay.
-
Excellent! They are threatening to serve a charge certificate on 14th and you have not received a Notice to Owner yet if I am correct?
-
Ok here you go - screenshots from their website:
(https://i.imgur.com/1J3iSbL.png) (https://i.imgur.com/uHG2jDz.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/RXyaFiv.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/JIB0nH4.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/TPLAViF.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/Gz7tFzm.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/g1E5okK.jpg)
-
Homework: log onto their website and see what it says and report back please.
-
Last month I bought a rug from a carpet shop in Lewisham. Because the rug was large & heavy when rolled up, I went & got the car and parked in the loading bay in front. I went in to get it and one of the carpet shop guys helped me carry it out & load it into my car. Definitely ‘loading’. However by the time we got to the car with it, I had a ticket. Contravention 25 “Parked in a loading place during restricted hours without loading”
I appealed the PCN. In my appeal, I explained I was loading. The carpet shop wrote me a note to confirm that I was indeed collecting a rug, which I attached. It was not an invoice because I paid cash in hand (shh) but the manager gave his name and confirmed that they can call him at the carpet shop to confirm. I therefore wrote in my appeal that Lewisham Council are welcome to call the carpet shop to confirm this, and I attached one of their business cards.
However I have received a rejection, which says:
I have noted your comments and investigated the evidence gathered by the Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) at the time of the contravention. I am satisfied that the PCN was issued correctly and there are no grounds for the cancellation of it. This letter is issued as a rejection of your challenge.
I understand you stated you were loading/unloading when the contravention took place.
I have noted your comments and proof. I can advise that the PCN was issued as the vehicle was seen parked in a loading bay without active loading being seen. The sign says 'loading only' and pictures a person pushing a trolley. The issuing Civil Enforcement Officer observed your vehicle and during the observation period saw no loading / unloading taking place. Once loading / unloading has been carried out, the vehicle should be moved straight away, time is not allowed to unpack or install the goods delivered. The issuing officer observed the vehicle for more than 5 minutes and saw no driver or loading / unloading taking place.
Is this correct – that even if you WERE loading, it is still a contravention if the enforcement officer does not SEE you loading?
And/or I suspect they did not call the carpet shop to confirm - do I have a case based on failure to consider?
If the consensus is that there is no point in fighting this, then I would like to pay by Friday because they emailed me their rejection on 27th September and they say We will accept the reduced payment at £65 as full and final settlement if the payment is received within 14 days from the date of this letter. Regrettably, if the payment is not received within 14 days, the full amount of £130 will be due.
Thank you
(https://i.imgur.com/ysNOmjq.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/p6qtp8X.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/DnJ93cW.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/h73nOEs.jpg)
https://maps.app.goo.gl/UdDCzGqc26tVzajJ6
https://maps.app.goo.gl/4USVRhMHddYNn5KK9