I would make a very simple challenge to the notice to owner:Dear Peterborough City Council,
I challenge liability for this penalty charge because the alleged contravention did not occur. This is because there was no adequate signage either in the vicinity of my vehicle, or on my route out of the car park.
Yours faithfully,
I'm happy to represent you at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal when they reject.
I would make a very simple challenge to the notice to owner:Dear Peterborough City Council,
I challenge liability for this penalty charge because the alleged contravention did not occur. This is because there was no adequate signage either in the vicinity of my vehicle, or on my route out of the car park.
Yours faithfully,
I'm happy to represent you at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal when they reject.
I have obtained the council's email address, and I plan to send an email this evening.The council's email address is on page 3 of the notice to owner, so I'm not sure why you say you have "obtained" it?
She also mentioned that appeals wouldn't be considered, as fines for parking in such spaces without charging an electric vehicle are uniform across the UK.If the council confirmed that in writing (i.e. that appeals won't be considered), you'd have an instant win. Frankly they sound so disorganised that they might just do that.
I have obtained the council's email address, and I plan to send an email this evening.The council's email address is on page 3 of the notice to owner, so I'm not sure why you say you have "obtained" it?
In my initial appeal, I clearly stated that my car was charged after the first 25 minutes
That is the discrepancy or perhaps better word is ambiguity....
You meant that you started charging after 25 minutes
The council and TBH myself, read it that charging was complete after 25 minutes
Typical of council muppets re the T&C board but it may help with appeal.
The T&C board is critical insofar as the fine detail is concerned.
If the council cannot/will not supply a copy there is a hole in their evidence
OP, I made the point earlier that the sign in the bay is specified for on-street use only.
Others have made the point that the effect of this sign and the fact that failure to comply could result in the imposition of a penalty charge must be conveyed clearly at the site.
You were asked to obtain photos of these signs, but we haven't seen any.
The council say their noticeboards carry this info but have not provided photos.
The order can say what it likes, but unless the effects of failure to comply with the order are displayed clearly at the site then its provisions are of no effect, this is not a guessing game.
You have the NTO. The last day of the 28-day period is 11 October, not 12th as stated in brackets in the body of the NTO.
Why don't you contact the council, refer to their reply to your informal reps and ask them for a photo of what it is they say conveys the effect of the on-street traffic sign in the Ts and Cs of use of the car park.
I note that reference has been made to the discount being re-offered if reps are submitted within 14 days, however, there's no reference to this in the NTO(although we've only seen the front page, pl post the remainder). IMO, it would be a breach of the council's public law duty to act fairly if they were to offer the discount contingent upon a policy condition which has not been brought to the owner's attention. As I said above, this is not a guessing game. They may offer the discount in the event of unsuccessful reps whenever they're submitted, this is the exercise of discretion and perfectly fine.
IMO, you need details of the signs and the Ts and Cs and should make an effort to obtain these before
QuoteSince I was in a hurry, I planned to charge my car on my way back, assuming I was paying for parking anyway.QuoteIn my initial appeal, I clearly stated that my car was charged after the first 25 minutes, to which they responded that the vehicle could have been moved to a regular parking bay if it had finished charging.
I'm a little concerned on the apparent disparity between the two statements above?
We haven't seen them but I assume that the CEO pics will show your car unplugged?
IMO, it would be a breach of the council's public law duty to act fairly if they were to offer the discount contingent upon a policy condition which has not been brought to the owner's attention. As I said above, this is not a guessing game. They may offer the discount in the event of unsuccessful reps whenever they're submitted, this is the exercise of discretion and perfectly fine.
IMO, you need details of the signs and the Ts and Cs and should make an effort to obtain these before
Since I was in a hurry, I planned to charge my car on my way back, assuming I was paying for parking anyway.
In my initial appeal, I clearly stated that my car was charged after the first 25 minutes, to which they responded that the vehicle could have been moved to a regular parking bay if it had finished charging.
.............
@ Cp8759, thank you for your time in helping fellow drivers.
The order doesn't explicitly states that the electric car must be charged at ALL times when parked in the space. However, if this condition was included in the order without clear signage in the car park indicating the fine, how does the council expect drivers to understand and comply with this requirement?
Use of Electric Vehicle Parking Places
5B.1 A Driver of a Vehicle Waiting in an Electric Vehicle Parking Place must have:
• a valid Ticket, a valid Permit or have made Electronic Payment for the whole
time that the Vehicle is Waiting during the Charging Hours.
• Connected to the recharging point and confirmed the payment for the electric
Recharging to take place
The order doesn't explicitly states that the electric car must be charged at ALL times when parked in the space. However, if this condition was included in the order without clear signage in the car park indicating the fine, how does the council expect drivers to understand and comply with this requirement?I doubt they've given that much thought to how drivers are meant to find out about this requirement.
Is the address on your V5 for the vehicle correct ?
I'm a bit confused with your message "formal rejection letter" since the council has already responded in email.It's an informal rejection, you have to wait for the Notice to Owner, make representations against that, and only at that stage you get a formal Notice of Rejection. It's that notice that gives you the right to appeal to the tribunal.
CP has requested the order, there is a chance that it doesn't mandate charging. That's a winner. But thats not a particularly high chance.Actually in most cases we've had so far, there was no requirement for charging. Remember we had one on-street bay where the order didn't exist at all, and Mr Greenslade even awarded costs against the council. At worst, it's 50 / 50 that the order mandates charging, and these small provincial councils are more likely to make a hash of things.
I hate to be negative but unless someone comes up with a technical argument, I reckon grabbing the discount is a good option.
This is akin to parking in a pay and display parking area, not paying while you did whatever and then arguing that paying after the event somehow unwound the contravention.
A condition of using a charging bay is that you are charging the vehicle, not that you intended to or indeed did so later.
It matters not that others may connect without charging or remain in the bay after charging, they will or will not be copped and are totally irrelevant to this case
As long as you challenge the Notice to Owner within 14 days of the date of issue, virtually every council in the country will re-offer the discount, the only known exception is Nottingham City Council.
I would therefore hold out, if nothing else by the time you get the formal rejection, we should have the parking places order and we'll know if it's worth risking the full amount at the tribunal.
In the meantime, please show us the images from the entrance that you've mentioned.