Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Jamran on January 26, 2025, 12:41:30 am

Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on September 12, 2025, 10:11:56 am
28 days beginning on date you were notified was therefore 8 Sept.

The CC was served correctly and, as per cp, no grounds are available to you under a Witness Statement(not, SD as this is a parking contravention).
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on September 12, 2025, 08:52:50 am
Quote from: H C Andersen on September 12, 2025, 08:17:58 am
The email included an attachment which had the following text:

Date of email pl.

12th August
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on September 12, 2025, 08:17:58 am
The email included an attachment which had the following text:

Date of email pl.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: cp8759 on September 11, 2025, 11:05:00 pm
Quote from: Jamran on September 11, 2025, 10:54:29 pm
I was told a statutory declaration may work? Is that true?
No, as you have no grounds for making a statutory declaration, and making a false statutory declaration can result in a much larger fine as well as a tribunal costs order. Unfortunately when the adjudicator ordered you to pay within 28 days, he really meant it.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on September 11, 2025, 10:54:29 pm
Quote from: cp8759 on September 11, 2025, 10:24:11 pm
Quote from: Jamran on September 11, 2025, 04:29:26 pm
Yes I was told the decision by the adjudicator and then email sent to me.

The email included an attachment which had the following text:

The adjudicator, having considered the evidence submitted by the parties, has determined that the appeal against liability for the charge should be refused.

The reasons for the adjudicator's decision are enclosed.

The full penalty charge must be paid within 28 days to:
London Borough of Tower Hamlets
PO Box 14790
LONDON
E14 2WA

If you do not pay the Enforcement Authority can issue a Charge certificate increasing the full penalty charge by a further 50%.

So, the adjudicator ordered you to pay the penalty and you ignored that order, and now you suffer the consequences. If you didn't read the email, or didn't open or read the attachment, I'm sorry to say but that's on you.

If you don't pay within the 14 day period the council will register the debt for enforcement and this will incur a further £10 charge.

Thanks for your reply. I didn’t ignore it. I was anticipating tower hamlets to send a letter as they usually have done  after they lost an appeal at adjudicator. I also had a lot going on. I am not trying to blame anyone and accept it’s on me. I am trying to find out if I can get them to accept £130. I was told a statutory declaration may work? Is that true?
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: cp8759 on September 11, 2025, 10:24:11 pm
Quote from: Jamran on September 11, 2025, 04:29:26 pm
Yes I was told the decision by the adjudicator and then email sent to me.

The email included an attachment which had the following text:

The adjudicator, having considered the evidence submitted by the parties, has determined that the appeal against liability for the charge should be refused.

The reasons for the adjudicator's decision are enclosed.

The full penalty charge must be paid within 28 days to:
London Borough of Tower Hamlets
PO Box 14790
LONDON
E14 2WA

If you do not pay the Enforcement Authority can issue a Charge certificate increasing the full penalty charge by a further 50%.

So, the adjudicator ordered you to pay the penalty and you ignored that order, and now you suffer the consequences. If you didn't read the email, or didn't open or read the attachment, I'm sorry to say but that's on you.

If you don't pay within the 14 day period the council will register the debt for enforcement and this will incur a further £10 charge.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on September 11, 2025, 07:12:39 pm
The decision included a direction to 'pay the penalty above [that is £130) within 28 days.'

You would not receive any further notification from the authority as none was required procedurally. That you did not know this doesn't change matters.

Pay the charge within the 14-day period or risk further escalation.

Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on September 11, 2025, 04:29:26 pm
Yes I was told the decision by the adjudicator and then email sent to me.

It was via phone.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Enceladus on September 11, 2025, 04:27:54 pm
You attended the hearing either in person or my likely by phone?

When was the heading?

Were you told the adjudicator's decision at the hearing?
If you were were then that's when the clock started ticking.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on September 11, 2025, 02:05:40 pm
Hi everyone. I had a lot going on and thought I would receive a letter from TH informing me about the outcome and demanding payment. When this didn’t arrive I checked to pay today and see that 28 days had elapsed on 9th Sept. I assumed there would be additional days added as there usually is. Is that the case? I got the charge certificate through the post today demanding £195. Do I have any chance to get this back to the original amount of £130. The adjudicator decision was recieved via email dated 15th August

Charge certificate:  https://share.icloud.com/photos/054uvW2fUW6BztxdyNtVnYBHw
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: cp8759 on August 12, 2025, 04:10:31 pm
Jamran an appeal is a legal process and the adjudicator cannot give legal advice to either side: it's up to you to present your case, it's not the adjudicator's job to help you (she would hardly be impartial if she did).

If your position was that the vehicle was hit by someone and thus moved, a legal ground of appeal would have been the the vehicle was placed there without the consent of the owner, but it's far too late to go back and argue that now.  Another argument would have been that the vehicle was legally parked with a blue badge and the removal of the blue badge by an unauthorised third party does not amount to a contravention within the meaning of the regulations, but again it's far too late to go back and argue that now.

As noted by Hippocrates, the fact of this case as explained on this threat don't really stack up and nobody here knows what you said during the hearing. All I can say is that deciding to represent yourself in what was a weak case to begin with was probably not a good idea.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on August 12, 2025, 03:09:01 pm
Basically she leaned onto the fact the contravention occurred when the CEO issued the ticket so the EA did not do anything wrong or procedurally inappropriate. Burden of proof is on me to show otherwise. I explained to her they didn’t tell me what was “sufficient evidence” and the cards are stacked against me as the only move I can take is to pay up or go to adjudication. How is that fair? They didn’t give me an opportunity at appeal stage to provide them with whatever the “sufficient” evidence is and now at this stage you’re saying you can’t do anything as they issued the PCN correctly at the time. So how’s that fair on the motorist? Additionally, I’m yet to see what sufficient evidence is. She basically said that’s all discretionary and she can’t do anything at this stage.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on August 12, 2025, 03:02:38 pm
Quote from: Jamran on August 12, 2025, 02:57:55 pm
Is that it or can I appeal it further?

The criteria for a review are rather stringent. There are too many disconnects in this case and we don't really know what you said in your appeal, and hearing.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on August 12, 2025, 02:57:55 pm
Is that it or can I appeal it further?
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on August 12, 2025, 02:09:49 pm
'It is the Appellant's case that no contravention occurred.'

How and why the adjudicator morphed this into 'mitigation', I've no idea.

IMO, if the adjudicator believed that a valid BB had been displayed correctly within the limits applicable to waiting on SYL then they could have found for the appellant under 'penalty exceeded....circumstances of the case'
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: stamfordman on August 12, 2025, 12:24:18 pm
Adjudicators do make recommendations to cancel parking PCNs usually when they see compelling mitigation ignored by authorities. I don't think this case was at that level.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: cp8759 on August 12, 2025, 11:40:05 am
Outcome (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_CFARa556rcxLIeVF36CbiOYDM-b3QTh/view).

Quote
The matters raised by the appellant amount to mitigating circumstances, which have already been considered by the EA. They do not amount to a ground of appeal, or an exemption. An Adjudicator has no power to consider mitigation as decided by the Court of Appeal in Walmsley v Transport for London [2005] EWCA Civ 1540.

Many litigants in person get this in their decisions, and this is a good illustration of why it's really advisable to seek representation especially in tricky cases. We are far from infallible, but at least none of us put mitigation to the adjudicator.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: mrmustard on August 12, 2025, 08:49:21 am
Unbeatable PCNs are beatable and I have lost unloseable cases.

The ebst chance for a poor case is that the council decide to DNC (do not contest it).
A 50% gamble though.

The council had to pay a £30 tribunal fee. They hate those.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on August 12, 2025, 08:45:39 am
Well, this has not been an easy thread but at least @Jamran tried.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: mrmustard on August 12, 2025, 07:47:42 am
2250258476    

    This is an appeal by Mr Khan (the Appellant) against a penalty charge notice (PCN) issued by the Enforcement Authority (EA) for parking in a restricted street during prohibited hours.
    This was decided at a video hearing.
    The EA states the Appellant’s vehicle was parked in Warley Street on 27 December 2024 at 09:33 hours. They state that the yellow line restrictions at the location apply from Monday to Friday 08:30 hours to 17:30 hours. The Civil Enforcement Officer’s (the CEO) evidence states that the PCN was issued after observing the vehicle parked with no activity between 09:28 hours to 09:33 hours. The CEO’s contemporaneous notes also state that they looked for a Blue Badge and none could be seen.
    The EA has produced photographic evidence of the vehicle and the PCN affixed to the vehicle. They have also produced correspondence with the Appellant dated 23 January 2025 and 29 April 2025.
    It is the Appellant’s case that no contravention occurred. In their representations the Appellant stated that their mother is a Blue Badge holder, of which they have provided evidence, and resides with the Appellant. They state that the Blue Badge was displayed correctly on the dashboard when they parked the car, but that the car was hit in the rear and the Blue Badge was displaced and fell on the floor. The Appellant has provided an invoice dated 12 April 2025 in relation to the repair of the damage caused.
    The Appellant further asserts that it is unfair that the discounted penalty was not reoffered with the Notice to Owner, which they consider is procedural impropriety.
    I am satisfied from the evidence that the contravention did occur. The Appellant’s vehicle was parked with no activity, and no Blue Badge was displayed on the vehicle.
    I further find that the EA has responded to the Appellant within the appropriate timescales and there has been no procedural impropriety on their part. The photographic evidence taken by the CEO when they issued the PCN shows the PCN affixed to the Appellant’s vehicle and therefore the PCN was served for the purposes of Regulation 9 of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022. The EA also extended the time for paying the discounted penalty on 23 January 2025 in their Notice of Rejection. In any event, I find that there is no requirement on the EA to offer the discounted penalty for any period beyond the time indicated in the PCN.
    The matters raised by the appellant amount to mitigating circumstances, which have already been considered by the EA. They do not amount to a ground of appeal, or an exemption. An Adjudicator has no power to consider mitigation as decided by the Court of Appeal in Walmsley v Transport for London [2005] EWCA Civ 1540.
    I therefore refuse the appeal and find that the penalty charge is payable.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on August 11, 2025, 05:14:54 pm
I'll send the number to @cp8759 tomorrow when it is published and he will do the honours.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on August 11, 2025, 05:12:11 pm
Quote from: Hippocrates on August 11, 2025, 05:09:42 pm
The 16.15 hrs one?

Yes
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on August 11, 2025, 05:09:42 pm
The 16.15 hrs one?
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on August 11, 2025, 04:39:25 pm
Just got off the meeting with adjudicator. Sadly, I lost the appeal. I’ll update the post with the decision asap. Really frustrating
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on August 10, 2025, 09:55:03 pm
LT hearing tomorrow. Wish me luck! Any further advice would be much appreciated.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Incandescent on May 04, 2025, 10:14:44 pm
Quote from: Jamran on May 04, 2025, 09:43:18 pm
Does anyone have advice on whether I have a chance with the adjudicator please?
As you asked in your initial post, "do I have a chance", I would say yes, because when you parked you did what you were required to do. However, we can never predict what an adjudicator will decide, so it would be something of a gamble. The adjudicator decides on the civil law test of "the balance of probabilities", therefore your appeal narrative must be credible.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on May 04, 2025, 09:43:18 pm
Does anyone have advice on whether I have a chance with the adjudicator please?
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on April 30, 2025, 10:49:37 pm
Quote from: stamfordman on April 30, 2025, 10:43:07 pm
It's pointless getting upset about something as mundane as a PCN and we give our time for free.

Anyway you have a choice - pay £65 or punt the full £130 at the tribunal, where you may win provided the adjudicator finds you and your evidence credible.

This is why people love a space like this as it’s welcoming and helpful. It becomes distasteful when it comes across as unhelpful and spiteful. Almost feels like they don’t want you to win. The points about the parking for 3 hours etc was completely irrelevant to the case at hand but as with my previous interaction with them, they’re on the prowl trying find ways to discredit me or the case.

Anyway, I apologise for going off topic to everyone.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: stamfordman on April 30, 2025, 10:43:07 pm
It's pointless getting upset about something as mundane as a PCN and we give our time for free.

Anyway you have a choice - pay £65 or punt the full £130 at the tribunal, where you may win provided the adjudicator finds you and your evidence credible.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Incandescent on April 30, 2025, 10:34:39 pm
Don't write this then -
"Please don’t start your BS inquisitions again."

HCA has a wealth of knowledge and whilst he can be acerbic, it is important to tease out all the circumstances so that a win becomes more likely than not.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on April 30, 2025, 10:30:39 pm
Quote from: Incandescent on April 30, 2025, 10:12:51 pm
Quote from: H C Andersen on April 30, 2025, 08:47:17 pm
Message received loud and clear.

I'm out.
and me

My post wasn’t directed at you or anyone else other than HC Anderson. I’ve had interactions with them previously on other posts and they’ve always come across as vindictive and difficult, always behaving like the case isn’t winnable. Those PCNs ended up being cancelled even though Anderson made out like it’s impossible constantly throwing curveballs for no reason. This is why I said “BS inquisitions”, because that’s what they did the last time I had dealings with them. Hope that clears it for everyone.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Incandescent on April 30, 2025, 10:12:51 pm
Quote from: H C Andersen on April 30, 2025, 08:47:17 pm
Message received loud and clear.

I'm out.
and me
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on April 30, 2025, 08:47:17 pm
Message received loud and clear.

I'm out.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on April 30, 2025, 08:33:07 pm
I’ve lost you in all the waffling. Point is the car was parked legally. It’s her badge, she was in the car. Only reason we parked there was there were no permit bays available at the time. Once one was available the car was moved. Please don’t start your BS inquisitions again. Tbh I’d rather you not even comment on this post.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on April 30, 2025, 08:29:58 pm
I think you need to refine this line.

A BB may not be used to 'park' a vehicle on a waiting restriction. It may wait for up to 3 hours and then not return for 1 hour:

Where the period of the prohibition exceeds 3 hours the exemption shall be for a period of 3 hours subject to the conditions that

a)the period of exempted waiting does not begin less than one hour after a previous period of exempted waiting by the same vehicle in the same road on the same day;

(b)a parking disc is displayed in the relevant position on the vehicle marked to show the quarter hour period during which the period of exempted waiting began.


 It's a temporary exemption from the restriction. When you say 'outside your house' this implies a degree of extended waiting, AKA parking, which is not permitted.

If the car was used to bring her to the house then unless it was to be used to transport her within the 3-hour period it had to be moved.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on April 30, 2025, 06:11:01 pm
The badge belongs to my mother. The vehicle was parked outside our house, therefore parked legally. My mother lives with me. They are simply insinuating the badge was used illegally. All of which can be proven.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on April 30, 2025, 04:29:22 pm
..and

The contravention alleged is: 'Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours.'

IMO, their reply has added another dimension to the above as I'm assuming that you (OP) provided a copy of the BB with your representations from which they deduced that the badge did not belong to you.

IMO, your first task, should you decide to appeal, would be to convince the adjudicator that the badge was being used properly. Nothing in this thread touches on this but I think you need to address the implication.*


*- which is that if you were not using the BB validly which would mean that, clock or not, the contravention would be established.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: mrmustard on April 30, 2025, 03:46:09 pm
I decided vehicle damage wouldn't convince an adjudicator so stepped away.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: stamfordman on April 30, 2025, 03:43:34 pm
Is Mr Mustard still on the case. But if you go to the tribunal the adjudicator will need to hear you in person/video.

They are reoffering the discount.

They say it's not your BB?

(https://i.ibb.co/J0T2bGq/image.png)
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on April 30, 2025, 01:55:15 pm
Just recieved a response for my formal challenge. They rejected it! Please find the letter attached.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Enceladus on March 31, 2025, 02:41:02 pm
My apologies. Looks like I misread the date of the NTO as being 28/02/2025 when it was actually 26/02/2025.

In my defence I did also advise how to calculate the date. "IE 28 days beginning with the date of service of the NTO. The date of service is deemed to be the 2nd working day after the date of posting. The date of posting should be the same is the date of issue."

It's always best to double check these things for yourself.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on March 31, 2025, 01:09:35 pm
Yes I did it last night. Sadly, I followed the advice here that I had until today to submit.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on March 31, 2025, 10:33:49 am
I don't know. They are not obliged to consider reps. received after the 28 day period. I trust you did this last night.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on March 30, 2025, 11:28:40 pm
So it’s not 31st March?!

Will I be ok?

Also, can I add the point about them wanting the full amount and not offering the discounted rate again?
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on March 30, 2025, 09:18:30 pm
Their website seems to be okay. I cannot open your previous challenge but I suggest you reiterate it with evidence of the damage. Thy must consider. By my reckoning you are past the 28 days so I would do this pronto tonight online . It still shows £130. 27th March was deadline.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on March 28, 2025, 03:48:33 pm
Bump
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on March 27, 2025, 12:17:52 am
Please find NTO attached

https://share.icloud.com/photos/00fAOTXlVMeA_d_ULkPop6hQA

Thanks
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on March 26, 2025, 08:52:49 pm
Please the whole of the NTO.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on March 25, 2025, 08:13:05 pm
Tomorrow is possible for me.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on March 24, 2025, 10:10:46 pm
Sorry but I have this virus going around at present and have a Tribunal case tomorrow.  I will try to get back tomorrow evening.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on March 24, 2025, 01:30:31 pm
Can someone assist me with write up of the appeal please? Or even the points that Hippocrates has raised?
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on March 10, 2025, 10:30:13 am
Quote from: Jamran on March 09, 2025, 11:34:58 pm
Hippocrates isn’t responding. Could you anyone else assist with the points they raised please? Deadline is this week
Thanks for the PM. I will take a look at their website later today.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on March 10, 2025, 05:44:35 am
thank you
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Enceladus on March 10, 2025, 12:25:00 am
Don't panic, I imagine he'll be along soon.
I calculate your deadline date, the date by which a formal representation must be delivered to the Council, as being Monday 31st March.

IE 28 days beginning with the date of service of the NTO. The date of service is deemed to be the 2nd working day after the date of posting. The date of posting should be the same is the date of issue.
 
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on March 09, 2025, 11:34:58 pm
Hippocrates isn’t responding. Could you anyone else assist with the points they raised please? Deadline is this week
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on March 05, 2025, 04:42:27 pm
Quote from: Hippocrates on February 08, 2025, 07:31:51 pm
I see the NtO has been sent and they want the full amount now and later. There's an issue with their website as no grounds are available. We have won cases on this.

Thank you. Could you assist in writing up the representation please? Not sure exactly how to articulate those two points you’ve raised.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on March 05, 2025, 04:32:53 pm
Here’s the NtO attached

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Hippocrates on February 08, 2025, 07:31:51 pm
I see the NtO has been sent and they want the full amount now and later. There's an issue with their website as no grounds are available. We have won cases on this.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on February 08, 2025, 05:42:09 pm
Thank you for your response. Much appreciated
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Incandescent on February 07, 2025, 05:37:12 pm
Quote from: Jamran on February 04, 2025, 03:03:36 am
I’m asking for advice whether I have a chance or not. Not if you’re willing to fight the case for me. If anyone could provide some advice I’d appreciate it
You have a chance, as I said before, but it is not a slam-dunk win, so really it is up to you whether you take them all the way or not. First you have to wait for the Notice to Owner, submit reps against that, then, when rejected, register an appeal at London Tribunals.  Of course they may accept your reps at the NtO stage. Informal challenges are almost all rejected by councils because they know that most people then just cough-up. So they keep the cash coming in.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on February 07, 2025, 04:10:15 pm
Bump
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on February 04, 2025, 03:03:36 am
I’m asking for advice whether I have a chance or not. Not if you’re willing to fight the case for me. If anyone could provide some advice I’d appreciate it
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: mrmustard on February 03, 2025, 06:53:52 am
Agreed. I am not taking up fighting this pcn
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on February 03, 2025, 02:50:03 am
Any other advice from someone please?
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on January 29, 2025, 06:52:00 pm
Perceived shortcomings in a response to informal reps carry relative little weight in this procedure (in fact the regs don't even require a written response), it's the response to formal reps which is mandated.

So, if you highlight their response in formal reps then IMO you invite them to cover their tracks and their backs in their response. And if you don't and the same shortcomings are not apparent in any NOR then an adjudicator won't attach much weight to an argument you advance in an appeal which wasn't advanced in formal reps.

So you'd have to include in formal reps and hope they just dismiss/pooh-pooh.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on January 29, 2025, 05:06:45 pm
Quote from: H C Andersen on January 28, 2025, 05:17:25 pm
If you want to argue this point then I suggest you dig out any contemporaneous evidence as to the car's condition before the PCN was issued.

As regards their consideration of your reps and their policies, these are different matters.

I think their response, or lack of it, should be the focus of the reps rather than proving without doubt that the car being hit causes the badge to fall. Or am I mistaken?
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on January 28, 2025, 05:17:25 pm
If you want to argue this point then I suggest you dig out any contemporaneous evidence as to the car's condition before the PCN was issued.

As regards their consideration of your reps and their policies, these are different matters.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on January 28, 2025, 05:04:32 pm
I don’t know if you have been hit while sat stationary in a car. The jolt is enough to move a human. So to say it’s not enough to take a piece of plastic off the dash is naive. I don’t know what you were expecting? The whole bumper coming off? Lol

Additionally, the point is how TH responded. Providing no explanation why they cannot apply discretion or what their cancellation policy states.

Maybe someone can explain further if that has any merit.

Thanks
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on January 28, 2025, 05:02:24 pm
How is that scuff? The bottom part of the bumper has come off partially. I pushed it back in but even then you can see it’s open.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Incandescent on January 28, 2025, 04:06:55 pm
Quote from: H C Andersen on January 28, 2025, 03:46:56 pm
Sorry, but these are scuffs and scrapes. There's no distortion of the fundamental shapes of these parts. I'm 99.9999% certain that an adjudicator is not going to be convinced that this was the damage made in a collision with another car sufficient to displace a BB.

But it's your choice.
Well, do remember that these plastic bumper covers can take quite a knock and then spring back just leaving paint damage.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: mrmustard on January 28, 2025, 03:57:31 pm
I'm inclined to agree.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on January 28, 2025, 03:46:56 pm
Sorry, but these are scuffs and scrapes. There's no distortion of the fundamental shapes of these parts. I'm 99.9999% certain that an adjudicator is not going to be convinced that this was the damage made in a collision with another car sufficient to displace a BB.

But it's your choice.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on January 28, 2025, 03:17:47 pm
Here are the images of the damage

https://imgur.com/a/dX5has3
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: mrmustard on January 28, 2025, 09:42:49 am
I helped this motorist last year. He is now in touch with me again. I will update in due course.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: mrmustard on January 28, 2025, 08:37:37 am
Are the damage photos about to be shown to us?
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on January 28, 2025, 08:36:29 am
Yes I did
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: H C Andersen on January 27, 2025, 10:56:19 am
Did you include a copy of your BB with your challenge?
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: mrmustard on January 27, 2025, 08:55:08 am
It would be better for everyone if you didn't park on a bend.

(https://i.ibb.co/VB9rmtq/6.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Bs3dNtC)

The rear doesn't seem to show any damage. There are no photos of the offside. Can we see a damage photo please.

(What is the situation with your other Tower Hamlets PCN? start a new thread if necessary).
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on January 27, 2025, 08:36:18 am
Rejection letter has been updated to show the PCN number. Post above. Thanks
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: mrmustard on January 26, 2025, 10:41:33 pm
It is your word against the council's. It would be a fantastic story for you to make up just to avoid a PCN. We could prepare a witness statement signed by you as that carries more weight and also let the adjudicator talk to you on the phone if it comes to it. Please give us the PCN ref and vehicle reg so we can look at the photos online.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on January 26, 2025, 08:03:37 pm
How would I prove that? I’ve got images of the damage but that’s about it. It isn’t worth me raising a claim with my insurance.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on January 26, 2025, 08:02:48 pm
Apologies

Updated
https://share.icloud.com/photos/011IO1zBHqqCiMtF0cT_iZPSA
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: mrmustard on January 26, 2025, 02:43:55 pm
I would like to be your free representative. This is atrocious behaviour by Tower Hamlets. You did follow the rules and no penalty is due (provided that what you tell us is correct). Please email mrmustard@zoho.com
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Enceladus on January 26, 2025, 03:46:28 am
Please follow the instructions in the READ THIS FIRST - **BEFORE POSTING YOUR CASE!** (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/) sticky post at the top of the forum.

You are specifically told not to redact the PCN number and the vehicle reg. Please correct that and also post up the PCN itself.

At the moment you can't appeal to the Adjudicator. You need to wait for the Notice to Owner and then submit a formal representation against it. If they reject your formal representation then you can appeal to the Adjudicator.
Title: Re: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Incandescent on January 26, 2025, 01:24:56 am
My view is you do have a chance, but you'd have to risk the full penalty at London Tribunals. TH are being their usual venal and rapacious selves from the content of their letter of rejection. However, you'll need robust evidence to support your claim that a car bumping into yours, dislodged the BB.
Title: Tower Hamlets PCN appeal rejected
Post by: Jamran on January 26, 2025, 12:41:30 am
Hi all,

I received a PCN in tower hamlets while my car was parked on a single yellow. The car was displaying a blue badge but fell from the dashboard after a vehicle hit it while my car was parked.

I appealed explaining this and showed proof of damage to my car due to the hit and run. Sadly, TH rejected the appeal and I’ve attached the rejection letter below.

TH have never cancelled a PCN for me due to it being a first time incident for a blue badge holder.

Do I have chance at adjudicator?

https://share.icloud.com/photos/062YODU79v-H7ufMn0nL0ed9A