Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: El-Roi on February 14, 2025, 09:38:17 pm
-
Thanks for the clarification.
-
The tribunal has no power to allow an appeal based on mitigating circumstances, the most they can do is ask the council to reconsider but if the council still refuses to cancel, there's nothing the adjudicator can do about it. It doesn't matter how compelling the mitigation is.
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
@404BrainNotFound
Mitigating circumstances - Mobility Issues
In my informal appeal, I explained that I have mobility issues which prevented me from returning to my car in time. The council rejected it, stating that the CEO had already given extra observation time (4 mins instead of 2). They did not ask for any evidence at that stage.
Now, in their TPT case summary, they state: "In conclusion, the contravention is supported by clear visual evidence, and no mitigating circumstances have been provided that would warrant cancellation of the Penalty Charge Notice.”
This seems to be their main argument. However, I do have evidence:
• My mobility issue worsened around that time, and I attended A&E on 05.01.2025 for my lower limbs. I have the A&E report showing I had X-rays and was given medication.
• I am also currently attending physiotherapy for this condition.
My specific questions are:
1. Should I explicitly address the council's "no mitigating circumstances" claim head-on in my submission?
2. Is this A&E evidence strong enough to serve as the formal proof the council says is missing?
3. What is the most effective way to present this? Should I just state the facts, or should I explicitly point out that the council is wrong?
Any insights on how to frame this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance
Link to my informal appeal and the authorities' response
https://ibb.co/Z6bYCdJb
https://ibb.co/Rpb4p05p
-
Codes are not mandatory, they're administrative.
The regs require that a PCN must state 'the grounds'. The contravention description is a major part of these.
This is not the Supreme Court, you don't need detailed written submissions, just put your argument forward in a personal and common-sense manner. IMO, use it as an aide-memoire.
-
Should the CC have been CC16 instead of CC19?
What should have been the correct CC based on their argument?
Does anyone have any templates or guidance that I can use to prepare my bundle and a detailed script that I can use for the hearing?
Thanks
-
What you should do to bolster your argument re validity is to refer to, quote verbatim and shoot down their evidence.
as this permit was obscured to the point that no relevant details (expiry date, zone, vehicle registration) could be seen, by a permit for Croydon (not valid in Medway), the permit is not, therefore, clearly displayed for inspection by the Civil Enforcement Officer and becomes invalid.
Clearly shows that the authority believe that a valid permit which is not 'clearly displayed' 'becomes invalid'...which totally conflicts with their later statement that 'A Penalty Charge Notice will be issued for not displaying a valid permit or not displaying it clearly to enable verification'..because these were not the contravention grounds under which the PCN was issued but rather '.....invalid..'.
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
@404BrainNotFound
Details on what I lodged and the Authorities Response
MW92219104
26/08/2025
Meadowbank Road
19
30/12/2024 14:07
Parked in a residents' or shared use parking place or zone either displaying an invalid permit or voucher or pay and display ticket, or after the expiry of paid for time
£50.00
Adjudicator's reasons for registering:
The appeal is registered
Grounds of Appeal:
The penalty charge exceeded the relevant amount.
The authority made a procedural error.
The alleged parking contravention did not occur.
Explanation:
I will provide evidences and update my appeal submission below later.
In the interim, I rely on my informal appeal and formal representation, in addition to the appeal submission below.
I appeal this Penalty Charge Notice on three statutory grounds. First, the alleged contravention did not occur. The PCN was issued under contravention code 19, which concerns the display of an invalid permit. I was at all material times the holder of a valid residents permit issued by Medway Council. That permit was on my dashboard when the PCN was issued, albeit it had become partially obscured. An obscured permit is not an invalid permit. It was valid in substance and in law, as the council itself has acknowledged by accepting a copy of my permit in correspondence. Since the alleged contravention presupposes the permit was invalid, and it was not, the contravention cannot be sustained.
Secondly, the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. In the rejection of my informal challenge the council misstated the penalty level, asserting that the full penalty was £70 and the reduced penalty £35. The correct statutory amounts for contravention code 19 are £50 and £25. Regulation 4(4)(e) of the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 recognises this as a statutory ground. By demanding a greater penalty than prescribed, the council acted unlawfully and committed a procedural impropriety.
Thirdly, there has been a further procedural impropriety in the handling of my formal representations. I attempted to make representations within the statutory 28 days of the Notice to Owner dated 8 July 2025. On 6 and 7 August 2025 I attempted to submit them online but the council’s electronic system failed repeatedly, generating error messages which I have preserved by screenshots. I attempted telephone contact, without success. On 8 August 2025 I submitted my representations by email, attaching the screenshots and my valid permit. On 11 August 2025, after re-sending the same email when initially told it had not been received, I was informed the council did have both emails on file. Nevertheless on 11 August 2025 the council issued a Charge Certificate. This was unlawful. Regulation 5(2)(a) of the 2007 Regulations imposes a duty on the authority to consider any representations made within the statutory period and to serve a notice of acceptance or of rejection. Issuing a Charge Certificate in the face of timely representations is a clear procedural impropriety.
It is also relevant that a member of the council’s parking staff initially gave me an assurance that if I produced proof of my valid permit the PCN would be cancelled. I relied on that assurance, which reflects the council’s past practice of cancelling one PCN per year for residents upon proof of a valid permit. The subsequent reversal of that position is inconsistent with the principle of legitimate expectation, as recognised in R v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan [2001] QB 213, where the Court of Appeal held that public authorities must honour substantive assurances absent overriding policy considerations.
In summary, the contravention did not occur, the penalty exceeded the amount due, and there has been procedural impropriety. I therefore respectfully invite the adjudicator to allow this appeal and direct that the PCN be cancelled in full.
Read less
Authority Information▼
Authority Summary:
This statement is submitted in response to Ms Jo Wilson's appeal against the Penalty Charge Notice issued for parking in a permit space without displaying a valid permit during prescribed hours.
Ms Wilson's argument that she had displayed, albeit partially obscured, and is the holder of a valid permit to park in a designated parking area, is not upheld by the photographic evidence taken at the time of the contravention as this permit was obscured to the point that no relevant details (expiry date, zone, vehicle registration) could be seen, by a permit for Croydon (not valid in Medway), the permit is not, therefore, clearly displayed for inspection by the Civil Enforcement Officer and becomes invalid.
The terms & conditions of the permit clearly state ' The permit is only valid if displayed in a conspicuous position on the front windscreen of the vehicle for which it was issued. A Penalty Charge Notice will be issued for not displaying a valid permit or not displaying it clearly to enable verification'
In summary, the contravention is clearly observed in the photographic evidence, specifically Item 2. The vehicle is clearly parked without claerly displaying a valid permit for the space where it was parked, which constitutes a breach of the relevant regulations. The explanations provided by the appellant do not align with the legal requirements or the evidence available.
In conclusion, the contravention is supported by clear visual evidence, and no mitigating circumstances have been provided that would warrant cancellation of the Penalty Charge Notice. The Council respectfully requests that the appeal be refused.
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
@404BrainNotFound
Just seen your message.
I don't get notifications.
The hearing is tomorrow afternoon.
I will upload what I posted on my TPT Appeal.
Thanks in advance for your help.
-
Sorry OP, but you MUST post actual documents, not your transpositions.
Trying to progress in an informed and controlled manner without sight of docs is going to cause you extra work and more than likely misinform us.
As regards what you've posted, I refer to this statement which you say is in their response:
This statement is submitted in response to Jojo's appeal
We need to know exactly what you submitted prior to their letter which, as you will see, makes no reference to the grounds of procedural impropriety.
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
@404BrainNotFound
Hi all,
I have received a hearing date for my Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT) appeal and need assistance preparing my submission bundle and exhibit.
I am new to this process and would be grateful for any guidance.
If anyone has a template or an example of a well-prepared bundle they could share, that would also be incredibly helpful.
Thanks in advance for any help you can offer
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
@404BrainNotFound
Update the council responded/ provided evidence to appeal TPT on 10.10.25.
I have only just seen the email and logged into the portal to check their evidence.
Please I need urgent help in responding to this.
Thanks in advance for your help.
See response below.
This statement is submitted in response to Jojo's appeal
against the Penalty Charge Notice issued for parking in a permit space without displaying a valid permit during prescribed hours.
Ms Wilson's argument that she had displayed, albeit partially obscured, and is the holder of a valid permit to park in a designated parking area, is not upheld by the photographic evidence taken at the time of the contravention as this permit was obscured to the point that no relevant details (expiry date, zone, vehicle registration) could be seen, by a permit for Croydon (not valid in Medway), the permit is not, therefore, clearly displayed for inspection by the Civil Enforcement Officer and becomes invalid.
The terms & conditions of the permit clearly state ' The permit is only valid if displayed in a conspicuous position on the front windscreen of the vehicle for which it was issued. A Penalty Charge Notice will be issued for not displaying a valid permit or not displaying it clearly to enable verification'
In summary, the contravention is clearly observed in the photographic evidence, specifically Item 2. The vehicle is clearly parked without claerly displaying a valid permit for the space where it was parked, which constitutes a breach of the relevant regulations. The explanations provided by the appellant do not align with the legal requirements or the evidence available.
In conclusion, the contravention is supported by clear visual evidence, and no mitigating circumstances have been provided that would warrant cancellation of the Penalty Charge Notice. The Council respectfully requests that the appeal be refused.
-
@stamfordman, 'You should appeal within 28 days of delivery etc' so is OK presumbly.'
IMO, is not what the regs provide and require. 'Within' is taken by the courts to exclude the trigger event unless qualified.
Within 28 days of today is not within 28 days beginning today.
-
Appeal lodged with TPT 26th September and acknowledgement received.
I would appreciate a detailed submission to update my current submission.
Thanks
-
The NOR says 'You should appeal within 28 days of delivery etc' so is OK presumbly.
Thanks.
You are correct.
Delivery is ( usually 2 working days after the NoR)
Delivery date of NoR is 28th August. Today 24th September is still within 28 days of the NoR. Today will be the final day I presume.
-
The NOR says 'You should appeal within 28 days of delivery etc' so is OK presumbly.
I would just send what I drafted for you. This has always been about only £25, so it's not worth worrying about much.
-
Appeal submission should be made within 28days
This might be what the NOR says, but as the regs make clear it's wrong.
Your rights of appeal are:
No later than the end of the period of 28 days beginning on the date of service;
At any time after this period on application to and at the sole discretion of the adjudicator.
'Within 28 days' means, unless qualified, 28 days from date of service. If you submitted an appeal on the last day of this period then you would have LOST your STATUTORY right to have it registered.
-
If it's like London Tribunals you can just register the appeal and send details later.
It is Medway. I think it is but not sure.
Cp8759 will know.
@cp8759 is Medway under the London Tribunal?
If I can just register the appeal will you be able to help draft a more substantial appeal to send later
?
Many thanks for this.
-
*- pl find a way to host the NOR externally and post as a complete and readable document.
[/quote]
I have tried several times.
It might be one of my settings has changed.
Link to NoR from external uploading platform.
https://ibb.co/1fDL8rGR
See post #36 & #46 ( NoR) .
-
Tomorrow is my deadline to lodge an appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for this PCN.
Really? How do you calculate this?
NoR date is 26th August 2025
Appeal submission should be made within 28days
-
Tomorrow is my deadline to lodge an appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for this PCN.
Really? How do you calculate this?
Follow stamfordman's post but add Procedural Impropriety to your grounds(these arise from the NOR*).
These duties are not rocket science so why do they get them wrong so often.
(6) If the enforcement authority does not accept the representations, its decision notice—
(a)must—
(i)state that a charge certificate may be served on the recipient unless within the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the decision notice—
(aa)the penalty charge is paid, or
(bb)the recipient appeals to an adjudicator against the penalty charge,
(ii)indicate the nature of an adjudicator’s power to award costs, and
(iii)describe the form and manner in which an appeal to an adjudicator must be made, and
(b)may contain such other information as the enforcement authority considers appropriate.
[but IMO such information may not substitute for or contradict or relieve the authority of its duties as specified above]
*- pl find a way to host the NOR externally and post as a complete and readable document.
-
If it's like London Tribunals you can just register the appeal and send details later.
Often you can just say 'I rely on my representations' but you have dragged things out til the last minute.
I would appeal:
The council still insists on enforcing the display of an invalid permit, when in fact it was partially obscured - in which case the correct contravention is not displaying a valid permit.
In their notice of rejection they say:
"I can advise that your vehicle had been parked in a ‘permit holders C only’ bay without a valid permit with clearly shown details on display."
This surely concedes the wrong contravention and the appeal must be upheld.
The council also did not respond to my representation that it made an unlawful demand for payment of a higher rate penalty in its rejection of my informal challenge. On this point too the appeal must be upheld.
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
Hi everyone,
Tomorrow is my deadline to lodge an appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for this PCN.
I need urgent help/guidance on preparing the appeal. I’ve posted the Notice of Rejection already but haven’t had replies.
Any help in drafting my submission would be hugely appreciated.
Many thanks!”
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
Below is the link to the partial blacked out NoR. The first page is blacked out completely. Don't know why!
It's happened before and cannot figure out why.
That's why I had to copy and paste the NoR details yesterday.
https://ibb.co/1fDL8rGR
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
Sorry all for the late response(s).
I don't get any notification when there is a reply or comment. I have to keep logging and checking.
-
@JOJO1209 do you plan on representing yourself, and are you planning on attending the hearing?
Cannot afford paid representation at the moment due to my current financial situation.
-
@H C Andersen
I completed the TE9 form to get the charge certificate removed. Is that what you are asking about
No.
I need help in drafting the appeal to file with the tribunal.
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
See dates as requested
OP, would you please give us a complete timeline of the key events because yours omits important matters.
I completed the TE9 form to get the charge certificate removed. Is that what you are asking about
Order for Recovery dated..28th April 25..( Charge Certificate CC) ...
Witness statement submitted to TEC dated ...11 June 25
TEC revocation order* dated...16 June 25..
NTO issued .....8 July
*- which revoked the Order for Recovery and directed the council to cancel the CC(you make it sound like they were doing you a favour).
-
@JOJO1209 do you plan on representing yourself, and are you planning on attending the hearing?
-
OP, would you please give us a complete timeline of the key events because yours omits important matters.
I completed the TE9 form to get the charge certificate removed. Is that what you are asking about
Order for Recovery dated.......
Witness statement submitted to TEC dated .......
TEC revocation order* dated........
NTO issued .....8 July
*- which revoked the Order for Recovery and directed the council to cancel the CC(you make it sound like they were doing you a favour).
-
It seems they are tying themselves in knots on the valid/invalid issue:
I can advise that your vehicle had been parked in a ‘permit holders C only’ bay without a valid permit with clearly shown details on display.
This surely is confirmation that they've issued the wrong PCN code. An invalid permit can only be so if the details can be checked and seen to be invalid!
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
Please I need help drafting the appeal to the Tribunal.
NoR below.
Parking Services
Your Ref:FE20KXC
Our Ref: MW92219104
Date: 26 August 2025
PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE MW92219104
NOTICE OF REJECTION OF REPRESENTATIONS
I refer to your recent appeal regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice.
Having considered all aspects of your appeal, I advise that I am unable to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice on this
occasion.
I have noted your comments and would advise you that a Penalty Charge Notice was issued because your vehicle was 19
Parked in a residents` or shared use parking place or zone displaying an invalid permit, an invalid voucher or an invalid pay & display ticket in Meadowbank Road.
In exercising our discretion to cancel a penalty charge notice, the circumstances detailed in your representations have been considered and all reasons for appeal have been taken into consideration. However, on this occasion I cannot find any compelling grounds in which to do so.
Although you have stated that the CEO failed to identify the partially visible valid permit which was displayed at the time,
which may have been partially obscured but this does not make it invalid as the 'Medway Council Serving You' logo can still be seen, I am unable to accept these as mitigating circumstances because I can advise that although you have submitted a valid permit, the terms of the provisions and conditions of the permit clearly advise that the permit is only valid if displayed in a conspicuous position on the front windscreen of the vehicle for which it was issued, a Penalty Charge Notice will be issued for not displaying a valid permit or not displaying it clearly to enable verification. The Civil Enforcement Officer is unable to ascertain the validity of the permit unless the relevant details are clearly visible.
Upon checking the officers photographs, taken at the time of the contravention, you can clearly see that the Medway Council permit is fully obscured by the Croydon Council resident permit, therefore, as the vehicle registration, expiry date and zone cannot be clearly seen on the Medway Council permit the permit is not deemed valid. The CEO's do the checks for a valid permit by checking the details on the permit displayed, as is required of them, not by checking their hand held devices.
I can advise that your vehicle had been parked in a ‘permit holders C only’ bay without a valid permit with clearly shown details on display. Relevant road signs and markings are sited in all roads within the permit area. I can confirm that the Civil Enforcement Officer noted that all windows were checked, and no valid permit was seen on display.
I have also noted your comment that the officers observation period exceeded the Medway Councils 2 minute policy for a
permit holder zone and I can confirm that the Civil Enforcement Officer gave your vehicle a 4-minute 46 second observation period and no activity was seen around the vehicle. As per Medway Council’s Parking Enforcement Policy, an observation period of a minimum 2 minutes should be given to vehicles seen parked in a permit holder only zones. I can also advise that the officer was in the vicinity of the vehicle for 8 minutes whilst taking photographs and making notes and no activity was seen around the vehicle, therefore the ticket was issued correctly.
I must advise that it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure all parking restrictions are read and adhered to before leaving thevehicle parked and to ensure the permit is clearly visible for inspection, as per the terms & conditions.
I have attached photographic evidence taken at the time the contravention occurred that endorses the fact that the Penalty Charge Notice was correctly issued.
-
NoR ( Notice of Rejection) received. I will post it later.
-
This is a bit of a saga and I'm half way through War and Peace but their site is showing £50 so wait for them to send you something, probably a rejection.
-
Update:
Called the council last week Monday and spoke to someone who seemed knowledgeable and experienced. She reduced the PCN back to £50 (from £75) and advised me to ignore the Charge Certificate (CC). I asked if she could confirm this in writing by email, and she said she would, but I haven’t received anything yet. I’m wondering if it’s worth chasing her up so I have something in writing.
She confirmed that they will consider my representation and the council will get back to me. According to her, the CC was issued at the same time they received my appeal. This isn’t entirely accurate, as my reps were sent before the CC date — but the important thing is that the CC has been cancelled and my reps will be considered.
-
OP, where is the NTO. Pl post all pages and leave in everything except your name and address.
-
The correct legal position is that once a Notice to Owner has been served, the statutory framework is contained in the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007
No it isn't, you need to read the regulations. Post incorrect advice again and you won't be posting without prior approval.
-
@404BrainNotFound I have removed your post because it is likely to mislead and cause confusion. You seem to have misunderstood the part of the process that the OP is at, and you've quoted legislation that was abolished years ago. If you want to help the OP with the tribunal stage, I suggest you wait until there is a Notice of Rejection that she can appeal against.
-
Yes I agree. Let's see the screenshots.
-
Yes I meant made reps. Not OP's fault about the system.
Agreed, the issue is what is the appropriate avenue of redress. I would suggest a formal complaint, if the system is down for whatever reason on a given day then really the council should extended all deadlines by one day.
-
Yes I meant made reps. Not OP's fault about the system.
-
I tried to submit it in the last day but the system prevented me. I took screenshot evidence.
Let's see these screenshots please.
@stamfordman there is no ground on form TE9 for "I tried to make representations within 28 days but the council website prevented me from doing so", so I'm not sure waiting for the OfR is the right approach.
-
I tried to submit it in the last day but the system prevented me. I took screenshot evidence.
That’s the thing — I actually called them on Monday the 11th to make them aware, but the person I got through to seemed new and even struggled to find my original email.
The system’s changed as well. It used to be easier to speak to someone, but now it’s all automated and they just push you online. The person I spoke to on the 11th also told me the phone line times have changed — I wasn’t aware of that — and said it was all part of the new automated system.
I did include everything in my representation (even a screenshot), but I don’t think anyone actually looked at it before the charge certificate was issued automatically.
I’ll try calling again and hopefully get through to someone with a bit more experience this time.
-
If you tried to make reps on that last day but were prevented then you can go through the same process of waiting for debt recovery. Or contact them saying you tried and have proof and will they accept reps.
You need to act on things in good time to meet deadlines!
-
I hope you filed reps - if they reject make sure you let us know and we can get you set up for the tribunal.
Update
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
PCN – Charge Certificate Issued dated 11/08/25. Despite Timely Representation attempts (Advice Needed please)
06 & 07/08/25 – Tried submitting representation online, system error (screenshots taken).
07 & 08/08/25 – Called Medway Parking but couldn’t reach a person (only automated lines). Phone log available
08/08/25 – Emailed representation to both parking email addresses after failed submissions and calls. ( phone log / History available)
11/08/25 – Called again, initially told email not received. After resending, they confirmed both 08/08 and 11/08 emails were on file.
Despite this, I’ve now received a Charge Certificate (11/08/25).
Question: What should I do next?
-
Thanks.
I wasn't able to file the representation that night.
I had problems filling online using the appeal portal. Technical system error messages kept coming up halfway through the filing process. Tried the next day same error messages Called the next day but couldn't speak to someone.
Ended up sending it by email with the error message screen shots & my Resident Permit. I will keep the forum updated.
-
I hope you filed reps - if they reject make sure you let us know and we can get you set up for the tribunal.
-
Is there anything else I can add to Stamfordman's draft representation as per your "post Reply #13 on: May 12, 2025, 04:14:46 pm"
Really sorry, I honestly don't have time to look into that.
-
@cp8759
Is there anything else I can add to Stamfordman's draft representation as per your "post Reply #13 on: May 12, 2025, 04:14:46 pm"
With respect to the response that you received from Medway when you requested the TRO.
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
Thanks for your prompt responses and advice.
I will send it tonight. I will go with what Stamfordman drafted.
@stamfordman - Thanks for the draft.
Note: Which witness statement are you asking about?
I completed the TE9 form to get the charge certificate removed. Is that what you are asking about?
-
Hi all,
Quick update on my PCN: the council withdrew the Charge Certificate (great news!).
What does this even mean? Please show us the paperwork you have received.
-
+1.
The latest date for making formal reps which must be considered is TODAY.
As per stamfordman, you don't have time to refine reps.
-
You made a witness statement?
An NTO dated 8 July means you about out of time - you need to do something now.
A quick read back suggests:
The contravention did not occur. The permit I displayed was obscured but it wasn't invalid.
The informal rejection demands an amount that exceeds the amount lawfully due.
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
Hi all,
Quick update on my PCN: the council withdrew the Charge Certificate (great news!).
Now I need to submit a formal representation to the council while the case is back at the NTO stage.
Please could someone help me draft a strong,compelling representation
- NTO date: 08 July 2025
Thanks so much — your advice has been invaluable so far!
-
Aside from checking with TEC if the debt is registered, you really don't need to do anything else. Noting can happen until the debt has been registered.
-
@H C Anderson
@stamfordman
@cp8759
Update CC Charge Certificate received dated 28.04.25
cp8759-sent you a copy of the CC on 3rd May.
Should I upload a copy of the CC here?
No NTO was received. So couldn't make a formal representation as per earlier advice on this post
On 3rd May received a Charge Certificate dated 28th April 2025.
Waiting for the debt to be registered and I will complete the TE9 form.
Checked Medway website this afternoon, debt still showing at £75.
Called HMTCS (TEC); line was closed.
Will call TEC tomorrow to check if debt has been registered.
Any advice will be welcomed.
Thanks.
-
@El-Roi have you received anything further? The PCN is now up to £75, so a charge certificate has been issued. This is not the end of the world, but you need to tell us what you have received so that we can deal with it before you miss any deadlines.
I've also had this rather odd response from the council:
Please see attached the TRO relating to your request, located within the time allowed, and accept our apologies for any confusion caused previously. Medway Council holds copies of these older TROs but does not have the capacity to catalogue them and their contents to make the information easily retrievable to current staff.
There are no staff dedicated to retrieving older traffic orders that weren’t consolidated in 2015/2016 and no single register, as TROs have fallen under the remit of various employees/departments/teams in the past.
Orders that were not consolidated in 2015 or 2016 remain valid in their own right; the attached is one of these. There are a large number of orders that are not catalogued (both paper copies and scanned copies in various locations), meaning information requested about a specific road takes considerable time to identify; reading through all schedules for entries relating to a particular road.
Whilst there are no staff resources that can be diverted to catalogue the older TROs and their contents, this will be rectified via a separate project ahead of identifying and digitising all TROs at Medway Council.
All documents from this time have been archived and searching through the archives would take staff over the required amount of time to respond to an FOI. Therefore, investigating this further will require a charge.
All I've been sent it a draft copy of the Medway Council (Designated Parking Places) (Amendment) (No.2) Order 2001 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1F_ZvwcSVn5QCVP6j_au5kHHiDMU3HohF/view), so the council might struggle to produce a copy at the tribunal, but we need to deal with the charge certificate first.
-
Are you the registered keeper with current DVLA details?
Yes
-
Are you the registered keeper with current DVLA details?
-
OP, you have to make a choice.
If you are the registered keeper then you could either pay the discount or continue. If the latter, you might be exposed to the full penalty should your reps be unsuccessful.
What are chances of success if it goes all the way to Tribunal ?
As regards grounds, a strict interpretation of the regs means that the contravention did not occur. This follows because the authority accept that 'you have submitted a valid permit' and yet have cited grounds precluded by this fact. However, this is after the fact, IMO the key admission here as regards issuing the PCN on the chosen grounds is 'I must also note that no details of the permit are visible'.
I agree. But as Stamfordman pointed out another code 16 should have been issued instead.
As regards 'I must also note that.....CEOs within Medway do not have the capability', they might say this, I couldn't possibly comment!
Thanks Noted.
-
Is the correct grounds for appeal - "The alleged contravention did not occur"
Should I ignore the "Mitigating circumstances" grounds which was on the informal challenge and was not considered in the rejection letter?
How do I address the misleading information on the rejection letter? Is that sufficient to cancel the PCN. Just want to learn / understand incase I encounter such scenario in the future.
Will you help me draft a representation when I receive the NTO?
Yes the contravention did not occur and they misled themselves into thinking another contravention did occur.
Thanks for the confirmation
The permit you displayed was obscured but it wasn't invalid.
Correct. They have acknowledged that I submitted a valid permit alongside my informal challenge in the rejection letter.
I will help you draft formal reps to the NTO. As I said this isn't a big deal unless £25 is make or break...
Thanks. Appreciated
Funds are tight at the moment.I have a lot going on.
Are you the registered keeper and is the V5C logbook up to date with correct address?
Yes
-
@El-Roi the informal rejection clearly demands an amount that exceeds the amount lawfully due, and that is a statutory ground for cancellation.
Thanks
I will wait for the NTO
In the meantime I'll get hold of the traffic order.
Appreciated.
-
OP, you have to make a choice.
If you are the registered keeper then you could either pay the discount or continue. If the latter, you might be exposed to the full penalty should your reps be unsuccessful.
As regards grounds, a strict interpretation of the regs means that the contravention did not occur. This follows because the authority accept that 'you have submitted a valid permit' and yet have cited grounds precluded by this fact. However, this is after the fact, IMO the key admission here as regards issuing the PCN on the chosen grounds is 'I must also note that no details of the permit are visible'.
As regards 'I must also note that.....CEOs within Medway do not have the capability', they might say this, I couldn't possibly comment!
-
@El-Roi the informal rejection clearly demands an amount that exceeds the amount lawfully due, and that is a statutory ground for cancellation.
In the meantime I'll get hold of the traffic order.
-
Is the correct grounds for appeal - "The alleged contravention did not occur"
Should I ignore the "Mitigating circumstances" grounds which was on the informal challenge and was not considered in the rejection letter?
How do I address the misleading information on the rejection letter? Is that sufficient to cancel the PCN. Just want to learn / understand incase I encounter such scenario in the future.
Will you help me draft a representation when I receive the NTO?
Yes the contravention did not occur and they misled themselves into thinking another contravention did occur.
The permit you displayed was obscured but it wasn't invalid.
I will help you draft formal reps to the NTO. As I said this isn't a big deal unless £25 is make or break...
Are you the registered keeper and is the V5C logbook up to date with correct address?
-
Is the correct grounds for appeal - "The alleged contravention did not occur"
Should I ignore the "Mitigating circumstances" grounds which was on the informal challenge and was not considered in the rejection letter?
How do I address the misleading information on the rejection letter? Is that sufficient to cancel the PCN. Just want to learn / understand incase I encounter such scenario in the future.
Will you help me draft a representation when I receive the NTO?
-
Are you using two accounts here?
Anyway the facts are you were given a code 19 invalid permit in a permit only bay. This usually means there is a permit but it's invalid such as through expiry. It may be the CEO was just confused by the clutter and should have issued a code 16 higher level no valid permit.
But your permit was valid at the time so I would go on with this, plus they've misled you with the rejection.
(https://i.ibb.co/S42jLV3W/med1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/4ZRFcqS7/med2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/QFmfJn61/med3.jpg)
-
What's happened is they've given you a lower level code 19 PCN because presumably the CEO saw a permit that was valid but no longer is. What is the other permit?
London Borough
The rejection assumes no valid permit was there and has failed to address the contravention and your challenge and told you the wrong amount is due. Is that all they said?
Yes. The Complete rejection letter is what I uploaded. I only removed my personal details and the letter head.
Sent him a copy of my current permit expiring 26.12.2025. He acknowledged that in the rejection letter.
I would go on with this. At most you are risking £25.
On what basis am I likely to succeed. Please can you elaborate so I can understand.
Thanks
@stamfordman
" Medway serving you was visible" The Medway permit is larger but no other details were visible.
My car is always parked at the same spot with my permit. So the officer knows I have a valid permit. It was renewed to 26.12.25
I sent them a clear copy of my current Permit that was seen on the car when the PCN was issued as advised by the officer I spoke to.
No the CEO didn't see a Medway permit that was valid and no longer is.
PCN issued on that road is usually £25 / £50. A few years ago when a storm turned my permit over on the dashboard. It was cancelled when I sent in a copy of the permit with my appeal explaining the circumstances.
Just to be clear because the rejection letter quoted the wrong amount payable will that make my chances of successfully taking it further greater?
If yes please can you explain.
Thanks
-
What's happened is they've given you a lower level code 19 PCN because presumably the CEO saw a permit that was valid but no longer is. What is the other permit?
The rejection assumes no valid permit was there and has failed to address the contravention and your challenge and told you the wrong amount is due. Is that all they said?
I would go on with this. At most you are risking £25.
-
Medway Code 19 Meadowbank - Resident Parking Permit Partially Displayed
Hi Everyone,
Please, I need some advice about a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) I received, and I'm not sure whether I should challenge it further or just pay the discounted amount before the 18th of February deadline.
Here's what happened: I was issued a PCN for not displaying my resident permit. The permit was on my dashboard but was partially covered by another permit. This happened due to some mitigating circumstances. I had just parked in front of my house after a two-hour journey from London and urgently needed to use the bathroom. I also have mobility issues, which makes it difficult for me to move quickly, especially when climbing stairs. I rushed inside, used the bathroom upstairs, and returned to my car in less than 10 minutes to swap my permit and collect my belongings—only to find a PCN on my windshield.
I called Medway Council's parking team and explained the situation. The lady I spoke to assured me that they would cancel the PCN if I appealed and provided proof of my resident permit. I followed her advice, sent in my appeal, and attached a copy of my permit. However, my appeal was rejected, which surprised me because, in the past, Medway Council has been known to cancel one PCN per year if a resident forgets to display their permit. I’ve experienced this myself before, and they asked for proof of the permit before cancelling the PCN.
I called several times trying to speak to the officer who gave me the initial advice, I knew her name. I eventually spoke with the same officer. This time, she seemed to backtrack on her earlier assurance. She said it depends on the discretion of the officer handling the appeal and that it's a personal decision. When I mentioned the previous policy of cancellation on submitting a valid resident permit; she said she’s only been in the job for six months and downplayed her earlier advice. I asked to speak to a manager to understand the change in policy, she said she would request a call back as no one was available. I haven’t received any call back yet (this was on Tuesday, 11th February 25).
Another issue is that the rejection letter I received, signed by Mr. Stokes, quoted the wrong penalty and discounted amounts. He listed £70 and £35, but the actual amounts on the PCN are £50 and £25. Could this error make any difference to my case?
I’m now unsure whether to continue challenging this—possibly all the way to a tribunal—or if I should just pay the discounted rate before the deadline to avoid it increasing to the full amount.
Any advice or suggestions on how to proceed would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
Link to all relevant documents and pictures
https://ibb.co/album/QvcRMD