Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Moaya on February 26, 2025, 03:52:59 pm
-
Good Morning,
I have received a date for the hearing. This would be my first, so I would appreciate any advice on what to expect and what I need to prepare.
https://imgur.com/a/tJSBX67
Thanks
-
It looks like they have just got in before the 56 day limit.
I will send my appeal as below unless you good folk advise otherwise. Many thanks.
Dear Sir/Madam,
I make representations on the following grounds: The contravention did not occur. As the authority will see from their evidence (the CEO's photos) the restriction in effect is given in the traffic sign which states: Pay by phone or Text or Pay at the machine and display ticket. Clearly, displaying a ticket is an optional matter for a motorist and therefore the contravention grounds of 'Parked without displaying a ...ticket or voucher' cannot be correct or even permissible contravention grounds because, among other matters, they deny the owner the defence of having purchased parking rights By Phone or Text. Contravention grounds must be correct and comprehensive in order to alert an owner to their possible applicable defences. If the authority believes that use of these grounds where payment By Phone or by Text or by purchasing and displaying a ticket are valid then they must explain the legal basis for this assertion when London Councils' Schedule of Contravention Descriptions already lists the correct grounds i.e. Parked without payment of the parking charge. I would also like to draw your attention to the following case Lydia Russo v Plymouth City Council (PL00004-2401, 12 March 2024) which was argued on similar grounds and the adjudicator concluded the contravention did not occur.
In addition, by the councils own admission they did not consider the Lydia Russo vs Plymouth case cited above. Therefor as in the case of Ivan Bachkov v London Borough of Newham (2250079444, 20 June 2025) they have failed to consider all the evidence provided with the representations, so there has been substantial non-compliance with the requirements of paragraph 1(7) of Schedule 1 of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003.
Kind Regards,
-
Any further advice would be appreciated, can I tell them I've only just received it?
-
Sent the reps on 26th of June
-
Sorry I have been away for work and was just sent this by someone checking my post. That's why I asked them to send me the response by email.
Shall I make any changes to my original challenge? Is it possible to submit electronically?
-
I have been abroad for work. I specifically asked them to email me the response which they completely ignored.
Shall I submit what I have already sent with no changes?
-
What date did you send reps. Looks like they've just scraped in the 56 day limit.
-
No surprise...other than J Warr is given such authority.
Sorry OP, but what are you doing! NOR dated 20 AUGUST which you post now. Can you explain pl.
You have until THURS 18th to register your appeal.
Contravention did not occur;
Procedural impropriety.
-
Hi All,
Please see the notice of rejection.
Thanks.
https://imgur.com/a/FIUJRz2
FYI this was my challenge:
Dear Sir/Madam, I make representations on the following grounds: The contravention did not occur. As the authority will see from their evidence (the CEO's photos) the restriction in effect is given in the traffic sign which states: Pay by phone or Text or Pay at the machine and display ticket. Clearly, displaying a ticket is an optional matter for a motorist and therefore the contravention grounds of 'Parked without displaying a ..ticket or voucher' cannot be correct or even permissible contravention grounds because, among other matters, they deny the owner the defence of having purchased parking rights By Phone or Text. Contravention grounds must be correct and comprehensive in order to alert an owner to their possible applicable defences. If the authority believes that use of these grounds where payment By Phone or by Text or by purchasing and displaying a ticket are valid then they must explain the legal basis for this assertion when London Councils' Schedule of Contravention Descriptions already lists the correct grounds i.e. Parked without payment of the parking charge. I would also like to draw your attention to the following Traffic Penalty Tribunal case PL00004-2401 which was argued on similar grounds and the adjudicator concluded the contravention did not occur. Please respond via email as I have been having problem with post deliveries recently. Kind regards.
-
There's nothing wrong with your original reps, so send them in again. The correct contravention would have been 'parked without payment' but they can only serve one PCN, and if they get it wrong, that's their bad luck.
-
Can anyone please advise on what to do next?
-
https://imgur.com/a/Y2VFzUF
Hi,
I have received notice to owner. Shall I reply with the same response as I did with my initial challenge? Apologies I only have the front page I took a picture of it initially and now I have misplaced the letter.
Thanks
-
Sorry I meant with regards to the discounted penalty. Yes I am the registered keeper.
-
You are not asked for a reply. You either pay or wait for a NTO to be issued to the registered keeper.
Their argument is tosh, but what did you expect, their misunderstanding is systemic.
Are you the registered keeper with current DVLA details?
-
Any advice would be appreciated, I need to reply today. I am thinking to go ahead and appeal. Should I include examples of precedents such as Russo vs Plymouth?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WW83Desv43qE8aviq2wez1KRsivNCqME/view
Thanks.
-
This was my initial representation:
Dear Sir, I make representations on the following grounds: The contravention did not occur. As the authority will see from their evidence (the CEO's photos) the restriction in effect is given in the traffic sign which states: Pay by phone or Text or Pay at the machine and display ticket. Clearly, displaying a ticket is an optional matter for a motorist and therefore the contravention grounds of 'Parked without displaying a ..ticket or voucher' cannot be correct or even permissible contravention grounds because, among other matters, they deny the owner the defence of having purchased parking rights By Phone or Text. Contravention grounds must be correct and comprehensive in order to alert an owner to their possible applicable defences. If the authority believes that use of these grounds where payment By Phone or by Text or by purchasing and displaying a ticket are valid then they must explain the legal basis for this assertion when London Councils' Schedule of Contravention Descriptions already lists the correct grounds i.e. Parked without payment of the parking charge. Please respond via email as I have been having problem with post deliveries recently. Kind regards
-
Hi guys,
Please see the reply from the council and advise further.
https://imgur.com/a/OvU109O
Many thanks.
-
Send in reps today. Unsuccessful reps submitted within the 14-day discount would attract a further 14 days to pay the discount once you receive their response.
It is a no-risk move to submit reps today online as instructed in the PCN.
Dear Sir,
***all the PCN and VRM preamble...
I make representations on the following grounds:
The contravention did not occur.
As the authority will see from their evidence (the CEO's photos) the restriction in effect is given in the traffic sign which states:
Pay by phone
or Text
or Pay at the machine and display ticket.
Clearly, displaying a ticket is an optional matter for a motorist and therefore the contravention grounds of 'Parked without displaying a ..ticket or voucher' cannot be correct or even permissible contravention grounds because, among other matters, they deny the owner the defence of having purchased parking rights By Phone or Text.
Contravention grounds must be correct and comprehensive in order to alert an owner to their possible applicable defences.
If the authority believes that use of these grounds where payment By Phone or by Text or by purchasing and displaying a ticket are valid then they must explain the legal basis for this assertion when London Councils' Schedule of Contravention Descriptions already lists the correct grounds i.e. Parked without payment of the parking charge.
Wait for others but don't miss the deadline of today.
-
Any further input from anyone will be greatly appreciated.
I think I have by end of today to pay the discounted charge.
Thanks in advance.
-
Thank you for your reply.
What contravention ground do you think would have been more appropriate?
I will wait on others to reply.
-
Appears to be the wrong contravention grounds.
GSV shows a traffic sign requiring either that a ticket is purchased and displayed OR that the motorist pay by phone. A CEO would be required to check the car for a P&D ticket and their HHC for any payments by phone/text and if neither then issue a PCN for failure to pay the parking charge, not non-display....how can not displaying be a contravention in itself if it is only an option?
Wait for others.
-
Hi Guys,
I received a PCN for failing to display a ticket. I just had a moment and forgot to pay whilst rushing to an appointment. I know its a long shot but are there any technical grounds on which I can appeal this PCN.
I don't have any real mitigation and I have already consigned myself to accepting this is an expensive lapse in concentration.
https://imgur.com/a/3cph6xr - PCN front and back
Than you in advance.
Moaya