Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: S23 on September 26, 2023, 12:00:07 am
-
Another angel.
-
Many thanks to MrMustard!
-
It seems to me there is no form of words which can adequately reconcile this inconsistency but it does seem to me that whatever form of words is used should not at any point inform the motorist of something that is positively incorrect.
There is actually as Newham's PCNs have sorted it.
Well done as per 2230446994 of course and 2240008359. Much obliged for the former which assisted the latter.
-
There was a delay whilst the adjudicator considered the arguments I raised at the hearing on 4 January but the decision is now out.
2230525729
The Appellant did not attend the hearing but was represented by Mr Dishman who made submissions based on his skeleton argument.
I am unable to accept his submission that on the fact this is a case where the principle of de minimis (i.e. legal insignificance) should be applied. I do not consider that either in terms of time or distance the amount and period of stopping was small as to amount to effectively nothing at all.
Mr Dishman submits that the PCN is non-compliant. There is an inherent difficulty in the way the legislation is drafted which requires the Council to ste that if the PCN is not paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with Date of the Notice an increased charge may be payable; but it is also provided that the Council may disregard ay representations received after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the penalty charge notice in question was served. This crates a period of limbo during which the Council can in theory increase the charge but is still required to consider representations. It seems to me there is no form of words which can adequately reconcile this inconsistency but it does seem to me that whatever form of words is used should not at any point inform the motorist of something that is positively incorrect. It is not correct to tell motorists that they have 28 days from the date of the notice to make representations when in fact that have 28 days from the date of service’ nor in my view can the PCN be said to be substantially compliant if it gives incorrect and inconsistent information on that particular important point.
I therefore agree with Mr Dishman that this PCN with the requirements of s4 of the Act . It follows that no penalty may be demanded on the basis of it.
-
Big thank you to all replies. I have emailed MrMustard for further support
-
For free help please email the complete Pcn, unredacted, to mrmustard@zoho.com
-
If Mr Mustard says there's a good argument, then at least 9 times out of 10 he will win at the tribunal (possibly more), so I'd forget about the discount and see if he can draft representations for you.
-
Had a look at the video.
One aspect you can also include in any representations/appeal is that the video starts with your vehicle already within the box. The offence occurs at the point of entry, not the point of stopping, and there are numerous tribunal decisions (including one that is highlighted as a 'key case' by London Tribunals itself) where appeals are upheld due to the video footage not containing the key moment of entry.
Yours is a bit borderline as an adjudicator may decide that the footage seems to be close enough to the point of entry that they can reasonably infer traffic conditions at the point of entry, but it's definitely something to highlight in addition to Mr Mustard's point.
-
My train home is half an hour later than I thought so here I am.
On the front of the PCN it says that representations made more than 28 days after the date above (date of PCN) may be disregarded. In the next line they get it right, 28 days after service for representations. (this legislation has two different 28 day periods for payment and for repesentations which is probably a drafting error but is upheld at the tribunal).
I would expect that to be a winner at the tribunal but there are no guarantees.
-
There are wording errors on the pcn but I am away cycling and cannot explain their technical nature before tomorrow when I am back at my desk. If this thread had been started earlier I could have responded earlier - this is guidance for all, not the OP in this case. Experts have full and busy lives
-
Two things: -
1. Road markings are clear enough for an adjudicator. They may not be in rain and/or darkness, of course.
2. Video shows you stopped only partially in the box, but I think too far in to make a de minimis argument.
Sorry I'm only looking at this past midnight ! However, I can't see anything to submit reps on, to be honest, although the PCN may contain errors, but I'm not up-to-speed on the Act at the top of the PCN. This and its regulations defines what must be in a PCN
Thank you for your thoughts. Still time to pay the reduced charge
Would be interested in other users thoughts and also wording relating to the PCN, etc. Many thanks
-
Two things: -
1. Road markings are clear enough for an adjudicator. They may not be in rain and/or darkness, of course.
2. Video shows you stopped only partially in the box, but I think too far in to make a de minimis argument.
Sorry I'm only looking at this past midnight ! However, I can't see anything to submit reps on, to be honest, although the PCN may contain errors, but I'm not up-to-speed on the Act at the top of the PCN. This and its regulations defines what must be in a PCN
-
Hi all,
Bexley incident date 05/09/23. Postal PCN dated 13/09/23 for '31J - entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited (camera enforcement)'.
Google street view link here (https://maps.app.goo.gl/uMy7geeALTzCUPxS7)
PCN and photo/video evidence here (https://drive.proton.me/urls/5KBM6JGW44#cGTVqFD4VS9f)
Are any of the following valid grounds for appeal?
1) Lines are broken or box unclear
2) Distance to view box is too close (+/- point 1)
3) Not able to move in any other direction - boxed in by car behind and oncoming lorry (see video)
4) Any other reason?
If no clear grounds for appeal identified today, I will pay it tonight (26/09/23) as I believe this is when the reduced charge of £65 ends
Thank you in advance