Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: chris2209 on April 23, 2025, 11:12:53 am
-
So at tribunal give the original context, the evidence that genuine attempts at payment were made, the topic of the additionally issued PCN, and the lack of clarity in the most recently supplied documents?
-
Hi, my rep was as below, and as confirmed receipt by Lewisham:
PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE ZY12707172
REGISTRATION NUMBER LX66UOJ
DATE OF CONTRAVENTION Tue , 22 Apr 2025 11:17
CURRENT AMOUNT OUTSTANDING £160.00
Dear Sir or Madam,
Online challenge for ZY12707172
On the grounds of:
The PCN exceeded the amount applicable
Further explanation :
I am requesting that PCN ZY12707172 is cancelled, on the basis that the penalty has exceed the amount
applicable in the circumstances of the case.
CEO L601 issued a different and separate PCN (ZY12707161) at 11:13, as documented in the Notice To Owner
received for that PCN.
Notable there was no evidence left for this PCN on the vehicle at the time, as is shown in
the photos taken for PCN ZY12707172.
The PCN in question (ZY12707172) has a first seen time of 11:07. It therefore follows this PCN (ZY12707172) is
unlawful because a PCN (ZY12707161) had already been served at 11.13.
The CEO cannot start observations for
PCN ZY12707172 (11:07), then issue a different PCN (ZY12707161) at 11:13, before then issuing the PCN
ZY12707172 at 11:17.
I attach copies of the Notice To Owners issues for these PCNs, with the times of issue. Again, there was no
evidence provided for the PCN first issued (ZY12707161), either on the vehicle, or digitally when viewing the
PCN
-
They are demanding the full penalty so nothing to lose by going to the tribunal.
What were your reps for this PCN. They don't look as though they were considered.
They have left some blank template at the end of the letter, which can be added to the appeal.
You should ask for a telephone or Microsoft Teams heading so you can speak to the adjudicator.
The reasoning set out by HC Andersen still holds and there is also the issue that you paid just 2 mins after the PCN time given the hospital issue.
(https://i.imgur.com/tpRrLfo.png)
(https://i.ibb.co/F4m80KXy/PCN-ZY12707172-Rejection-Letter-1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/1tbfjBf9/PCN-ZY12707172-Rejection-Letter-2.jpg)
-
Hi All,
Mixed results here.
The additionally issued PCN has been cancelled, citing a "processing error":
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iwON7FOTut7S54Q1mPtqYsVU99NiTUtb/view?usp=sharing
The "original" PCN has been upheld, and they've just repeated the original convention:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1C2G_XDV2jNs8WBf_mytZBrgoys0OkD44/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UReVQdNxkFsfALO2-Vo_dPPnpbmHYVi1/view?usp=sharing
Do you think it is worth going to the adjudicator, or has this become a lost cause? Frustratingly they don't actually say what the penalty charge now is, and they've left a highlighted placeholder for what it will increase to...
Thanks in advance.
-
OP, if you assert that you parked once only then the 'second' PCN is a shoo-in cancellation: 'penalty exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case'.
Why?
PCN 1 - not seen, but issued by CEO L601 at 11.13, it says so in the NTO;
PCN 2 - you've posted which carries the all-important 'first seen' time of 11.07.
It therefore follows that PCN2 is unlawful because a PCN had already been served at 11.13! You cannot start obs for PCN2, then issue a different PCN at 11.13 and then issue another at 11.17.
So, PCN2- the original subject of this thread is effectively dead, you just have to submit reps as above.
So, what about PCN1? I would suggest similar grounds.
Perhaps...
Dear Sir,
PCNs ********* (PCN1) and *********(PCN2)
I refer to the above issued, according to the authority, by the same CEO(L601) as follows:
PCN1 - 11.13. I did not find this on my car neither is it in evidence in the
CEO's photos of PCN2.
PCN2 - Issued at 11.17 but first observed at 11.07.
I am making formal representations in respect of both on the grounds that the penalty exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case, circumstances which are evidenced by the authority's NTOs.
In respect of PCN2, the authority are claiming that CEO L601 observed the car at 11.07 then at 11.13 decided to issue a different PCN(PCN1) for £130 for a separate and parallel reason(my car was parked once only) while still observing my car for PCN2 and then at 11.17 decided to issue this PCN at 11.17.
So, PCN ********* (PCN2) issued at 11.17 must be cancelled because only 4 minutes prior the CEO had issued PCN*********(PCN1) for the same contravention.
And PCN1 must be cancelled because the CEO only formed their belief that a penalty was payable at 11.17, 4 minutes after the penalty was demanded.
Perhaps the authority are able to work out what CEO L601 was doing, but as far as both PCNs are concerned and your demands for penalties from me I suggest that a veil is drawn over the events and that by return you confirm their cancellation.
-
Yep dated 26th May so plenty of time. Thanks for your help.
-
I'll look at this later. There's no rush with an NTO - it's dated 26 May?
-
Hi,
Just wondered if you'd been able to consider the response to the original PCN?
Thanks!
-
Thanks stamfordman, would appreciate your help with response when you can.
-
Looks like clumsy fingers by the CEO as there is just 4 mins between the PCNs. There are no pics for the first one so I expect the CEO accidentally logged it and it shouldn't be a problem to get it cancelled by referencing the second one that was served on the car as pics show.
I'll have a think about reps for the rejected one.
-
Hi,
I have now received the Notice to Owner for the PCN, as expected. However I have also been sent a second Notice to Owner for a different PCN, seemingly for the same alleged infraction.
I only received one actual ticket on the car (PCN ZY12707172), there was no ticket for this new PCN ZY12707161. The alleged time for the new PCN is 11:03 - 11:13, which is from the exact moment I arrived in the parking space, I took the image of the parking signage at 11:04 so not sure how this can be issued? Can they issue two PCN's simultaneously?
Please advise on how to appeal the original PCN, do I supply the same evidence as before or does this require anything additional?
Please also advise on how to handle the new Notice to Owner, given I was never issued the PCN in the first place, but obviously Lewisham believe that I was...
Thanks!
Notice to Owner for the originally issued PCN - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UviSa6-QtNws86NSyEs2dls2BtyDl10p/view?usp=drive_link
Notice to Owner for the new PCN - https://drive.google.com/file/d/16akIWMyNYwjSYnGP6BuNi5GJnuIfdJgk/view?usp=drive_link
-
Thanks for the response. So the process from here would be to not pay, wait for the Notice to Owner letter that they say they'll send? That will give me the chance to contest further? Thanks!
-
You've left your name and address on the letter so I've captured the main body of the letter without this.
If it were me I'd go on with it - this is a pretty callous rejection given the circumstances. I think an adjudicator would allow this and the council may accept at formal stage if reminded of their duty to act fairly. But London penalties are now high so the stakes are higher.
(https://i.imgur.com/1CQOkeL.png)
-
Hi,
Had a response from Lewisham on this, they find no grounds for cancellation, their response attached.
Whilst they accept the timeline given, and efforts made, their view is that no permit was in place whilst the CEO observed the vehicle (which I pointed out...).
It's frustrating that they say "Please be advised parking time must be sought immediately after parking", which I feel is exactly what I did. I accept I left the vehicle during this time, but they have given no appreciation to the context.
Is it worth pursuing this any further? If they are very unlikely not to change their minds I'd rather not risk the increase to £160.
Thanks!
-
That's much better. There are tribunal cases where this type of scenario at this length of time has been allowed should the council be unpleasant. A tough adjudicator could have sided with them on not using the phone line but you did try that too so I think you should see this off.
-
Thanks - a slightly softer approach below. What do you think?
I am writing to request cancellation of PCN (XXXX) on the basis that time must be allowed to make payment for the required virtual permit. For context, I was parking in the given the location for an urgent hospital appointment for my heavily pregnant partner. Whilst we weren’t with the vehicle whilst making payment for the virtual permit, as it would have been unsafe for my partner to proceed to the hospital alone, we made every effort to do so in a timely manner, and it was duly delivered (no pun intended…) according to the timeline below.
- 11:04 - Arrived at parking location - see attachment 1 - “Parking Signage”
- 11:08 to 11:09 - 3 failed attempts to pay using the Pay by Phone app. 3 different payment methods attempted - see attachments 2, 3 and 4 - “App Payment Attempt 1-3”
- 11:09 to 11:15 - Failed attempt to pay over the phone to the Pay by Phone 0800 number. Pay by Phone system disconnected after 6 minutes - see attachment 5 - “Phone Payment Record”
- 11:19 - Successful payment made on Pay by Phone website - see attachment 6 - “Parking Receipt”
We feel we made all reasonable efforts available to secure the virtual permit, as quickly as possible, whilst maintaining the safety of those present. We accept that the period of observation for the PCN (11:07-11:17) falls within the timeline above, however we would hope that reasonable time to pay would be afforded, especially given the context.
-
It's an informal challenge at this stage and your draft is a bit confrontational - I would tone it down to be more about making every effort to register the session under the circumstances of the appointment and it was duly delivered according to the timeline.*
* A bit of humour can sometimes work wonders.
-
That is a very good, and very true, point!
-
You should say why you parked there - I presume you had to assist a heavily pregnant partner into the hospital and you could hardly hang about at the car waiting for service.
-
Thanks for the advice, much appreciated.
Current draft response, for feedback:
I am writing to request cancellation of PCN (XXXX) on the basis that time must be allowed to make payment for the required virtual permit.
The timeline of events relating to the PCN was as follows. Evidence of each stage is supplied, with timestamps.
- 11:04 - Arrived at parking location - see attachment 1 - “Parking Signage”
- 11:08 to 11:09 - 3 failed attempts to pay using the Pay by Phone app. 3 different payment methods attempted - see attachments 2, 3 and 4 - “App Payment Attempt 1-3”
- 11:09 to 11:15 - Failed attempt to pay over the phone to the Pay by Phone 0800 number. Pay by Phone system disconnected after 6 minutes - see attachment 5 - “Phone Payment Record”
- 11:19 - Successful payment made on Pay by Phone website - see attachment 6 - “Parking Receipt”
It is accepted by adjudicators that time must be allowed for payment to be made for parking. In this instance, that time period was longer than normal, however this was due to errors with the Pay by Phone systems, and not through any fault of mine. The evidence provided demonstrates that for the period of observation for the PCN (11:07-11:17), I was making all reasonable efforts possible to pay for parking, and in fact did so at the earliest opportunity.
-
Don't just cough-up ! You have a reasonable case for cancellation of the PCN. It is accepted by adjudicators that time has to be allowed for payment to be made to park. If this were not so, nobody could park legally at all !
Of course your time was somewhat extended, but you have a good reason for that. Reading between the lines of your narrative, it is clear that you were not by the car when tryng to make payment. It is never a good idea to walk away from the parked car when making a PbP payment, because if a CEO happens along, you cannot explain to him what you are trying to do.
Wait a bit to see what the others say, but prepare a draft based on your narrative, and post it here for review.
-
Hi,
Thanks in advanced for any advice!
I was visiting Lewisham Hospital yesterday for our 36 week scan (all good thankfully!), I parked on Lewisham Park in a bay that requires a permit, or payment via PayByPhone (see signage in image). We were running late so needed to head to the hospital whilst I processed the payment. 3 failed attempts at payment (with three different cards) through the PayByPhone app, 1 failed attempt by phone where their system just hung up on me, and finally successful payment on the web, meant that between arriving at 11:04 (timestamp from image of signage), it was only at 11:19 that a permit was paid for. Of course, during that time, the car was observed (11:07-11:17) and a PCN issued.
- Arrived 11:04 - timestamp on image of signage (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HRl_NZ7tKzWhLcLezJtNXP3AiYPZUwP6/view?usp=drive_link)
- 11:08 - 11:09 - 3 failed attempted at payment through app - timestamp of screenshots (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eZK8vHjuTWzy4QCxTTS4LMgif4DwvUKq/view?usp=drive_link, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j-wPaEOxnjduxagGJ3GVCBSEKtFA0Rpz/view?usp=drive_link, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AGzUCJ4pEoKVn1F_tS0JuDl7lkypDXYU/view?usp=drive_link)
- 11:09 - 11:15 - failed attempt to pay by phone - time record of call of PayByPhone (the 0800 number at the bottom) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YjI3xKgKLs8ED58aTbCxo0sbZIxAcR5Q/view?usp=drive_link)
- 11:17 - PCN issued (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NXCO9qIf6lNw0kBuDwNEW__Ng8hgrxAO/view?usp=drive_link)
- 11:19 - successful payment via the PayByPhone website - receipt (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HeYegsOy8jrVa_CF1kCyfuvg-gv5kAFQ/view?usp=drive_link)
I accept that during the time of observation, I didn't have a valid permit, however my argument is that for all of that time, I was making reasonable efforts to pay for the parking, and have evidence to that effect.
Any chance this stands up to appeal, or just accept and move on?
Thanks!