Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: TheParkingmeister on May 29, 2025, 01:04:39 pm
-
In short, you've not accepted their offer and have escalated to Stage 2 as set out in their letter.
You now have 2 strands going within the council: the complaint and the still live PCN. I wonder whether the council will make the link?
My employer decided to undermine me and pay it without asking me first and without knowledge of the situation. They think the council made them a gesture of goodwill out of the kindness of their hearts by cancelling the PCN in exchange for paying the £23. 😑
Anywho, I updated the council Manager chap who is investigating my Stage 2 complaint, and made it clear I still expect a full response to the points I raised, also including why the council thought it was appropriate to give an ultimatum, to pay £23 to in order for them to cancel a PCN which they told me they are currently investigating the legality of.
So, I'll see what they say.
-
In short, you've not accepted their offer and have escalated to Stage 2 as set out in their letter.
You now have 2 strands going within the council: the complaint and the still live PCN. I wonder whether the council will make the link?
-
So what's your intention?
It's just incredibly annoying that given the amount of time, that I get a response from someone who has clearly not bothered to look into the matter.
The fact they offer an ultimatum, if you pay the £23 for parking we will cancel the £70 (including VAT) unlawful demand for money, it's laughable.
I responded and doubled down. The fact I had previously offered to pay the £23, as it was a genuine misunderstanding, but the parking service manager rejected and demanded £70 and insisted the driver had intentially tried to defraud them and the company, despite there being no evidence of that, and then considering the administration cost dealing with this unlawful demand for money, means they will get no payment from us.
I escalated to stage 2, because they didn't actually address the main issues I complained about, I.e, operating in breach of the 2025 Order, attempting to enforce under a mix of TMA 2004 and contract law, not following legal process of pcn enforcement, obtaining registered keepers details through a revoked order (2022 Order) etc.
I could have agreed to pay the £23, but doing so would let them off the hook and allow them to continue to operate unlawfully. And lastly because I think the Parking Service Manager is a dick, and I don't like his attitude, accusing this driver of deliberate wrong doing without any evidence to support that. Dude needs a reality check or just training.
-
So what's your intention?
-
OP, if you're going to complain then, with respect, you don't ask questions.
Dear Sir,
Newark and Sherwood District Council(Civil Enforcement Off-Street Parking Places) Order 2025
As you will be aware, the above order came into effect on 7 April 2025. However, what I suspect you do not know is that your council is still operating under some previous unregulated hybrid regime and I enclose a copy of correspondence which I have received in respect of an alleged parking contravention which occurred on ** May 2025 which illustrates this point.
Although I have responded to this correspondence, as your officers have not followed the law to date, namely they have disregarded the Order, I have no confidence in their ability to comprehend the issues, admit their error and cease whatever enforcement they might have had in mind. Hence I am writing to you both for myself and any other motorists who might have received similar unlawful demands from the council.
I await your confirmation that my 'penalty' charge has been cancelled and that you will address the current shortcomings.
Yours...l
I emailed the council customer service email with the above, with "FAO John Robinson CEO and of Sue Bearman Assistant Director for Law" in the subject. I got an automated response saying I would get a full response or un update as to when I can expect to receive a response withing 3 working days. I didn't get a response. I followed it up on the 8th July and again on 17th July. And eventually got a response today which was frankly pathetic.
To summarise, it failed to actually address the issues raised and they seem to think I was negotiating when I requested for confirmation that the PCN had been cancelled. Apparently, I can pay the parking fees that ought to have been paid and in exchange they will cancel their unlawful demand for money 🤔 It would appear that their investigation consisted of asking the Parking Services Manager, aka Brian, and that was it.
"Subject: NSDC Customer Feedback response stage 1 ref: 5923031
Dear *my name*
Customer feedback: Response to your complaint (stage 1)
Thank you for the time you have taken in providing us with details of your complaint. Feedback is incredibly important to us so we can continue to learn, improve, and develop our services for our residents. We take all complaints extremely seriously and I am sorry that you have had to make a complaint in this instance.
Our definition of a complaint is “an expression of dissatisfaction, however made, about the standard of service, actions, or lack of action by the organisation, its own staff, or those acting on its behalf, affecting an individual resident or group of residents”.
This letter will outline what we do when we receive a complaint and how we seek to find a resolution. It will include details of your complaint and the steps we have taken to investigate. It will also confirm if your complaint has been upheld and outline any actions we will be taking. It also provides information on what to do if you are not satisfied with our response.
Firstly, when we receive a complaint, it is logged as a ‘stage 1 complaint.’ When you contacted us you raised the following issues: -
You have raised the following issues:
- A formal acknowledgement of this complaint
- A substantive response to the concerns raised
- Confirmation that enforcement practices are aligned with the 2025 Order
- Confirmation of the cancellation of the penalty charge issued
I understand that, to resolve your complaint, you are seeking the following outcome/s:
- A formal acknowledgement of this complaint
- A substantive response to the concerns raised
- Confirmation that enforcement practices are aligned with the 2025 Order
- Confirmation of the cancellation of the penalty charge issued
To investigate, and review your complaint I have Consultation with the Council's Parking Services Manager
Review of the Newark Lorry Park parking charges, parking charge notices, procedures, signage
Your complaint has been partially upheld, detailed below are the reasons for this decision:
Review of procedures and notices for the Newark Lorry Park
Ongoing consultation with parking authority
Ongoing consultation with the Council's Legal team
Clarification to the affected party of the circumstances surrounding the issue of a penalty charge notice
Offer of mutual resolution to the affected party
As below, we would like to elaborate on the circumstances that lead us to this position, what we are doing in more detail, and offer a resoution which you hope will find acceptable:
Following receipt of your complaint, I have reviewed the issues you have encountered when your driver parked at Newark Lorry Park, which is summarised below.
Your vehicle VRM *Vehicle reg* arrived at Newark Lorry Park on 05/05/25 at 14:58 and exited the site on 06/05/2025 at 06:43.
No payment was received from your driver for parking your company’s vehicle on the site.
There is clear signage as you enter Newark Lorry Park and around the lorry park stating the terms and conditions when parking on the site.
Newark and Sherwood District Council operate an ANPR barrier payment system on Newark Lorry Park. Drivers entering the site are agreeing to the terms and conditions of Newark Lorry Park.
All vehicles entering the site have 2 hours free parking on site, this benefits driver on a break, using the café, fuel bunker and Lorry Wash.
All drivers parking their vehicles for longer than the 2 hours free parking period should pay for their parking session prior to leaving the lorry park. Clear instructions are displayed on the lorry park parking tariff and information boards located in several locations around the site.
There is clear signage stating, ‘Pay at the Kiosk’.
When drivers use the Kiosk, the instruction is very clear and displayed in multiple languages.
The receipt that you forwarded to the Parking Services Manager was not a valid parking receipt. This was a card transaction receipt and was clearly marked as Transaction Declined.
The Parking Services Manager has previously sent through to you an image of what your driver would have viewed upon entering his vehicle registration number.
As the card payment was cancelled the driver would have seen a message that was also sent through to you.
If the driver was having difficulty he could have spoken to our officer on site or called on the lorry park help point, which is managed by the Authority’s CCTV team 24 /7 365 days a year.
No contact was made by your driver for assistance. As the parking session had not been paid for, a voucher for the showers would not have been issued.
We note your challenge for the Penalty Charge Notice issued, and we are now reviewing our arrangements for such at the Newark Lorry Park. This is a complicated process and will not be concluded before we are obliged to reply in respect of your complaint. We would therefore offer the following for conclusion of this matter:
1. That the parking charges for vehicle registration number PN71 DVR - £19.17 + vat @ 20%. Total £23.00 is paid to cover the duration of the stay.
2. Following payment of this parking charge, Newark and Sherwood District Council will cancel PCN 09.05.25 3.
Subject to your agreement, we can provide you with an invoice for the parking charge. We thank you for your time and consideration and assure you of our best attention. We hope this brings the matter to a conclusion; please contact me should you wish to discuss further.
Again, I am really sorry that you had cause to complain to us and I hope that this letter shows that your feedback has been fully considered and that you are satisfied with this response. The steps outlined above would complete stage 1 of our complaints process.
If you are still concerned or unhappy with our response you may choose to escalate your complaint to stage 2 of our complaints process. To do that, you should reply in writing (email or letter), ideally explaining why you remain dissatisfied and what outcome you are seeking. Your complaint will then be reviewed by a Business Manager or Director who was not involved in this stage 1 response.
A full copy of our Customer Feedback Policy is available on our website https://www.newark-sherwooddc.gov.uk/customerfeedback/.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Pete Preece
Business Unit Manager"
-
Keep it simple and to the point IMO.
They are not complying with the Order or TMA regulations. It's pretty straightforward and I think the response from the CE would confirm this.
-
Sorry, but why are you concerned about these issues? They have an enforcement power which they are obliged to use if they wish to penalise motorists.
They haven't.
I don't see the point of itemising everything they should and must do, this list would be as long as the applicable parts of the General Regs and Appeals Regs themselves, not to mention the Secretary of State's Statutory Guidance.
When I drafted my previous post initially I did include reference to obtaining DVLA data given that the only extant Order is the 'TMA' one. But then I thought, why bother at this stage? But I think it's an idea once the PCN's been cancelled because such a complaint should be directed at the council's DPO and this might wake them from their slumber.
Because I don't like just parroting statements without knowing exactly what they mean 🤷♂️
-
Sorry, but why are you concerned about these issues? They have an enforcement power which they are obliged to use if they wish to penalise motorists.
They haven't.
I don't see the point of itemising everything they should and must do, this list would be as long as the applicable parts of the General Regs and Appeals Regs themselves, not to mention the Secretary of State's Statutory Guidance.
When I drafted my previous post initially I did include reference to obtaining DVLA data given that the only extant Order is the 'TMA' one. But then I thought, why bother at this stage? But I think it's an idea once the PCN's been cancelled because such a complaint should be directed at the council's DPO and this might wake them from their slumber.
-
Will you please get away from what happened, it's distracting and irrelevant.
The council have made an Order.
This is legally binding on the council as well as others.
They are not complying with their order.
This is not about the facts of an alleged breach, it's about the legal powers available to the council to penalise such a breach.
Sadly such ignorance exists.
Do you think that Brian was replying to your email to the Chief Executive?
Okay, fair enough, I was just providing context and Brian's response.
So, obviously they can't legally enforce an Order that has been revoked (Order 2022), would obtaining the keepers details from DVLA not then be a data protection breach if that was the order they used to do so?
Also, if they had quoted the 2025 Order on the NtO they'd still be in breach right? As in, they still have to enforce it within TMA 2004 regs which they are not doing and hence in breach of the Order which allows them to enforce off street parking laces like Newark Lorry park?
-
Will you please get away from what happened, it's distracting and irrelevant.
The council have made an Order.
This is legally binding on the council as well as others.
They are not complying with their order.
This is not about the facts of an alleged breach, it's about the legal powers available to the council to penalise such a breach.
Sadly such ignorance exists.
Do you think that Brian was replying to your email to the Chief Executive?
-
Brian replied to me this morning saying:
"Good morning (my name), I am purely looking at the facts.
I have attached an image of what the driver would have seen at the payment kiosk if their payment transaction was declined.
I have also attached an image of what the machine would have issued the driver following a declined transaction.
The facts are also clear that we have not received payment for the parking charges applicable on Newark Lorry Park for the vehicles parking session on 5th May 2025.
As this is a barrier-controlled car park a Parking Charge Notice is issued as we cannot issue a Penalty Charge Notice on a pay on foot payment system as allows you to pay for your parking prior to leaving, not on entry.
Due to the payment system on this site a Parking Charge Notice is issued as a contractual private notice.
The parking signage is very clear on site as well as payment options.
We are very fair with the way we manage the parking enforcement at Newark Lorry Park.
Our system generates an overstay list, which shows all vehicles that have been on site longer than the 2-hour free parking period, without paying the parking charges on site.
We have a very small number of vehicles that are in contravention of the parking regulations on Newark Lorry Park.
I am not threatening debt collection, only informing you of the process.
I am very happy to discuss this matter further, if you want to give me a call on 01636 655835
Regards
Brian Rawlinson
Parking Services Manager
Newark and Sherwood District Council"
I have attached the 2 documents attached to the email. And I have also attached the receipt our driver provided that does not have "Transaction cancelled" written below and no evidence it was covered or tampered with. This raises doubts for me about what the kiosk screen said. He obviously did not use a fuel card that doesn't allow parking payment to test this out.
Beyond that, he does say it is a "contractual private notice". What does this mean then? Does the 2025 Order allow them to do this or should it still be a civil penalty under TMA 2004? And I assume it should still have an appeals proecedure and inform me of an independent appeals procedure?
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
I wrote to the council CEO and the Assistant Director for Law yesterday. And aslo heard back from the PCN dude, Brian, this morning. I'll put that in a separate reply.
OP, if you're going to complain then, with respect, you don't ask questions.
Dear Sir,
Newark and Sherwood District Council(Civil Enforcement Off-Street Parking Places) Order 2025
As you will be aware, the above order came into effect on 7 April 2025. However, what I suspect you do not know is that your council is still operating under some previous unregulated hybrid regime and I enclose a copy of correspondence which I have received in respect of an alleged parking contravention which occurred on ** May 2025 which illustrates this point.
Although I have responded to this correspondence, as your officers have not followed the law to date, namely they have disregarded the Order, I have no confidence in their ability to comprehend the issues, admit their error and cease whatever enforcement they might have had in mind. Hence I am writing to you both for myself and any other motorists who might have received similar unlawful demands from the council.
I await your confirmation that my 'penalty' charge has been cancelled and that you will address the current shortcomings.
Yours...l
-
OP, if you're going to complain then, with respect, you don't ask questions.
Dear Sir,
Newark and Sherwood District Council(Civil Enforcement Off-Street Parking Places) Order 2025
As you will be aware, the above order came into effect on 7 April 2025. However, what I suspect you do not know is that your council is still operating under some previous unregulated hybrid regime and I enclose a copy of correspondence which I have received in respect of an alleged parking contravention which occurred on ** May 2025 which illustrates this point.
Although I have responded to this correspondence, as your officers have not followed the law to date, namely they have disregarded the Order, I have no confidence in their ability to comprehend the issues, admit their error and cease whatever enforcement they might have had in mind. Hence I am writing to you both for myself and any other motorists who might have received similar unlawful demands from the council.
I await your confirmation that my 'penalty' charge has been cancelled and that you will address the current shortcomings.
Yours...l
That sounds like a good idea. But who should I be complaining to?
I assume here for a start.
https://selfservice.newark-sherwooddc.gov.uk/renderform?t=326&k=AD2976DEACFE04AF64AC7CE4174015A063B29C61
-
That sounds like a good idea. But who should I be complaining to?
According to their website
https://www.newark-sherwooddc.gov.uk/customerfeedback/#d.en.124437
You can make a complaint online.
But also (at the bottom of the page):
Contact your local councillor about local issues
Contact the Council's Chief Executive or directors by emailing customerservices@newark-sherwooddc.gov.uk
I would complain using the online service and copy it to an e-mail, putting in the subject line of your e-mail
FAO John Robinson CEO and of Sue Bearman Assistant Director for Law
See:
https://www.newark-sherwooddc.gov.uk/management/
If using post address is
Newark and Sherwood District Council
Castle House
Great North Road
Newark
Nottinghamshire
NG24 1BY
To find the councillors for the ward in which is this lorry park is situated and their contact details see:
https://democracy.newark-sherwooddc.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?bcr=1
-
The Chief Executive:
https://www.newark-sherwooddc.gov.uk/management/
-
OP, if you're going to complain then, with respect, you don't ask questions.
Dear Sir,
Newark and Sherwood District Council(Civil Enforcement Off-Street Parking Places) Order 2025
As you will be aware, the above order came into effect on 7 April 2025. However, what I suspect you do not know is that your council is still operating under some previous unregulated hybrid regime and I enclose a copy of correspondence which I have received in respect of an alleged parking contravention which occurred on ** May 2025 which illustrates this point.
Although I have responded to this correspondence, as your officers have not followed the law to date, namely they have disregarded the Order, I have no confidence in their ability to comprehend the issues, admit their error and cease whatever enforcement they might have had in mind. Hence I am writing to you both for myself and any other motorists who might have received similar unlawful demands from the council.
I await your confirmation that my 'penalty' charge has been cancelled and that you will address the current shortcomings.
Yours...l
That sounds like a good idea. But who should I be complaining to?
-
OP, if you're going to complain then, with respect, you don't ask questions.
Dear Sir,
Newark and Sherwood District Council(Civil Enforcement Off-Street Parking Places) Order 2025
As you will be aware, the above order came into effect on 7 April 2025. However, what I suspect you do not know is that your council is still operating under some previous unregulated hybrid regime and I enclose a copy of correspondence which I have received in respect of an alleged parking contravention which occurred on ** May 2025 which illustrates this point.
Although I have responded to this correspondence, as your officers have not followed the law to date, namely they have disregarded the Order, I have no confidence in their ability to comprehend the issues, admit their error and cease whatever enforcement they might have had in mind. Hence I am writing to you both for myself and any other motorists who might have received similar unlawful demands from the council.
I await your confirmation that my 'penalty' charge has been cancelled and that you will address the current shortcomings.
Yours...l
-
What an utterly useless and incompetent council ! Cretins doesn't have sufficient impact as a word to describe this lot.
I think it is time for a complaint to be made to the CEO of this council asking what statutory enforcement process is in use at the Newark Lorry Park.
-
I see that the "Notice" of May 14th implies that a contravention of the Newark and Sherwood District Council Parking Order 2022 occurred. I can't find that order. Perhaps they mean the 2025 order?
&
The letter gives you 14 days to pay the £70 demanded. That should be 28 days for a TMA2004 PCN.
You've redacted the dates and times from the May 14th letter. What are they?
It was some time in the evening of 5th May to morning of 6th May that the vehicle was parked.
And the invoice date was 16th May to be paid by today, 30th May.
Didn't even notice the 2022, but yeah it seems that was revoked by the 2024 amendment which has since been revoked by the implementation of the 2025 version.
"66. The Newark and Sherwood District Council (Off Street Parking Places) Order 2024 is revoked as from the date this Order comes into operation and any variations thereto attached to these orders are revoked in their entirety as from the date this Order comes into operation" lol these people just get worse and worse
-
I see that the "Notice" of May 14th implies that a contravention of the Newark and Sherwood District Council Parking Order 2022 occurred. I can't find that order. Perhaps they mean the 2025 order?
&
The letter gives you 14 days to pay the £70 demanded. That should be 28 days for a TMA2004 PCN.
You've redacted the dates and times from the May 14th letter. What are they?
-
So, you've responded to their letter which they title a Notice to Owner, yes?
Hi, yes, so a receipt had been handed in to us for the parking with the drivers paperwork. I couldn't find how to appeal as there is no information on doing so. So, I emailed the email address on the NtO letter with the receipt attached.
The third picture I have attached on my post is the email chain. I thought the letter was odd (as in it doesn't appear to be either a private parking charge notice or a council penalty charge notice) but I have had 2 others from them in the past that I recall and I sent in the receipt and that was the end of the matter. This time, that was not the case, and the dude is essentially accusing the driver of intentionally defrauding them and threatening additional charges and debt collections if it's not paid.
-
So, you've responded to their letter which they title a Notice to Owner, yes?
-
Surely it must still include statutory appeal rights and instructions and explain the rights under the TMA 2004? Also, VAT is not chargeable on Penalty Charge Notices because they are considered fines. Is it a statutory penalty or not, i'm confused?
Well, yes indeed, but they have actually served you with an unlawful demand for money, because the order has been in force since 7th April 2025 which replaced their previous arrangements.
Clearly in this council, it takes a very long time for new parking arrangements to filter down the hierarchical pyramid ! Whoever this person is that has been responding to you, he is totally ignorant of the enforcement arrangements that should be operating in this car park.
So I would respond to their "Notice to Owner" pointing out that they seem to be operating under two separate sets of incompatible laws and regulations. Point out that if they were operating under the Traffic Management Act 2004, you should have received a Penalty Charge Notice that the law mandates must contain a fixed set of information. Their Parking Charge Notice does not, so if anybody is committing fraud, it must be the council by issuing unlawful demands for money.
You might also consider making an official complaint to the council.
The sheer stupidity that we see nowadays in councils beggars belief.
[/quote]
I replied saying:
"Hi Brian,
It appears you’re suggesting that the driver knowingly tried to avoid payment. If that is the case, I would expect the council to be able to evidence this intent clearly.
I fully understand that you cannot entrap a vehicle. However, knowingly allowing a driver to exit the site without informing them that the receipt is invalid knowing this would lead to a penalty also has the effect of entrapment and does not support fair enforcement.
From your correspondence, it is unclear whether this charge is issued under civil enforcement powers as set out in Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA 2004) or as a contractual private notice.
If it is issued under the TMA 2004, I must remind you of your obligations under Schedule 1 to provide a formal Notice to Owner, which informs and allows statutory representations, and if rejected, provide the right to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. No such documentation or legal process has been followed.
Instead, your communications threaten debt collection, which is not permitted under TMA enforcement without a court-issued Order for Recovery. This cannot be issued without following the legal steps: NtO, Representations, NoR, Adjudicator appeal, Charge Certificate, Order for Recovery, then bailiff enforcement (not “debt collection” like a private operator would threaten).
I also note that the charge you have issued includes VAT. Under TMA 2004 PCNs are civil penalties and as such are exempt from VAT. This makes it look like a private contractual charge and not a civil penalty.
If it is instead issued under private contract law, I dispute the debt on the grounds that:
1. There was a genuine attempt to pay, as supported by the receipt and information provided, showing good faith on our part.
2. I have offered to pay the full parking charge, which you declined.
3. The Notice to Owner, which should surely be a Penalty Charge Notice under TMA 2004, not a Parking Charge Notice, fails to make it clear whether operated under public or private enforcement.
I therefore request either:
• A formal rejection notice with access to adjudication (if it is indeed TFA enforcement), or
• Written confirmation that the charge is cancelled.
Any further enforcement or reference to “debt collection” without observing the correct statutory process will be reported to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, the Local Government Ombudsman as well as a formal complaint to Newark & Sherwood District Council.
Regards"
-
https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/TRO/Newark%20and%20Sherwood/KQ004.pdf
Newark Lorry Park is item CE015 in col. 1 of the Schedule to Part X of the Order which came into effect on 7 April 2025.
'Penalty Charges' are dealt with in Part VII - as a subject it's not necessary to include in an order made under the referenced powers, but there we are!
The Order was in effect when the contravention occurred. (OP, don't blank out dates)
The letter is b******s.
Surely it must still include statutory appeal rights and instructions and explain the rights under the TMA 2004? Also, VAT is not chargeable on Penalty Charge Notices because they are considered fines. Is it a statutory penalty or not, i'm confused?
Well, yes indeed, but they have actually served you with an unlawful demand for money, because the order has been in force since 7th April 2025 which replaced their previous arrangements.
Clearly in this council, it takes a very long time for new parking arrangements to filter down the hierarchical pyramid ! Whoever this person is that has been responding to you, he is totally ignorant of the enforcement arrangements that should be operating in this car park.
So I would respond to their "Notice to Owner" pointing out that they seem to be operating under two separate sets of incompatible laws and regulations. Point out that if they were operating under the Traffic Management Act 2004, you should have received a Penalty Charge Notice that the law mandates must contain a fixed set of information. Their Parking Charge Notice does not, so if anybody is committing fraud, it must be the council by issuing unlawful demands for money.
You might also consider making an official complaint to the council.
The sheer stupidity that we see nowadays in councils beggars belief.
-
https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/TRO/Newark%20and%20Sherwood/KQ004.pdf
Newark Lorry Park is item CE015 in col. 1 of the Schedule to Part X of the Order which came into effect on 7 April 2025.
'Penalty Charges' are dealt with in Part VII - as a subject it's not necessary to include in an order made under the referenced powers, but there we are!
The Order was in effect when the contravention occurred. (OP, don't blank out dates)
The letter is b******s.
Surely it must still include statutory appeal rights and instructions and explain the rights under the TMA 2004? Also, VAT is not chargeable on Penalty Charge Notices because they are considered fines. Is it a statutory penalty or not, i'm confused?
-
https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/TRO/Newark%20and%20Sherwood/KQ004.pdf
Newark Lorry Park is item CE015 in col. 1 of the Schedule to Part X of the Order which came into effect on 7 April 2025.
'Penalty Charges' are dealt with in Part VII - as a subject it's not necessary to include in an order made under the referenced powers, but there we are!
The Order was in effect when the contravention occurred. (OP, don't blank out dates)
The letter is b******s.
-
The May 14th Notice says at the top "Notice to Owner". I would expect it to say Notice to Keeper if this is a Parking Charge Notice.
That said, the text of the letter says it's a Parking Charge Notice more than once.
The County of Nottinghamshire was designated:
(a)a civil enforcement area for parking contraventions; and
(b)a special enforcement area
In 2008. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1086/made
Newark is not mentioned in the schedule of exceptions. And neither is the lorry/coach park.
Shouldn't the TMA 2004 protocols and regulations be followed?
-
Their letter mentions the Traffic Management Act 2004, but as far as I know, this is of no relevance to the serving of Parking Charge Notices.
-
This is a parking charge notice and seems to be issued as a private parking invoice. It is not a civil penalty charge notice.
Maybe belongs in the private parking section.
-
Newark & Sherwood Cuncil operate Newark Lorry Park and so they are exercising their powers under section 32, 34 and Part IV of Schedule 9 of the road traffic regulations act 1984 and under traffic management act 2004 to recover all costs... is what the letter says.
One of our vehicles parked there overnight and believed they had paid for parking with a company fuel card. The Lorry Park advertise this as a valid payment method, however the company cards are set up only to allow fuel purchases. So, it has declined. However, the receipt it spat out looks like a valid receipt to the driver and to me.
I have attached the NtO and the attached invoice and a picture of my appeals, and their responses.
My concern is there was no evidence attached to the notice or any evidence online, infact there was nowhere to login online to see the PCN or pay online, and no information on appealing and I have had no option for independent adjudication presented, is this right? It doesn't seem right to me.
They are also basically accusing the driver of fraud, but I see no evidence that he attempted to defraud anyone besides their word.
Any help would be greatly appreciated 🙏
[attachment deleted by admin]