Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: GRYOUT on June 25, 2025, 11:41:55 am
-
Well this cloak and dagger approach has hardly helped others, has it?
Couple things... First off - Given firms (public and private) are upskilling and leveraging data, I do genuinely question how long it'll be until councils are scouring forums such as these to try and get ahead of the community. If I were working on the other side, I'd be checking these spaces regularly and running a few AI Agents through new posts to train the systems to be smarter and tight up any loopholes, which is partially why I held off publishing the official docs. I'd really like to see a portal that's somewhat locked down or restricted in access that people can upload their docs to without it being so easily available on the clearnet.
Secondly, Whilst drip-feeding info to you isnt the most helpful, pls know I'm hugely grateful for all of your help.
Have written up an events-based timeline below. Hope this helps others. Anything else of interest just let me know.
The main points listed below:
Contravention: 53C - Driving down a School Street during restricted hours. Council: Sutton
1) PCN: Received PCN 7 days after contravention.
2) PCN Appeal: Made representation to council 3 days later. Requested PCN be cancelled as contravention was a first-time mistake.
3) NoR: Received NoR 1 day later. Noticed NoR incorrectly referenced pre-April full charge/uplift amount (£130 -> £195) instead of £160 -> £240 when describing effects of no action/response to NoR. Researched using GPT-o3, Claude, Perplexity. Created appeal to be filed later to Lon.Trib
4) NoR Appeal: Waited 24 days to respond to the NoR. My understanding of the rule is council must issue one valid NoR within 56 days. If I say the NoR is invalid, and the council agree, they could then technically argue a valid NoR has yet to be issued, and may be within their rights to issue another NoR (this time without a mistake in it). There's nothing in the 2003 Act that says only one NoR may be issued. The wording is that only one valid NoR may be issued. Key word here valid. I'm aware this is contrary to some views in this thread. I couldn't confirm for sure on the stance here so decided to at least draw out the process for 24 days which would have given them a little less of the 56 days to respond, if indeed that was an option available to them. I think the 2004 Act tightens things up a bit.
Filed to London Tribunals the following.
The NoR must warn that a charge certificate will be served unless you pay or appeal within 28 days, and it must describe the effect of that certificate - i.e. the penalty increases by 50% of the full charge.
1. Wrong financial uplift: Schedule 1, (5)(1) states that a charge certificate increases the penalty by 50% (one-half). Sutton’s full penalty for this contravention is £160, so the Charge Certificate amount specified in the NoR should be £240. The NoR instead warns of an increase from £130 to £195. It therefore mis-states a mandatory statutory consequence.
2. Wrong timing statement: Schedule 1, (3)(a) requires the NoR to say that a charge certificate may be served unless, before the end of 28 days, I pay or appeal. The NoR received says the a Charge Certificate may be sent before 28 days, implying it can act during that 28-day window. This reverses the statutory sequence and is potentially misleading.
Because the NoR fails on both the amount and the timing required by Schedule 1, it is invalid. That is a clear procedural impropriety and the penalty charge exceeds the amount permitted by law. I ask the adjudicator to allow the appeal and cancel the PCN.
5) DnC: Council filed a Do not contest 1 week later.
-
Well this cloak and dagger approach has hardly helped others, has it?
-
Well done, and thanks for letting us know the outcome
-
Haven't managed to scan it as of yet. I'll ensure to do it this evening or by tomorrow at the latest.
You can just take pics on a mobile phone?
We don't even know if you've registered an appeal yet?
Made the appeal to London Tribunal. Highlighted incorrect charge on the NoR. Council cancelled the PCN upon reviewing evidence in the appeal portal. I didn't upload the paperwork here as it really looked like a slam dunk and didn't want to bog you guys down with what seemed like an easy win.
-
Haven't managed to scan it as of yet. I'll ensure to do it this evening or by tomorrow at the latest.
You can just take pics on a mobile phone?
We don't even know if you've registered an appeal yet?
-
@GRYOUT Why all this cloak and dagger stuff?
-
They can't withdraw the NoR and issue a new one. You're entitled to rely on what it says. But if it makes you feel more secure then register an appeal with the independent adjudicator. Put "detailed submission to follow" in the relevant box.
Registering an appeal might trigger a DNC, Do Not Contest.
Is this for certain? Is there any way they could send me another (valid) NoR that supersedes the first one? Is there any workaround on the council's side that they can rely on to invalidate the first NoR once they're aware of their mistake?
I'm wondering if I need to wait to file the appeal with London Tribunals, or if I can just file it now knowing the council has no recourse or power to fix the mistake once it come to light. I.e. can they say they didn't issue a valid NoR as it was defective and treat it as no notice at all in effect, and then issue another one that's not defective?
The clock is ticking with the Adjudicator. The window to submit an appeal is determined with reference to the date of service of the Notice of Rejection that you currently have. There is a time limited validity code on the NoR which you will need to use.
I advised you to submit an appeal. State that a detailed submission will follow. You could add that the Notice of Rejection is defective as mandatory information concerning the amounts due are incorrectly stated and that this is potentially prejudicial.
Registering an appeal will buy you some time to refine your argument about a defective NoR. The Council will have to respond with their evidence as it stands now. Not with what they might wish they had sent.
To get started with refining your argument please post up the documents previously requested.
If you don't get an appeal registered then you run the risk of timing out, the council will then serve a charge certificate adding 50% to the amount due. And you will have no option but to pay it.
-
Left this a couple of days ago as OP had not posted any documents, despite requests and promises.
Now just daft questions.
Shouldn't have bothered looking again! :o
Haven't managed to scan it as of yet. I'll ensure to do it this evening or by tomorrow at the latest.
There's me thinking I was asking a smart question ::) . Just trying to understand the legislative application to the PCN.
-
They can't withdraw the NoR and issue a new one. You're entitled to rely on what it says. But if it makes you feel more secure then register an appeal with the independent adjudicator. Put "detailed submission to follow" in the relevant box.
Registering an appeal might trigger a DNC, Do Not Contest.
Is this for certain? Is there any way they could send me another (valid) NoR that supersedes the first one? Is there any workaround on the council's side that they can rely on to invalidate the first NoR once they're aware of their mistake?
I'm wondering if I need to wait to file the appeal with London Tribunals, or if I can just file it now knowing the council has no recourse or power to fix the mistake once it come to light. I.e. can they say they didn't issue a valid NoR as it was defective and treat it as no notice at all in effect, and then issue another one that's not defective?
-
Left this a couple of days ago as OP had not posted any documents, despite requests and promises.
Now just daft questions.
Shouldn't have bothered looking again! :o
-
Out of curiosity, the PCN says that the contravention falls under the LLA & TfL Act 2003.
I noticed this is slightly different to the TMA 2004 legislation when it comes to detailing what a NoR must state. The 2004 Act is clearer, the 2003 Act seems a little more vague and generalised.
Can arguments that lean towards the 2004 act be made, e.g. the NoR states the incorrect Charge Certificate amount and misleads regarding the financial impact of the charge.
Does the fact the PCN falls under the 2003 Act disadvantage this arguement?
For clarity:
- The PCN was for £80 discounted, £160 after discounted, and £240 in the event of no action via a Charge Certificate
- The NoR is for £80 discounted, £160 after discount, and increases from £130 to £195 in the event of no action via a Charge Certificate
The £130 to £195 figure is wrong, and should say £160 to £240 instead.
-
Sending is not the determinant issue, it's service.
Service is presumed 2 working days after posting. Therefore in theory a council could issue on a Thurs when the window closes on a Sunday i.e. 3 days 'early' and still be OK providing that reps weren't made on the Thurs, Fri, Sat or Sun. It's all programmed and some will be quick off the mark, others will wait until the window has closed before issuing, just to be on the safe side.
Frankly, I cannot see how a council could give consideration to the reps in such a short timeframe, but we haven't seen them. I refer to them in the third person because I get the impression that you aren't the 'respondent'.
-
We don't know whether it's a Notice of Rejection of Formal Representations or not, we haven't seen it.
By the way..the council can send a Charge Certificate during the 28-day window, i.e. on day 1–28
Correct. But they risk it being served without lawful authority if it's sent before the 28-day window closes and action is taken during its transit. It's happened and occasionally authorities have come a cropper.
Yes, it's a Notice of Rejection of Representations (which is the same as a Notice of Rejection of Formal Representations I'm led to believe).
Just to clarify your last message, when you said "By the way..the council can send a Charge Certificate during the 28-day window, i.e. on day 1–28" , were you quoting my post, or were you confirming that the council are permitted to send a CC between day 1-28?
Your last message where you say "Correct" suggests that you were quoting my post and confirming that the council shouldn't be sending it out before 28 days.
-
53C - buses/cycles only moving traffic contravention.
53C: Failing to comply with restrictions on vehicles entering a pedestrian and cycle zone
It was a school street with restricted access at pick up time
-
Authorities have 56 days to reply to formal representations made against parking PCNs - nothing to do with this.
They can't reissue an NOR and in any case they deal with 1000s of PCNs and while we'd hope they dip in here to learn things I doubt many do.
In my case it's a formal representation made against a moving traffic PCN (53c).
The way I understood it, the informal representation wasn't even an option given the nature of the PCN the moving traffic type.
-
53C - buses/cycles only moving traffic contravention.
-
We don't know whether it's a Notice of Rejection of Formal Representations or not, we haven't seen it.
By the way..the council can send a Charge Certificate during the 28-day window, i.e. on day 1–28
Correct. But they risk it being served without lawful authority if it's sent before the 28-day window closes and action is taken during its transit. It's happened and occasionally authorities have come a cropper.
-
Authorities have 56 days to reply to formal representations made against parking PCNs - nothing to do with this.
They can't reissue an NOR and in any case they deal with 1000s of PCNs and while we'd hope they dip in here to learn things I doubt many do.
-
I'll get it uploaded shortly when back home.
It'd be London Tribunals, as it's a London Borough.
I'd read that the EA has 56 days in which to issue a compliant NoR. If they realise their mistake, they could withdraw the NoR, fix it and re-issue it within 56-days of my representation being made.
-
They can't withdraw the NoR and issue a new one. You're entitled to rely on what it says. But if it makes you feel more secure then register an appeal with the independent adjudicator. Put "detailed submission to follow" in the relevant box.
Registering an appeal might trigger a DNC, Do Not Contest.
As to which Tribunal has jurisdiction I have no idea as you have failed to disclose the required information. Not least which Enforcement Authority you are dealing with.
So once again, if you want the comprehensive advice then please read the instructions in the READ THIS FIRST - **BEFORE POSTING YOUR CASE!** (https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/) sticky post at the top of the forum.
Please post up the postal PCN you received and the Notice of Rejection and the text of your representation against the PCN.
Just redact your name and address / email address where present. Please leave everything else visible.
-
You can PM me if you like; but, the normal procedure is to post as suggested above. Yes, I won one case re the wrong amount "subceded". Redbridge. I would not advise cutting it fine and do not know what 56 days are in this regard.
-
I should have been clearer in my first post (which I'll update to reflect the below).
12/06/25: Alleged contravention
19/06/25: PCN issued
20/06/25: PCN served
24/06/25: Representation submitted
24/06/25: NoR dated and posted
25/06/25: NoR served
[attach=1]
Is there a way to share the notice privately, as I don't want to give the EA the opportunity to withdraw the NoR and reissue a corrected version (if a procedural impropriety angle exists).
I understand they have up to 56 days in which to do this if they wise up and decide to.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Possible scenarios:
The sum demanded in the NOR is incorrect i.e. the contravention occurred after the new mandated penalties came into effect, which would be borne out by the fact that you 'received it last week' if you are the registered keeper because otherwise if the contravention occurred before 7 April then prima facie the PCN has been served late and is invalid, or
The PCN is in respect of a pre-change contravention but your 'receipt' is due to it not being delivered direct to you, or
You are not the registered keeper, the contravention occurred before the change but was sent first to, say, a leasing company who then made successful reps following which a fresh PCN was sent to you...etc?
Is why we need the PCN with all dates and other non-personal info in place.
-
Yes let's see the material but the correct action is to appeal to the tribunal on the basis of a defective rejection.
-
Please post up the postal PCN you received and the Notice of Rejection and the text of your representation against the PCN.
Just redact your name and address / email address where present. Please leave everything else visible.
All as per the instructions in the READ THIS FIRST - **BEFORE POSTING YOUR CASE!** (https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/) sticky post at the top of this forum.
-
Intentionally leaving details of the EA out of my post as I intend to follow it up myself if experts consider it worthy
Received a PCN last week for a 53C. The PCN states the charge is £80 discounted, £160 after discount period, and £240 in the event payment isn't made or a representation isn't submitted. I submitted a rep.
Timelines as follows:
12/06/25: Alleged contravention
19/06/25: PCN issued
20/06/25: PCN served
24/06/25: Representation submitted
24/06/25: NoR dated and posted
25/06/25: NoR served
[attach=1]
On the NoR, under the heading "If you do nothing", it's written “If you have taken no action, before the end of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this Notice of Rejection, we may serve a Charge Certificate increasing the charge from £130 to £195.”
That appears wrong for 2 reasons:
1. Overlapping timelines: By using the words "before the end of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this Notice of Rejection", the notice implies the council can send a Charge Certificate during the 28-day window, i.e. on day 1–28. That contradicts the statute, which requires them to wait until the 28-day period has expired
2. Mis-stating the charge amount: I've done some research and can see London’s higher-band PCNs went up on 7 April 2025, so the correct wording should be **£160 increasing to £240**. It seems they’re still using the pre-April 2025 template (£130 → £195).
Questions
1. Should the NoR not have made use of the word "before the end of 28 days..."
2. Is it correct to think the NoR figure should match the £160 → £240 band?
3. Has anyone here succeeded on a similar “wrong amount” argument recently?
4. Would you appeal now or wait to see if they serve a CC, or try and run down as much of the 56-day clock as possible before putting in the appeal to reduce the chances of the EA withdrawing their NoR and reissuing a corrected NoR which I can't appeal.
Thanks in advanced.
[attachment deleted by admin]