Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: taffer87 on October 26, 2023, 02:07:23 pm
-
@cp8759 - thanks for the help (and also others)..
was quite straightforward in the end due to the charge certificate error from the council and on me mentioning that, the authority representative agreed that this was an error and the call only took a couple of minutes for the adjudicator to accept the appeal.
I decided to raise this at the start rather than go through all the other appeal points.
-
@taffer87 what was the outcome?
-
so the answer to when the appeal was registered is one of the two. probably 8 February 2024. i can see the authority was informed of the appeal on 8 February 2024 as per their log too
Received charge certificate in the post today dated 5 March 2024.
There you have it.
The regs provide:
Further representations by the parties
4.—(1) Any party may deliver representations in relation to the matters referred to in regulation 5(2)(b), 8(5) or 11(3), as appropriate in the circumstances, to the proper officer at any time before the appeal is determined.
-
Pl answer the questions:
Date that the tribunal issued their notification to you that your appeal had been registered (which acts as the same date on which the enforcement authority were notified);
The date the CC was issued.
Not 'Appeal with tribunal filed on 31 January 2024 online', you must have received confirmation that it had been registered. And you can find out from the authority when the CC was issued.
There is no email which says the appeal has been registered.
There is an email on 31 January 2024 saying appeal has been submitted and tribunal will consider and let you know if it has been accepted within 7 days.
the next communication I have is an email with an attachment on 8 February 2024 which says thanks for your appeal which was received on 31 January 2024 the hearing will take place on xx March 2024 (a date in wc 11 March 2024)
so the answer to when the appeal was registered is one of the two. probably 8 February 2024. i can see the authority was informed of the appeal on 8 February 2024 as per their log too
The charge certificate was issued on either 4 March or 5 March. It doesn’t matter really which of the two for this purpose. Will just wait to receive it. I am not going to contact the council and flag the error directly to them for now.
On 4 March (and prior to that), the council website said a charge certificate would be issued on 4 March and the amount will increase to £195 but it was accepting £130 as payment.
On 5 March the council's website changed the amount to £195 and now says the charge certificate will be registered at the court on 22 March 2024
Received charge certificate in the post today dated 5 March 2024.
Very happy to receive the charge certificate :D
-
Upload that screenshot to the tribunal website, it shows that the penalty demanded exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case, which is a statutory ground of appeal in its own right.
If you get a charge certificate in the post, service of that document is a procedural impropriety. If the council officer attends, ask him or her if the council concedes the appeal owing to the premature charge certificate.
If s/he refuses to concede you need to cross-examine the officer by asking them to read out the definition of a procedural impropriety at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/576/regulation/2 and then asking how premature service of a charge certificate while an appeal is outstanding is authorised or required by the regulations.
Thank you
-
Pl answer the questions:
Date that the tribunal issued their notification to you that your appeal had been registered (which acts as the same date on which the enforcement authority were notified);
The date the CC was issued.
Not 'Appeal with tribunal filed on 31 January 2024 online', you must have received confirmation that it had been registered. And you can find out from the authority when the CC was issued.
There is no email which says the appeal has been registered.
There is an email on 31 January 2024 saying appeal has been submitted and tribunal will consider and let you know if it has been accepted within 7 days.
the next communication I have is an email with an attachment on 8 February 2024 which says thanks for your appeal which was received on 31 January 2024 the hearing will take place on xx March 2024 (a date in wc 11 March 2024)
so the answer to when the appeal was registered is one of the two. probably 8 February 2024. i can see the authority was informed of the appeal on 8 February 2024 as per their log too
The charge certificate was issued on either 4 March or 5 March. It doesn’t matter really which of the two for this purpose. Will just wait to receive it. I am not going to contact the council and flag the error directly to them for now.
On 4 March (and prior to that), the council website said a charge certificate would be issued on 4 March and the amount will increase to £195 but it was accepting £130 as payment.
On 5 March the council's website changed the amount to £195 and now says the charge certificate will be registered at the court on 22 March 2024
-
Pl answer the questions:
Date that the tribunal issued their notification to you that your appeal had been registered (which acts as the same date on which the enforcement authority were notified);
The date the CC was issued.
Not 'Appeal with tribunal filed on 31 January 2024 online', you must have received confirmation that it had been registered. And you can find out from the authority when the CC was issued.
-
Service of a CC when an appeal has been registered may be a PI.
But get your ducks in a row first to ensure that you can nail the matter with objective facts, which are:
Date that the tribunal issued their notification to you that your appeal had been registered (which acts as the same date on which the enforcement authority were notified);
The date the CC was issued.
OP, over to you. If the dates stack up, then IMO it's appeal point no. 1.
I haven’t received a charge certificate yet but the council website says one has been issued and the council payment amount has gone up to £195 on 4 March 2024
appeal hearing is next week (wc 11 March 2024) and has not been changed since the tribunal set it on 9 February 2024
Appeal with tribunal filed on 31 January 2024 online
Notice of rejection date 29 Jan 2024
-
Service of a CC when an appeal has been registered may be a PI.
But get your ducks in a row first to ensure that you can nail the matter with objective facts, which are:
Date that the tribunal issued their notification to you that your appeal had been registered (which acts as the same date on which the enforcement authority were notified);
The date the CC was issued.
OP, over to you. If the dates stack up, then IMO it's appeal point no. 1.
-
Upload that screenshot to the tribunal website, it shows that the penalty demanded exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case, which is a statutory ground of appeal in its own right.
If you get a charge certificate in the post, service of that document is a procedural impropriety. If the council officer attends, ask him or her if the council concedes the appeal owing to the premature charge certificate.
If s/he refuses to concede you need to cross-examine the officer by asking them to read out the definition of a procedural impropriety at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/576/regulation/2 and then asking how premature service of a charge certificate while an appeal is outstanding is authorised or required by the regulations.
-
You certainly need to include this matter at the adjudication, as this is a procedural impropriety, and has won appeals in the past.
-
@cp8759
it seems they have issued a charge certificate even though the hearing at tribunal is a week away. i haven’t received it in the post yet but this is what the council website says and when i go to payment it asks for £195 today
even if i don’t physically receive the charge certificate in the post - is this a PI on its own that they are now asking for £195 on their website?
At the same time I have also received a message from Tribunal that The LA Appeal officer will indeed be joining the hearing via telephone
(https://i.ibb.co/RBxk0gL/IMG-2800.png) (https://ibb.co/Sdh4n6q)
(https://i.ibb.co/TvVsCxc/IMG-2798.png) (https://ibb.co/w09fvFy)
-
To the Adjudicator..
Sir,
I would draw your attention to pages 2 and 3 of the council's Case Summary, as follows:
Customer Reason for Representation
Item 3
Not owner ....not owner for purposes of TMA.
Authority Reason to Uphold (sic) Appeal
Please be advised......therefore the council had done(sic) a transfer of liability ..Evidence E
I would also refer you to Evidence C(council's log) which shows that on 15 Dec. representations were received from VWFS Finance challenging liability.
This letter can be seen in Evidence E and states that the vehicle is on lease to ******** and supplies my name and address. On the basis of this letter alone the council accepted the owner's representations, see their Notice of Acceptance dated 17 Jan. I would add that although VWFS wrote to the council again, their duplicated letters dated 21 Dec. refer, these add nothing to their representations as regards the nature of the hiring.
I submit that their letter dated 15 Dec. failed to meet the requirements of representations under regulation 5(4)(d) of the Appeals Regulations 2022 which require that the owner not only states the name and address of the person to whom the vehicle was hired at the material time but also include the following documents:
A signed statement of liability acknowledging their liability in respect of any penalty charge notice served in respect of any relevant road traffic contravention involving the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement.
No such evidence was submitted by VWFS or by the council to justify their decision to accept the owner's representations and to issue a NTO to me.
As support to your appeal on these grounds.
Some thoughts.
-
@H C Andersen
Any views are welcome as need to submit soon.
1. In addition to the point on whether the TWOC in NTO fetters to theft should be added? I haven't found any real past cases on this so am minded to not include.
2. Also want to check if I need to mention this in the rejection notice against the informal challenge as I think they shouldn't have said "automatically" but keen to get guidance from experts/experienced folk
"You have these choices:
- You can pay the discount charge of £65.00 if your payment reaches us within 14 days of the date of this letter.
- You can pay £130.00 within 28 days of the date your PCN was issued.
- You can formally challenge your PCN by using a Notice to Owner form. The vehicle's owner will automatically receive the form if the PCN has not been paid within 28 days of being issued. The form offers you the chance to formally challenge your PCN or pay the full £130.00. If you decide to formally challenge your PCN, please do not write to us again but wait until the Notice to Owner form arrives."
3. Anything else you can think of based on evidence pack and my draft appeal doc
-
@H C Andersen
Oops edited above and also here: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/w6p0ql7y0y0dfhis18awz/Evidence-Pack-redacted_Redacted-1.pdf?rlkey=0n7krasyfrjhd8phw7zat0whs&dl=0
-
Edited
The evidence pack refers to a moving traffic contravention and Lewisham council!
-
@H C Andersen
please see link to council evidence bundle here: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/w6p0ql7y0y0dfhis18awz/Evidence-Pack-redacted_Redacted-1.pdf?rlkey=0n7krasyfrjhd8phw7zat0whs&dl=0
Appeal to Tribunal here: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/iuj701ssg6wm39cioxrvk/lambeth-pcn-Appeal-skeleton-latest.docx?rlkey=g3agnjs7wb9dezaeebzvjsni4&dl=0
-
As I posited might be the case.
OP, the link to their evidence no longer works!
As others have observed, the main procedural issue in your favour would appear to be the authority issuing a NTO in your name. They had no power to do this when on the basis of what was discussed before the authority posted their evidence they could not cancel the NTO issued to the de jure owner i.e. the hire company. A NTO is a legal document; it demands payment from the recipient; councils may only issue these in prescribed circumstances; councils may enforce payment using the full weight of the law, even to seizing the recipient's goods.
So, is their demand for the penalty lawful? In the context of this point, only if the owner made representations in the correct form and manner and if these provided the evidence which the law requires in order to empower the council to cancel their NTO and issue a fresh one to you.
We need access to the council's evidence.
-
Re the hyperlink to the video evidence. This case is very relevant
2210208756
Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.
Reasons
The Authority has not complied with the requirements for providing CCTV evidence directed by the Tribunal in the Chief Adjudicator's Practice Direction which reads:
'The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 require parties to an appeal to deliver evidence to the Proper Officer. Evidence must be submitted in an immediately accessible form. It is expected that when an enforcement authority is relying on moving images, where a DVD containing the evidence is not provided, the relevant CCTV evidence will be presented in a file containing the uploaded evidence and included in the authority’s evidence bundle. Providing a hyperlink to an authority’s website is not considered to be a proper delivery or submission of evidence. Authorities will also be aware that using this system has resulted in adjudicators allowing appeals, when they have been unable to access or view evidence; this does not occur when the evidence is correctly submitted. The evidence form category type K, will be amended to refer to “CCTV uploaded evidence” and from 4th April 2020 authorities must submit the evidence in the required format. (Providing the evidence in DVD form under category type J “unscannable evidence” remains acceptable).'
Therefore I do not have before me any CCTV evidence showing the appellant's vehicle stationary in the box junction. Stills are not adequate evidence as I cannot be satisfied the vehicle is stationary. The Authority cannot rely on any evidence or apparent admissions made by the appellant. I must decide if the Authority has shown there is a case to answer before I look at the appellant's evidence. In this case it has not done so.
It is for the Authority to prove its case and in the absence of adequate evidence it has not done so. I therefore allow the appeal on that basis.
Thanks, they have included all the photos in evidence separately anyway.
-
Re the hyperlink to the video evidence. This case is very relevant
2210208756
Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.
Reasons
The Authority has not complied with the requirements for providing CCTV evidence directed by the Tribunal in the Chief Adjudicator's Practice Direction which reads:
'The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 require parties to an appeal to deliver evidence to the Proper Officer. Evidence must be submitted in an immediately accessible form. It is expected that when an enforcement authority is relying on moving images, where a DVD containing the evidence is not provided, the relevant CCTV evidence will be presented in a file containing the uploaded evidence and included in the authority’s evidence bundle. Providing a hyperlink to an authority’s website is not considered to be a proper delivery or submission of evidence. Authorities will also be aware that using this system has resulted in adjudicators allowing appeals, when they have been unable to access or view evidence; this does not occur when the evidence is correctly submitted. The evidence form category type K, will be amended to refer to “CCTV uploaded evidence” and from 4th April 2020 authorities must submit the evidence in the required format. (Providing the evidence in DVD form under category type J “unscannable evidence” remains acceptable).'
Therefore I do not have before me any CCTV evidence showing the appellant's vehicle stationary in the box junction. Stills are not adequate evidence as I cannot be satisfied the vehicle is stationary. The Authority cannot rely on any evidence or apparent admissions made by the appellant. I must decide if the Authority has shown there is a case to answer before I look at the appellant's evidence. In this case it has not done so.
It is for the Authority to prove its case and in the absence of adequate evidence it has not done so. I therefore allow the appeal on that basis.
-
@Hippocrates
@cp8759
The NTO I received has this in grounds of appeal
"At the time the alleged contravention occurred the vehicle in question was in the control of a person who did not have the consent of the owner - Please enclose evidence (e.g. police crime report, insurance claim)."
I have seen numerous mentions in the forum recently that wording similar to this for TWOC fetters to theft (and is thus a PI?). Any thoughts on this or past tribunal cases so I can include this as an appeal point too for tribunal?
-
Thanks @cp8759 I have added this and the relevant backup to the draft appeal document as point 2.
-
I've highlighted in red the differences that normally are considered material:
Interestingly they have offered the £65 discount again if the appeal is unsuccessful.
How exact does the PCN that the council includes in the evidence pack need to be? Is it supposed to be an exact copy as there are some minor differences eg.
Is this a winner on its own?
Front page differences:
Council copy says: "Who Believed That the Following Parking Contravention Had Been Committed"
Actual PCN says: "Who had reason to Believe That the Following Parking Contravention Had Been Committed: 12"
Council copy says: "or without payment of the parking charge"
Actual PCN says: "or without payment of the parking charge (shared use bay)"
Council copy says: "The penalty charge must be paid within the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the alleged contravention occurred."
Actual PCN says: "The penalty charge must be paid no later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the penalty charge notice was served."
Council copy says: "notice is served, the penalty charge will be reduced by 50%"
Actual PCN says: "notice is served ("the 14 day period"), the penalty charge will be reduced by 50%"
Council PCN has this which actual PCN does not have: "View any photos of the contravention at www.lambeth.cov.uk/parkingphotos Please allow up to 5 working days to view"
Also, council copy has no row for CEO signature
Back of PCN
Text looks all the same, actual PCN has a "I am idler" image at the end but assume this is irrelevant.
Go to https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pVrE76_RYY6bNmEpYGbsZkxtpfIeud_BT3SKfg7TzQM/edit?pli=1#gid=642784037 and look at rows 633 to 659, those are all the decisions you can cite. The leading authorities are Vanessa Price v Nottingham City Council and Tahir Hamid v London Borough of Waltham Forest.
I suggest however that you read all the cases and try and find one with similar discrepancies. This issue will easily win an appeal.
-
Interestingly they have offered the £65 discount again if the appeal is unsuccessful.
How exact does the PCN that the council includes in the evidence pack need to be? Is it supposed to be an exact copy as there are some minor differences eg.
Is this a winner on its own?
Front page differences:
Council copy says: "Who Believed That the Following Parking Contravention Had Been Committed"
Actual PCN says: "Who had reason to Believe That the Following Parking Contravention Had Been Committed: 12"
Council copy says: "or without payment of the parking charge"
Actual PCN says: "or without payment of the parking charge (shared use bay)"
Council copy says: "The penalty charge must be paid within the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the alleged contravention occurred."
Actual PCN says: "The penalty charge must be paid no later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the penalty charge notice was served."
Council copy says: "notice is served, the penalty charge will be reduced by 50%"
Actual PCN says: "notice is served ("the 14 day period"), the penalty charge will be reduced by 50%"
Council PCN has this which actual PCN does not have: "View any photos of the contravention at www.lambeth.cov.uk/parkingphotos Please allow up to 5 working days to view"
Also, council copy has no row for CEO signature
Back of PCN
Text looks all the same, actual PCN has a "I am idler" image at the end but assume this is irrelevant.
-
For cp, given Jack Walsh's recent decision, where does this stand?
The alleged contravention is supported by evidence which can be viewed at
https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/parking-transport-and-streets/parking-fines/view-pcn-
evidence
for the Environment Traffic Adjudicators and
the appellant.
But they've included other exhibits which might replicate this 'evidence'.
-
@cp8759 Council evidence pack now received: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/rplllsinilz1r9rgtjzn2/Evidence-Pack-redacted_Redacted.pdf?rlkey=uc9vzc9mttl4id4d9s8ykna2a&dl=0
Any advice on the draft appeal document is most welcome: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/rv8m7ivg9u7q1s3k76mgo/Appeal-skeleton.docx?rlkey=25075flfm6i07y5lvs991m967&dl=0
-
Thinking of uploading this next week in advance of council evidence pack and can then edit / add anything after council evidence
No, as I've told you privately, don't submit anything until the council has shown their hand. There is literally zero reason to upload anything now.
After all, for all you know they might not submit anything at all and then you just win by default.
Thanks will do that (not submit for now)
-
Thinking of uploading this next week in advance of council evidence pack and can then edit / add anything after council evidence
No, as I've told you privately, don't submit anything until the council has shown their hand. There is literally zero reason to upload anything now.
After all, for all you know they might not submit anything at all and then you just win by default.
-
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/rv8m7ivg9u7q1s3k76mgo/Appeal-skeleton.docx?rlkey=25075flfm6i07y5lvs991m967&dl=0
Waiting for council evidence and case listed for early March 2024 at London Tribunals now
Thinking of uploading this next week in advance of council evidence pack and can then edit / add anything after council evidence
-
You've posted a very low resolution copy of the agreement, but this seems to be the killer term:
(https://i.imgur.com/fD8I7A4.png)
There's plainly been no permanent disposition if the registered keeper can take the vehicle back whenever it wants.
Wait for the council evidence pack but that's basically the point that will win you the case.
-
hire agreement attached. any wording and previous tribunal cases to support the not owner argument will be really appreciated based on this
(https://i.ibb.co/tMTY4ct/lease-agreement-1-of-3.jpg) (https://ibb.co/bgMNPLZ)
(https://i.ibb.co/smgsTM4/lease-agreement-2-of-3.jpg) (https://ibb.co/C1wVjTy)
(https://i.ibb.co/qm01Bsz/lease-agreement-3-of-3-jpg.jpg) (https://ibb.co/5sYcT8d)
-
There should be a law against councils acting in this way!
Have submitted a two line appeal relying on previous reps (and further points to be raised after reviewing the council evidence) to london tribunals to get the process started. Will update once I have a date/time.
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
-
There should be a law against councils acting in this way!
-
received a rejection notice today. should i submit the london tribunal in person appeal saying i rely on my previous representation and will provide further points after reviewing the evidence pack presented by Lambeth?
(https://i.ibb.co/2s0gwQQ/IMG-2736.jpg) (https://ibb.co/CMphqZZ)
(https://i.ibb.co/zNDfvD5/IMG-2737.jpg) (https://ibb.co/WsjKJj3)
(https://i.ibb.co/56njgbS/IMG-2738.jpg) (https://ibb.co/80dxL1f)
(https://i.ibb.co/ZL1PQQF/IMG-2739.jpg) (https://ibb.co/5MxyQQS)
(https://i.ibb.co/vzSmfsB/IMG-2740.jpg) (https://ibb.co/12kKBsn)
(https://i.ibb.co/ZLNsSC5/IMG-2741.jpg) (https://ibb.co/X2VBDT1)
-
@taffer87 has sent me the terms of the lease and they don't create a permanent disposition in any event, so it's hard to see how one could lose this case.
-
I don't see that Lambeth's actions will stand up to scrutiny, I'd send HCA's draft for now and let's see what drivel comes back in the rejection.
-
thanks for this. Seems like this will be a pretty solid appeal point for London Tribunals
My point remains the same. If anything it's enhanced by the council's letter which is typically legally ignorant. Where ANY reps are made then the council are under this duty:
5) If the enforcement authority accepts the representations—
(a)it must cancel the relevant enforcement notice,
(b)its decision notice must state that the enforcement notice has been cancelled
*- Enforcement notice is a regulatory term which covers a NTO.
OP, in my draft please insert 'Appeals' before Regulation (5)...
-
My point remains the same. If anything it's enhanced by the council's letter which is typically legally ignorant. Where ANY reps are made then the council are under this duty:
5) If the enforcement authority accepts the representations—
(a)it must cancel the relevant enforcement notice,
(b)its decision notice must state that the enforcement notice has been cancelled
*- Enforcement notice is a regulatory term which covers a NTO.
OP, in my draft please insert 'Appeals' before Regulation (5)...
-
As I understand it (but see what the experts say) in order to accept the transfer of liability (see also pots replies #47 & #50 from PMB and HCA) they have to cancel the original PCN & NtO and re-issue to you. They have specifically declined to cancel. It's a mess, but it needs an expert to give you definitive advice as to next step.
See also this Lambeth doc on Representations both VW & you have received,note especially the 2nd paragraph and the 4th. ground.
(https://i.ibb.co/t8qBVy5/NTO-to-VWFS-Lambeth-p3.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
-
Have VW leasing received a noitice of cancellation of the original PCN?
here is the council letter to the lease company.. it technically doesn't say it is a "Notice of Acceptance" does it need to be quite explicit to count as a Notice of Acceptance? If so could be an appeal point once it gets to London Tribunals
(https://i.ibb.co/BZWzdSs/lambeth-letter-to-lease-company.png) (https://ibb.co/2tVnmfK)
-
'Penalty exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case'.
The circumstances being that the authority had no legal basis to demand a penalty from you as the 'owner' because they were not empowered to issue a new NTO to you pursuant to regulations 20(1) and 20(4)(b) of the General Provisions etc. Regulations because the precedent conditions in Regulation 5(4)(d) had not been met by the owner i.e. the authority was not in possession of a statement of liability signed by you or evidence that the owner was a 'vehicle-hire firm' and that a 'hiring agreement' (both defined terms) were in effect.
In this case, the authority have simply accepted the say-so of a leasing company that the vehicle in question was subject to a 3-year lease, however, this claim, even if correct, does not meet the legal standard required and therefore the authority's purported cancellation of that NTO was ultra vires and it must therefore follow that their issue of a new NTO was similarly unlawful.
As a thought.
Thanks is that relevant for the PCN and NTO issued under TMA 2004 or do I need to change the references?
Also here is the NTO in my name if that adds any other points I should add?
(https://i.ibb.co/MBLQ3Dv/lambeth-nto-page-1-of-4.jpg) (https://ibb.co/0s3vdj7)
(https://i.ibb.co/JsqyJHJ/lambeth-nto-page-2-of-4.jpg) (https://ibb.co/2kSs4d4)
(https://i.ibb.co/d2wzsJZ/lambeth-nto-page-3-of-4.jpg) (https://ibb.co/C73TpsL)
(https://i.ibb.co/sFmkGpL/lambeth-nto-page4-of-4.jpg) (https://ibb.co/tbmktwy)
-
'Penalty exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case'.
The circumstances being that the authority had no legal basis to demand a penalty from you as the 'owner' because they were not empowered to issue a new NTO to you pursuant to regulations 20(1) and 20(4)(b) of the General Provisions etc. Regulations because the precedent conditions in Regulation 5(4)(d) had not been met by the owner i.e. the authority was not in possession of a statement of liability signed by you or evidence that the owner was a 'vehicle-hire firm' and that a 'hiring agreement' (both defined terms) were in effect.
In this case, the authority have simply accepted the say-so of a leasing company that the vehicle in question was subject to a 3-year lease, however, this claim, even if correct, does not meet the legal standard required and therefore the authority's purported cancellation of that NTO was ultra vires and it must therefore follow that their issue of a new NTO was similarly unlawful.
As a thought.
-
Have VW leasing received a noitice of cancellation of the original PCN?
Ask the question but regardless that letter will not suffice to transfer liability they need to at a minimum set out the date and terms of the lease
The letter has the dates of the lease but not much more.
Anything I should add in the draft challenge for this beyond what I have already?
-
Yes unfortunately they have indeed received a confirmation letter from Lambeth
-
Have VW leasing received a noitice of cancellation of the original PCN?
Ask the question but regardless that letter will not suffice to transfer liability they need to at a minimum set out the date and terms of the lease
-
Have VW leasing received a noitice of cancellation of the original PCN?
-
there you go
(https://i.ibb.co/Jp17mVQ/VWFS-rep-to-Lambeth-27-12-23.png) (https://ibb.co/FYrwm2V)
-
Show us what the lease company sent to the council as representations that they are not the owner
-
Thanks I am the owner in the sense that I have the lease agreement in my name with the lease company and the new NTO is in my name.
-
If you're not the owner, you need authority from the owner to act on his/her behalf. Apart from that it looks OK to me.
-
WIP draft of formal challenge for comments/input here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/sa7kadaxze51fl6i6ebgm/PCN-formal-reps-draft-redacted.docx?rlkey=q5rld6lgg8v0c691597dz017p&dl=0
-
I am not a fan of the story re the appointment, all you are doing is asking for discretion that will not be given.
You must focus on the connection error and the fact that you paid as soon as a connection was secured
You must be given time to make the payment and as the pay by phone was the only option then it's up to the council to ensure it is accessible
for the informal reps that is the major point, the hospital appointment matters only in that it is reason why you did not wait at the car until payment is made you don't have to but the council will say you should
For later there is another ground which i would not bring up just yet
Hi Can you please tell me what is the new ground I should add which you said is "for later"?
The council issued the NTO in my name yesterday and I am expecting it in the post today or tomorrow. They have written to the lease company confirming the transfer of liability and I can see online that they have issued a new NTO so I want to work on the formal challenge.
-
VWFS has received the NTO and submitted the standard letter they use to request a transfer of liability.
This is the NTO VWFS have received for reference in case anyone picks up issues with this - waiting for NTO in my name in the meantime. Any help appreciated on points to raise when I get the NTO in my name in addition to the previous informal rep I made
(https://i.ibb.co/rKBHKpd/NTO-to-VWFS-Lambeth-p1.png) (https://ibb.co/20zd0MZ)
(https://i.ibb.co/YWYXhfr/NTO-to-VWFS-Lambeth-p2.png) (https://ibb.co/PY3Mg1S)
(https://i.ibb.co/t8qBVy5/NTO-to-VWFS-Lambeth-p3.png) (https://ibb.co/r4xkDnJ)
(https://i.ibb.co/XDWJmGt/NTO-to-VWFS-Lambeth-p4.png) (https://ibb.co/cwyTzsQ)
-
Thanks looks like they have now issued the Notice to Owner to the lease company online - will let them know so they can transfer liability to me .. expect I will get something in the new year now.
-
Ah so found out that they pretty much have 6 months to send a NTO .. really long time to have this as an open matter but anyway will have to wait
6 months is the legal limit, but the Statutory Guidance for the legislation they are using to issue the PCN is that it should be issued much sooner.
Extract from the Statutory Guidance
Issuing the notice to owner
If the penalty charge is not paid the enforcement authority may issue a notice to owner (NtO). The purpose of this is to ensure that the PCN was received by the vehicle owner and to remind the vehicle owner that the payment in full is now due and, if it is not paid within a further 28 days, it may be increased.
The NtO may be issued 28 days after serving the penalty charge, and we expect authorities to send them within 56 days. The ultimate time limit, in exceptional circumstances, is 6 months [footnote 33] from the ‘relevant date’. There should be a very good reason for waiting that long to serve an NtO. The regulations set out the information that the NtO must [footnote 34] give.
-
Ah so found out that they pretty much have 6 months to send a NTO .. really long time to have this as an open matter but anyway will have to wait
-
I can see on the website the still says £100 and that I challenged and they responded on 10 November so can't challenge again
Assume this means they haven't issued a NTO to Lambeth yet - thought it would be fairly automatic and they woudl issue one as soon as eligible - any experience of this - can councils take a long time before issuing a NTO?
(Appreciate I would need to wait for NTO in my own name in any casE)
-
Is this not some sort of procedural impropriety by the council giving false information as the next stage would be a NTO at £130 rather than £195?
I would certainly make the argument. While it's not a procedural impropriety as defined by the regulations, it would appear to be a breach of the council's duty to act fairly.
After all someone who doesn't have the benefit of legal advice might see that, panic, pay the £65 and lose the right to take things further, so there is a risk of prejudice.
-
So this is what it says today on the council website. previously it said the amount would go to £195 on 28 November but today (on 28 November) it just says the amount will increase to £195 very soon and please pay £65 now
Is this not some sort of procedural impropriety by the council giving false information as the next stage would be a NTO at £130 rather than £195?
Summary so far:
Date of contravention/PCN on windscreen: 26 October 2023
Informal reps made: 2 November 2023
Letter rejecting the informal challenge: 10 November 2023 - received on 13 November 2023
(https://i.ibb.co/8m9HndQ/PCN-LJ27533870-BD22-PYW-pic-28-Nov-redacted.png) (https://ibb.co/grJxbPc)
-
ah that's a shame so their error in replying to informal reps doesn't really count for much?
Well it counts for something, but mistakes in the formal rejection hold a lot more weight.
-
Also, good to get your input on if the error in their letter saying I supplied evidence for payment on 25 October (when in fact I did supply evidence for 26 OCtober) and PCN was issued on 26 October now means there is a very good chance of winning at tribunal? Of course next stage is NTO to lease co - then transfer liability to me and new NTO to me.
If they make a similar mistake at the formal notice of rejection stage, we might be able to exploit that.
ah that's a shame so their error in replying to informal reps doesn't really count for much?
-
Also, good to get your input on if the error in their letter saying I supplied evidence for payment on 25 October (when in fact I did supply evidence for 26 OCtober) and PCN was issued on 26 October now means there is a very good chance of winning at tribunal? Of course next stage is NTO to lease co - then transfer liability to me and new NTO to me.
If they make a similar mistake at the formal notice of rejection stage, we might be able to exploit that.
-
If the amount goes up to £195 prematurely, take another screenshot but with another window open showing https://time.is/
The reason being that the council could try arguing you fiddled with the time and date on your own computer, but you can't change the time shown on that website.
Thanks will try on the date website says it will increase to £195..
Also, good to get your input on if the error in their letter saying I supplied evidence for payment on 25 October (when in fact I did supply evidence for 26 OCtober) and PCN was issued on 26 October now means there is a very good chance of winning at tribunal? Of course next stage is NTO to lease co - then transfer liability to me and new NTO to me.
-
If the amount goes up to £195 prematurely, take another screenshot but with another window open showing https://time.is/
The reason being that the council could try arguing you fiddled with the time and date on your own computer, but you can't change the time shown on that website.
-
yes all correct details with them - will let them know
-
Give the lease company the heads up tell them not to pay but to make representations using the not owner ground naming you. Do they have correct details for you?
If they mess up or the council accept an invalid document from them more power to your elbow
-
yes will do and i guess wait for NTO now which will go to lease company first and then they will transfer to me so at least a month to go
Plz do let me know the other point you had mentioned earlier to bring out later but you had not specified what it was in one of your earlier posts
-
Things just getting better all the time. start to collate all your evidence into one folder so it's handy to get to when it comes time to appeal
-
okay so received the attached letter in response to the informal reps - extremely strangely they are saying that I attached a receipt for 25 October which is clearly wrong as both the paybyphone receipt and the customer support team screenshot mention 26 October.
even more bizarre they can't find any record of payment from me for 26 October -- crazy
(https://i.ibb.co/pRQWJNG/Lambeth-responses-Page1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nnB3z4Z)
(https://i.ibb.co/GWwFYr1/Lambeth-responses-Page2.jpg) (https://ibb.co/jyKH0jx)
-
It could well do but let's see the NTO first,
-
indeed apologies, £195 is indeed what it says on the council's website (re amount goin up to £195 on Tue, 28 November)
Hopefully this adds one further point for the formal reps/Tribunal stage
-
It definitely is not at NTO stage and its an error on their website.
Date of contravention/PCN: 26 October 2023
Informal reps: 2 November 2023
Date of rejection notice: 10 November 2023 (not received yet)
Council website says charge is currently £65 so looks like they reissued the discount for another 14 days from date of service but then says the charge will go up to £190 by 26 November 2023
When in fact on 26 November 2023 or 14 days from rejection notice, they will be able to issue a Notice to Owner for the first time which should just be for £130 and probably will offer discount again
I keep asking for precision so we can know what is what it will not go up to £190 will it it says £195
This is an error they must first serve the NTO and it will then be £130 they cannot do this before the 22nd nov
-
It definitely is not at NTO stage and its an error on their website.
Date of contravention/PCN: 26 October 2023
Informal reps: 2 November 2023
Date of rejection notice: 10 November 2023 (not received yet)
Council website says charge is currently £65 so looks like they reissued the discount for another 14 days from date of service but then says the charge will go up to £195 by 28 November 2023
When in fact on 28 November 2023 or 14 days from rejection notice, they will be able to issue a Notice to Owner for the first time which should just be for £130 and probably will offer discount again
-
If you can get, the PCN log off their website, because that should show you when/if a Notice to Owner has been sent out. Matters don't progress to a Charge Certificate unless they have produced and sent out the NtO. HOwever, so many councils are totally incompetent and stupid, I suppose it is possible they missed this stage out. I think there was one London council that had a contractor print and mail-out their postal documents and failed to do so. Date of NtO must be the date sent out by mail and first class too.
-
documents are needed not screen shots and dates be precise so we can help you
Thank you, will definitely post as soon as I have any document. Nothing received yet - they posted on 10 November as per the website screenshot so assume I will get it mid next week
Nothing in spam/inbox so looks like they have sent by snail mail rather than email
-
documents are needed not screen shots and dates be precise so we can help you
-
looks like they have rejected my reps - amount going to increase to £195 as per their website on 28 Nov- I haven't received anything so far though - presume will get something in the post next week
shouldn't they say the amount will increase to £130? rather than £195? given I only did informal reps within 14 days and next step will be a NTO - not sure why amount will increase to £195 on 28 November
(https://i.ibb.co/LRhzQYN/pcn-website-pic-lambeth.png) (https://ibb.co/jfZvVbJ)
-
I guess I was thinking the council will say there were no technical faults etc...
Of course, and back in the day the thief-takers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thief-taker) also maintained that they only ever caught the guilty...
-
Thanks, submitted the reps on 2 November.
Will update when I hear back.
I guess I was thinking the council will say there were no technical faults etc but hopefully, there is enough evidence to support otherwise.
-
thanks - so assuming no further comments will send today
re tribunal i guess they will not really accept the above and think it’s mitigation so will need to rely on council messing something on transfer of liability or other procedures?
I'm not sure it is mitigation, one could say that if the council provides a payment system, it's up to them to ensure it works as expected and without errors.
+1 the risk of connection problems should have been assessed and mitigated for
-
thanks - so assuming no further comments will send today
re tribunal i guess they will not really accept the above and think it’s mitigation so will need to rely on council messing something on transfer of liability or other procedures?
I'm not sure it is mitigation, one could say that if the council provides a payment system, it's up to them to ensure it works as expected and without errors.
-
thanks - so assuming no further comments will send today
re tribunal i guess they will not really accept the above and think it’s mitigation so will need to rely on council messing something on transfer of liability or other procedures?
-
Definitely include the paybyphone logs, it's the only evidence that shows you haven't made the whole thing up.
However to set your expectations, you will almost certainly have to take this to the tribunal.
-
Thanks - will be great to know the other potential argument if possible even if not including now.
I have now also received a response from Paybyphone support, will be good to know if adds to my case/helps? or should i not include it (last pic below)
Updated draft ref below
Dear Sirs,
I want to make an informal representation regarding PCN XXXX.
I was attending a post-pregnancy complication-related hospital appointment at 10.30am (hospital appointment letter can be seen in exhibit A) and arrived at the location at 10.15am. The Paybyphone app (which I had used at a previous appointment on 25-May, receipt picture in exhibit B) was not working so I used the Chrome browser application on the phone to go to the paybyphone website and started a session by entering my details and went through all the steps including payment by 10.20 am and the session was showing as having started on the page. I paid for 1.5 hours as my last appointment at the same hospital clinic had taken around 2 hours due to delays and I was anticipating staying for a long time. From my previous visit, I am also aware that this area is enforced strictly by the council, being right next to a hospital and there are many enforcement agents walking about at all times.
I then had to take 2 of my kids (an under 1-year-old and the other a 2-year-old) out of the car and put in the pram and get to the Golden Jubilee Wing of the hospital and enter the 3rd floor which took around 10 minutes and I arrive at the hospital clinic at 10.30. To my shock, on reaching the location when I looked at my mobile again the live parking session had disappeared and the paybyphone website was showing a “Connection Error” message. I immediately restarted the steps and purchased a new session which started at 10.33 am for 1.5 hours (see Exhibit C for receipt for this, no receipt email received for the earlier session from 10.15).
The appointment at the clinic was very efficient this time and I was seen shortly after. I then took my kids and myself back to the car and was dismayed to see a PCN attached to the car.
I had no intention of not paying for the session and the parking session had started on the paybyphone website when I left the car and due to some error with the paybyphone website or system the session was not recorded. I also include a photo of my browser history which shows I had to visit paybyphone app multiple times in the morning of the 26th (see exhibit D).
I left the site at 10.51 am (see Exhibit E, Google timeline showing my time of arrival and departure).
In summary: I started a paid live parking session at around 10.15am and left with the honest belief I had paid. There must have been some technical issues with Paymyphone as their mobile application was not working and I was forced to pay via the browser which showed a live session when I left the car. I immediately paid for a new parking session when on reaching the hospital I realised the live parking session had turned into an "Connection Error" message in the paybyphone website. I then had to try multiple times to make the payment as can be seen. The only reason the parking session disappeared after initially being started by me is a technical issue with paybyphonbe and I have even contacted Paybyphone support who confirmed that I went through all the steps at 10:15 and entered the payment details, location time etc. For some fault with their website the session started on my browser but not on their system (Exhibit F)
I urge you to please consider the circumstances above and cancel the PCN. I will of course be more than happy to provide any other information that you request.
Yours faithfully,
Exhibits
(https://i.ibb.co/VB0x08t/hospital-appointment-letter-redacted.jpg) (http://"https://ibb.co/ggbdbC3")
(https://i.ibb.co/cDnYK18/receipt-old-parking-redacted.jpg) (http://"https://ibb.co/9s5ZmN4")
(https://i.ibb.co/X3cSGzG/receipt-email.png) (http://"https://ibb.co/jWngjLj")(https://i.ibb.co/GvMBHM0/Google-timeline-page-redcated.png) (http://"https://ibb.co/KjsRKsX")
(https://i.ibb.co/B3WqLgn/385533502-1694414784412618-1034144666736827407-n.jpg) (http://"https://ibb.co/V9n2Vvw")
(https://i.ibb.co/YXBs483/Paybyphone-support-Page1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/vh4nCmH)
-
I am not a fan of the story re the appointment, all you are doing is asking for discretion that will not be given.
You must focus on the connection error and the fact that you paid as soon as a connection was secured
You must be given time to make the payment and as the pay by phone was the only option then it's up to the council to ensure it is accessible
for the informal reps that is the major point, the hospital appointment matters only in that it is reason why you did not wait at the car until payment is made you don't have to but the council will say you should
For later there is another ground which i would not bring up just yet
-
Bump - looking to send rep by end of tomorrow so any comments welcome
-
Draft rep below - any comments welcome on the text and/or merits./. if not worth it then I can just wait for NTO, transfer of liability and hope council don't issue Notice of Acceptance or don't get the hire agreement etc (which some adjudicators allow as an appeal point) - doing it my wife's name as paid via her phone.
Dear Sirs,
I want to make an informal representation regarding PCN XXXX .
I was attending a post-pregnancy complication-related hospital appointment at 10.30am (hospital appointment letter can be seen in exhibit A) and arrived at the location at 10.15am. The Paybyphone app (which I had used at a previous appointment on 25-May, receipt picture in exhibit B) was not working so I used the Chrome browser application on the phone to go to the paybyphone website and started a session by entering my details and went through all the steps including payment by 10.20 am and the session was showing as having started on the page. I paid for 1.5 hours as my last appointment at the same hospital clinic had taken around 2 hours due to delays and I was anticipating staying for a long time. From my previous visit, I am also aware that this area is enforced strictly by the council, being right next to a hospital and there are many enforcement agents walking about at all times.
I then had to take 2 of my kids (an under 1-year-old and the other a 2-year-old) out of the car and put in the pram and get to the Golden Jubilee Wing of the hospital and enter the 3rd floor which took around 10 minutes and I arrive at the hospital clinic at 10.30. To my shock, on reaching the location when I looked at my mobile again the live parking session had disappeared and the paybyphone website was showing a “Connection Error” message. I immediately restarted the steps and purchased a new session which started at 10.33 am for 1.5 hours (see Exhibit C for receipt, no receipt received for the session started earlier around 10.15 am).
The appointment at the clinic was very efficient this time and I was seen shortly after. I then took my kids and myself back to the car and was shocked to see a PCN attached to the car.
I had no intention of not paying for the session and the parking session had started on the paybyphone website when I left the car and due to some error with the paybyphone website or system the session was not recorded. I also include a photo of my browser history which shows I had to visit paybyphone app multiple times in the morning of the 26th (see exhibit D).
I left the site at 10.51 am (see Exhibit E, Google timeline showing my time of arrival and departure).
I urge you to please consider the circumstances above and cancel the PCN. I will of course be more than happy to provide any other information that you request.
Yours faithfully,
Exhibits
(https://i.ibb.co/VB0x08t/hospital-appointment-letter-redacted.jpg) (http://"https://ibb.co/ggbdbC3")
(https://i.ibb.co/cDnYK18/receipt-old-parking-redacted.jpg) (http://"https://ibb.co/9s5ZmN4")
(https://i.ibb.co/X3cSGzG/receipt-email.png) (https://ibb.co/jWngjLj)(https://i.ibb.co/GvMBHM0/Google-timeline-page-redcated.png) (http://"https://ibb.co/KjsRKsX")
(https://i.ibb.co/B3WqLgn/385533502-1694414784412618-1034144666736827407-n.jpg) (https://ibb.co/V9n2Vvw)
-
yes will do but want to check if by some luck there is anything technically wrong with the PCN text?
I can't see anything wrong with the PCN itself.
-
yes will do but want to check if by some luck there is anything technically wrong with the PCN text?
-
A good starting point would be for your to draw up a draft representation including all the points you want to advance and all the supporting evidence you want to put forwards. That makes it much easier for us to evaluate the strength of your case.
-
Managed to get this evidence so far
1. Google timeline showing the journey and legnth of stay
2. Hospital appointment time showing the 10.30 appointment time
3. Receipt of parking from last hospital visit
I can also add daschcam photos if that would be beneficial
The only thing I am trying to sort out evidence for is the time i visited the paybyphone website as Chrome app on android (on my wife's phone) doesn't show the time stamp for previous days visits even though Chrome app on Iphone does show time stamp for previous days... trying to see if i can get the history file or can export data somehow to prove the exact time...
The appointment was at the Golden Jubilee Wing and as per google maps it takes a 3 min walk. However, with kids and then entering the building, waiting at lifts goin to the right ward its about 8-10 minutes
Will appreciate any advice - is it worth submitting informal reps? Any history with Lambeth - would they consider? If not worth it then I can just not to anything and wait for NTO and then see if they issued a notice of acceptance to the lease company / what documents they received from lease company etc
(https://i.ibb.co/VB0x08t/hospital-appointment-letter-redacted.jpg) (http://"https://ibb.co/ggbdbC3")
(https://i.ibb.co/cDnYK18/receipt-old-parking-redacted.jpg) (http://"https://ibb.co/9s5ZmN4")
(https://i.ibb.co/GvMBHM0/Google-timeline-page-redcated.png) (http://"https://ibb.co/KjsRKsX")
council photos now available too
(https://i.ibb.co/nrWncmh/council-photo-6.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nrWncmh) (https://i.ibb.co/5LcLBR5/council-photo-3.jpg) (https://ibb.co/5LcLBR5) (https://i.ibb.co/2dPbh24/council-photo-2.jpg) (https://ibb.co/2dPbh24) (https://i.ibb.co/37xj9YW/council-photo-1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/37xj9YW) (https://i.ibb.co/VmwqxzG/council-photo-5.jpg) (https://ibb.co/VmwqxzG) (https://i.ibb.co/xJfMD9b/council-photo-4.jpg) (https://ibb.co/xJfMD9b)
-
Will upload council photos as soon as they are on council website
I received a PCN this morning - had an appointment at the hospital - found parking and paid on paybyphone.co.uk (I thought I had and went through all the steps at 10.18). This area is full of council enforcement officers and would never even think of not paying here.
Had 2 kids under 3 in the car, loaded them onto the pram - got to the hospital building and in waiting area i saw the phone and it was showing a "Connection Error" and asking me to pay again - I was stupid and should have taken a screenshot but didn't as panicked a bit and immediately paid but as the receipt shows this was at 10.33
The appointment was relatively quick and I actually got back to the car at 11am and found the PCN on the windscreen. The council website shows they started observing at 10.20 and issued at 10.26
The car is a lease car (VWFS, who only provide a letter to the Council, not the lease agreement and I have had a previous PCN cancelled by London Tribunals from a different council (Lewisham) as the council never received the hire agreement from the authority).
Will be great to get advice on this - assume I should send an informal rep to the council basically apologising and explaining the circumstances?
Are there any technical flaws that could help?
Worst case - I may have to bet on the same hire agreement technical issues again but would be better to have something more too.
GSV link here: parked exactly where the white car is so right next to the sign too.. https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4685773,-0.0956214,3a,75y,242.96h,75.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-C_5JmXuEQ7ed-2twzSEBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
(https://i.ibb.co/274fCrm/pcn-front.png) (https://ibb.co/VW4PzGr)
(https://i.ibb.co/c8pyj46/pcn-back-page.png) (https://ibb.co/hdngS3B)](https://i.ibb.co/MGFMJRJ/receipt-email.png) (https://ibb.co/jWngjLj)
(https://i.ibb.co/6B63kNg/council-website.png) (https://ibb.co/2NXDT5g)