Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: rsg444 on September 25, 2025, 11:32:41 am
-
PCN was paid today. Thanks for your advice.
-
It was sent via email this morning as an attachment.
-
Thanks.
As I understand it, their reply is dated 25th and offers the discount for 14 days 'from the date of service', which begs the question how did you receive this on 25th, or did it come by email with letter to follow. Best and worst case scenarios are that the discount ends 12/8 October, so you've got time to canvas other views.
-
Thank you HCA, I should have done some due diligence myself before asking for assistance on here. I will speak with him over the next few days when I get a chance and recommend he just pays at the discounted rate because now that its clear the van was almost opposite the address where he was working - there is no reason why it took him 7 minutes.
I still feel the PCN is harsh and that their response to the initial challenge is laughable as it does not consider the points - but regardless, if unloading means him having to clear the area to set down the panels or whatever else he might have had to do then he should have obtained a permit IMO.
Thanks all for your assistance and apologies for taking up your time.
-
+1, facts.
Let's look at the facts.
The vehicle was parked outside no. 36.
No. 47 is on the opposite side of the road, in fact immediately opposite.
He was parked in a permit holder bay during restricted hours without displaying any permit(not even visitors?), therefore unless an exemption applies the vehicle was in contravention.
Unloading/delivering is apparently an exemption. However, this cannot take a second longer than necessary and delivering does not allow for sorting out where items are to go, but would allow for placing them.
You say 'He said it was because they couldn't find parking near the property so had to walk down the road to drop each wall panel off of which the return journey is probably longer than 7 minutes', but given the objective facts and, apparently, reps which claimed that the delivery address was no. 47 which is immediately opposite, then IMO an adjudicator is not going to be persuaded by these claims.
Is the driver in a position to rebut the CEO's claim that the vehicle was observed for 7 minutes or otherwise able to explain why the vehicle was left unattended for this period? If not, then IMO he would struggle on this point.
-
If he was taking the stuff some distance that's a factor and having to make several trips.
These situations turn on facts that someone can explain to an adjudicator to justify the exemption.
-
I agree stamford man, I did ask why the CEO was able to observe the van for 7 minutes. He said it was because they couldn't find parking near the property so had to walk down the road to drop each wall panel off of which the return journey is probably longer than 7 minutes - plus hes almost 70 years old so not the quickest person anymore.
My main issue is them "acknowledging" the points raised in the informal challenge but effectively repeating them in their response but then the grounds for rejection are that we did not raise the very points that they've acknowledged. For example:
"You have stated that you were unloading building materials for work at 47 Gresham
Road.
"Although you have stated that the vehicle was parked at the location for the purpose
of loading and unloading and have provided a receipt, it is missing key information.
This includes details of the goods being loaded or unloaded, the date and time of
collection and the address where the goods were being delivered or collected to
confirm that the vehicle was being used for a delivery or collection at the time of the
offence."
This for me at least is not considering the points raised. Plus in the initial challenge, FIL did state what the items were, and uploaded the receipt for the said items - as it was an eForm, we no longer have the actual challenge sent - in hindsight it should probably have been screenshotted or copied and pasted into Word.
-
CEO's pics just show nothing going on but they are not timestamped.
Loading does need to be going on and 7 mins is rather too long without an explanation.
(https://i.ibb.co/27Qkh5mL/Screenshot-2025-09-25-at-13-10-47.png)
-
Thank you for your responses. I will post up the PCN at some point tomorrow when I'm back home. But in the meantime, the PCN reference is PN23480956 is VRM is *M5*KUU*.
The van is registered to FIL - i.e. he is the RK
Google Street View is:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/47+Gresham+Rd,+London+E16+3DU/@51.5120006,0.0303125,3a,75y,19.85h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stjY8vSy5mx3tfUjPtjVZjg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D0%26panoid%3DtjY8vSy5mx3tfUjPtjVZjg%26yaw%3D19.845179!7i16384!8i8192!4m6!3m5!1s0x47d8a876894736a1:0x8ec2c2f649cea8aa!8m2!3d51.5121351!4d0.030364!16s%2Fg%2F11c4n46jgj?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDkyMi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
Many thanks.
-
Please also post a GSV link to the location.
-
This is a PCN served on-site, so the first challenge is an informal representation. Newham always reject informal representations. It's a tactic to intimidate you into paying up.
To take the matter further you will have to wait for the Notice to Owner and submit a formal representation (challenge). And if this is refused you'll need to submit an appeal to the Adjudicator. If you were to lose you would be liable for the full penalty, not the discount amount.
The NTO will be posted to the registered keeper of the van. So is your Father the RK or might it be a lease company or an employer? And is the address current and correct. It's best to actually check the V5c, assuming Dad is the RK.
Please post up the PCN. Leave everything visible, including the vans's reg number and the PCN number. Let's assess your chances with the Adjudicator.
-
Does the van belong to yr f-in-l and does the V5C carry his name & address?
-
Dear all,
I was wondering if you can assist.
My father in law who is a builder was doing some works at a property in Newham for one of his customers. The property is in a CPZ. He parked on the same street to unload some bath panels. He saw the CEO arrive on his scooter and told him he was unloading, the CEO nodded his head and continued riding his scooter. FIL returned to his van to find a PCN affixed. He appealed on the grounds on unloading building materials. He provided a receipt showing the goods, gave the address of where he was working. Explained the what the goods were (large bathroom wall panels and adhesives) and provided evidence from Newham's website that unloading/loading is permitted in CPZ and that you can do so for up to 20 minutes.
The following is their response to his informal challenge - it appears to me to be Procedural Impropriety as they clearly haven't considered the points - if they had they wouldn't mention in their letter the address that was given to them and then a paragraph later state that he didn't provide the address of where he was unloading them to. I'd go as far to say that copying and pasting the points to somehow prove they've been considered but then only to contradict themselves later on with the generic part of their response is clearly failure to consider. Any assistance and guidance will be much appreciated.
Thank you for your correspondence received on 08 September 2025 regarding the
above penalty charge notice (PCN). Your comments and the notes of the Civil
Enforcement Officer (CEO) have been considered.
Your vehicle was observed at 10:39 Parked in a residents' or shared use parking
place or zone without a valid virtual permit or clearly displaying a valid physical
permit or voucher or pay and display ticket issued for that place where required, or
without payment of the parking charge in Gresham Road.
You have stated that you were unloading building materials for work at 47 Gresham
Road. You informed the Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) that the unloading would
take 15–20 minutes, and he acknowledged this before leaving. Despite this, a PCN
was issued after only 7 minutes of observation. You locked your van each time due
to high-value tools inside, and there were no loading restrictions in place. According
to Newham Council’s guidance, loading/unloading is permitted in Resident Permit
Bays. You have also provided a receipt as evidence of the goods being unloaded. In
light of these circumstances, you respectfully request that the PCN be reconsidered
and cancelled.
We have carefully reviewed your comments and the available evidence; however,
we have not found grounds to cancel the penalty charge.
After reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO) notebook, we found no
evidence of a conversation between the driver and the officer. Without supporting
evidence, we cannot consider the conversation you mentioned.
You have stated you were loading your vehicle, however the Civil Enforcement
Officer (CEO) observed your vehicle for 7 minutes and did not see any loading or
unloading taking place. Therefore, the PCN was issued correctly.
London Borough of Newham
Parking Correspondence
PO Box 71575
London E6 9LY
25 September 2025
Although you have stated that the vehicle was parked at the location for the purpose
of loading and unloading and have provided a receipt, it is missing key information.
This includes details of the goods being loaded or unloaded, the date and time of
collection and the address where the goods were being delivered or collected to
confirm that the vehicle was being used for a delivery or collection at the time of the
offence.
Please note it is the responsibility of the driver to be aware of the restrictions that
operate in the areas they choose to drive and park. The driver must keep a proper
lookout, check signs and ensure that they adhere to the restrictions, and ensure their
vehicle is legally parked before leaving it unattended.
In conclusion, having taken all aspects of this matter into consideration, no
justification for cancelling the penalty charge notice has been found.
The discounted payment of £80.00 will be accepted in full and final settlement
if paid not later than the last day of the period of 14 days beginning with the
date of service of this letter.
You can view evidence of the contravention online at parking.newham.gov.uk by
selecting ‘View a PCN.’ You will need your PCN number and vehicle registration
mark (VRM).
If payment is not received within this time, the full penalty amount of £160.00 will
become payable.
Payment should not be made if you wish to pursue this and want to make formal
representation, as payment is seen as an acceptance of liability and will close the
case.
If payment is not received as detailed, I shall assume that you wish to pursue the
matter and shall arrange for a Notice to Owner to be sent after the period of 14 days
to the registered keeper of the vehicle so that formal representations may be made.
Should these be rejected, the registered keeper of the vehicle will then be offered the
opportunity to appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicators. I should point out
that, should you decide to take this course of action, after the discount period has
expired, you will forfeit the right to pay the Penalty Charge at the lower rate and the
full charge of £160.00 will be due.
If you are not the registered keeper of the vehicle, for example the vehicle is a
company or lease/hire vehicle, or being used with the owner`s consent, I suggest
you advise the keeper that a Notice to Owner will be issued.
Please note that Newham Council is unable to consider any further correspondence
at this stage regarding this penalty charge notice.