Here you go:
Dear Bristol City Council,
In the first instance I would point out that I paid the daily charge for 21 September 2023 and I happened to enter the zone some 25 seconds too early, I suggest that this is de-minimis and not a contravention at all, or in the alternative you should exercise discretion not to enforce.
I further challenge liability for PCN BS56246641 on the basis that the penalty demanded exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case.
The PCN carries an 0870 premium rate telephone number, and I contend that as in Paul Bateman v Derbyshire County Council (DJ00037-2209, 10 November 2022) this amounts to an excessive demand. While I appreciate other payment methods are available, binding authority from the High Court in the case of London Borough of Camden v The Parking Adjudicator & Ors [2011] EWHC 295 (Admin) determined that where one payment method carries a surcharge, the availability of other payment methods is irrelevant and the penalty demanded is excessive.
Further to this, the penalty charge notice is only permitted to demand payment of the penalty charge, there is no legal mechanism that allows the council to demand the toll charge in addition to the penalty charge on the PCN.
This is akin to a PCN for not paying in a pay and display bay: you can issue a PCN for £70 but the penalty charge notice cannot demand the unpaid pay and display fee on top of that.
In this case the PCN may only demand £120, discounted to £60 for the first 14 days. The regulations do not allow the PCN to demand the additional £9 you are seeking, the amount demanded therefore exceeds the amount due by law.
It follows that the penalty charge must be cancelled.
Yours faithfully,