Show Posts - ttn48

In fact I had already sent in my representation when I read your last post, @cp8759, and this was the representation I made:-.I have today received the notice of rejection..This is my summary of their responses to the three points in the representation.1) The contravention did not occur - they say it did because a traffic cone is enough.2) Procedural impropriety (A regulation 9 PCN must include wording that representations "must be made to the enforcement authority in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner.")- This confused them, I think, and me.  An additional piece of maybe relevant information is that before they had sent the NTO I had (foolishly) submitted a 2nd informal representation with points 1 and 2 in.  They replied at that point (21 Feb) to say 'a further attempt at an informal challenge is not possible', and 'The second challenge you submitted will be held on file until you have submitted your formal representation'.  They seemed to think I was complaining about them not considering my 2nd informal representation - but of course I wasn't.3) Procedural impropriety (28 day period wrong) - they kinda disagree.

Thanks very much for all the advice.  It is very much appreciated.For my draft response to the NTO, the online form only allows one of the 'specified grounds' boxes to be ticked, so I shall reply by post - using the Royal Mail 'Signed for' service to ensure it is received.On a photocopy of page 3 of the NTO I will tick The Specified Grounds boxes against:* The alleged contravention did not occur.and* There has been a procedural impropriety by the enforcement authority.On a photocopy of page 4 of the NTO I will write:The alleged contravention did not occur.Penalty charges can only be imposed by signs authorised under section 64(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, this means either signs authorised by the Traffic Signs Regulations 2016, or by signs specifically authorised by the Secretary of State.The Traffic Signs Regulations 2016 do not authorise any parking suspension signs, and a search of the Department for Transport website at https://www.dft.gov.uk/traffic-auths/ indicates that Hull City Council has not obtained a special authorisation from the Secretary of State for the use of any parking suspension signs.In the absence of a lawful parking suspension sign, the contravention alleged cannot have occurred.There has been a procedural impropriety by the enforcement authority.PCN KH13981341 is non-compliant with regulation 3 in the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/576/regulation/3) which state:"3.—(1) A regulation 9 penalty charge notice must include the following information—(a)that a person on whom a notice to owner is served may, in accordance with these Regulations, make representations to the enforcement authority against the penalty charge and, if those representations are rejected, appeal to an adjudicator;(b)that if, before a notice to owner is served, representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified in the notice for the purpose those representations will be considered by the enforcement authority;(c)that if a notice to owner is served despite the representations mentioned in sub-paragraph (b), representations against the penalty charge must be made to the enforcement authority in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner."PCN KH13981341 does not include the information set out in 3 (1) (c).There has been a procedural impropriety by the enforcement authority.The wording of PCN KH13981341 in terms of the 28 days period is wrong since it does not comply with Schedule 2 para. 2 in the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/schedule/2) which state(d)that the penalty charge must be paid within the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the alleged contravention occurred,and I will sign and date the form as instructed.Please let me know if I've missed anything.

You may be right, but it's pretty nuanced.  I don't think it is obviously the case that "The whole point of (c)" is as you state - although I can see it is a possibility that that is its motivation.I get the point that the means of submitting representations changes, or at least could change, before and after the issuance of the NTO, but the PCN says that the NTO will tell you how to appeal it.I think your argument points at the vagueness of regulation 3(1)(a-c) as much as it does about inaccuracies in the PCN, and I only have an opportunity to challenge the PCN, not regulation 3(1)(a-c).I may well still include this in my representation to the NTO, but I think it's nowhere near as strong as the "The alleged contravention did not occur" due to the lack of authorised (or any) parking suspension signs.Still, every little helps, and I'm grateful for the time you've taken to make your suggestions and offer up valuable advice and detailed information.

Quote from: Incandescent on 18 Feb, 2024 18:34In addition to the above, the PCN is non-compliant with regulation 3 in the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022 : -Quote3.—(1) A regulation 9 penalty charge notice must include the following information—(a)that a person on whom a notice to owner is served may, in accordance with these Regulations, make representations to the enforcement authority against the penalty charge and, if those representations are rejected, appeal to an adjudicator;(b)that if, before a notice to owner is served, representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified in the notice for the purpose those representations will be considered by the enforcement authority;(c)that if a notice to owner is served despite the representations mentioned in sub-paragraph (b), representations against the penalty charge must be made to the enforcement authority in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner.Can you see anything that looks like 3 (1)(c) ? No, thought not.Actually, [Incandescent], I think I can see language to the effect of 3 (1)(c).  Specifically, from the PCN (2nd page, penultimate paragraph)..".. The NTO will explain ... how to appeal and the period of entitlement to appeal against it and the form that appeal must take. .."

Here is the NTO..

No, it hasn't reached me yet.  I will update when it does.

Hi,I parked in a parking space, and on the pavement next to the space was a yellow flat-sided cone with a 'no waiting' sign on it.  The cones had 'HCC' written on by hand in marker pen.The space in front of the one I parked in had a cone in when I parked.  The space I parked in did not.I saw no notice suspending the bays.I received the PCN attached to my windscreen.I submitted an informal challenge, which was rejected.I can wait for the Notice to Owner and then make a 'formal representation', apparently.  After that I could go to tribunal.Do I have grounds on which I could successfully challenge the PCN, or should I pay now to get the discount?The street pictures below are mine.Streeview location:https://maps.app.goo.gl/A7Y6x3Xn9neayzRVADespite the name, Market Place is a street, not a market place.Thanks very much in advance for any advice you can offer.