Free Traffic Legal Advice

I've tried uploading the Sentry footage from the car but the files are far too big for this site and they will not upload. I've tried a resize and that doesn't work either.

The car footage does NOT pick up the CEO putting the envelope on the car. It does however have everything else including timings leading up to that point.

Hi,


Thanks so much for the comments to this, greatly appreciated.

The council eventually got back to me the other day reference the body cam footage they claim to have. They informed me that I must pay 10 pounds to have this BUT if anyone is identifiable in the footage, then they would NOT give me the footage due to 'data protection.'

Reference the Code 12 vs 16, the bays are for the residents there and yes the residents require permits to park there. I'm unsure what you mean reference the 'suffix wording' for Code 12. The NTO clearly states the suffix wording for Code 12 on the first page, 4th paragraph?

My footage from the car very clearly shows the CEO lurking around the car but for some unknown reason does NOT show the CEO approach the car (which is bizarre). One thing the council did say, they said the CEO was a "he" and I can tell you without doubt the CEO was a female.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Thanks for the reply.

My 4 year old is autistic with a deep speech delay, no sentences, all one word comms.

I spent a lot of time highlighting the above in my initial appeal, stating that the nearest non permit parking is on a very busy road and how my daughter has no spatial awareness at all (we've already had a nasty experience with this). The council completely ignored that part of the appeal, as its is not mentioned at all in the letters as you can see. Please see below email to them dated 10/04
Dear Sir/Madam,
 
 
 
I am now in receipt of your response to my PCN appeal.
 
Your Notice of Rejection of Representations dated 05/04/2024, arrived at my address 09/04/2024.
 
I have read the response and have some points below please for your attention:
 
 
1. When I appealed, my written appeal was composed of two elements, one being the absence of a physical ticket attached to my vehicle and two being the fact that my daughter is autistic and my regard for her safety. Whilst the former was addressed in the response, unfortunately and for reasons unknown; the latter was not mentioned at all. I would like to request please why this was the case?
 
2. When I appealed, my written appeal stated that there was no printed ticket attached to the vehicle. I confirmed that there was a plastic envelope but there was no printed ticket. You have stated in the response “after viewing the body cam footage, the officer can be seen approaching your vehicle, walking to the front and taking a photograph. He can then be seen printing out the PCN and placing it in the envelope.” I did kindly request that you share any evidence of the printed ticket with me as part of my appeal but that request has not been granted. Furthermore, the CEO is not male and is most certainly a female (see attached images below). My vehicle records people close by (footage attached below) and has recorded very clear footage of the CEO being in the vicinity of the vehicle and the exact times. I would again kindly request please, that you share footage or at the very least screenshots of the ticket being printed and placed on the vehicle.
 
I would be grateful if you would attend to the above points please, before I make a decision on how to move forward with this matter.
 
Thank you.


The email reply to this from the council was dated 11/04 informing me that the case was on hold until a written response could be sent out. The written response is the last letter attached in the PDF document dated 11/04. As you can clearly see from this letter, they've chosen yet again to completely ignore any inclusion of my daughter's condition, neither from the initial appeal or indeed the above follow up email. I'm curious as to why they've done this.

In addition to the above, I'm wondering if I have found a loophole here.

Regulation 6 of the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) is what the council have quoted in their Notice of Rejection.

Paragraph 4a of the above regulation states "the enforcement authority MUST consider the representations and any supporting evidence which the recipient provides"

Reference the above, when I appealed I clearly bullet to the council that my appeal was in two parts, one was the lack of physical ticket displayed and the other was the fact that my daughter is autistic with a speech delay and communication issues. The Notice of Rejection received from the council, does not even acknowledge my full appeal elements and completely ignores the part I've stated about my daughter. I even sent an email to the parking department at the council asking why they had ignored my full appeal and chosen only to focus on the missing ticket. Their Notice of Rejection states - "the reasons for rejecting your appeal are: You said there was no physical ticket." There's no mention of the other grounds of my appeal.

The CE and RTC regulation 7 states If the enforcement authority fails to comply with the requirements specified in paragraph (4) within the 56-day period—

(a)it is deemed for the purposes of these Regulations to have accepted the representations made by the recipient, and

(b)it must—

(i)cancel the relevant enforcement notice,

(ii)refund any sum paid in relation to it, and

(iii)serve a notice on the recipient informing the recipient that the enforcement notice has been cancelled because the enforcement authority failed to serve a decision notice in accordance with paragraph (4)(b).

Surely from the above it can be argued here that the council have NOT considered the full representations?