Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi all,

Just want to thank you for all your help thus far.

I have my hearing at the county court tomorrow. Nervous. But I think my main point is the PoFA compliance.

I did want to just send a few documents in Excel's evidence pack. Perhaps just for a last minute sanity check (from any of you that may see this before tomorrow).

Please let me know if you have any further advice. Also - any advice towards do's/don'ts for this hearing would be very helpful as it's my first time doing this.

Thank you! Pictures below.

Hello all,

Firstly want to thank everyone that has helped so far.

I had my mediation a little while ago, long story short they said they'd be pursuing because they claimed to have sent a Notice to Keeper. And they made an offer to settle for £180. I rejected, and counter offered an amount I deemed was worth not having to deal with the stress of the situation..£40. As you'd expect, they rejected this.

Following failed mediation, they emailed an offer of £145. In response, I asked for the evidence they intend to reply upon. They have sent images, as well as an NTK document, and an NTK reminder.

Emails, and evidence they emailed has been attached. Any assistance is sincerely appreciated, not too sure what my next action should be.

The image of the sign they sent is not readable at all, and images of the vehicle do not show that the vehicle was parked in a disabled bay.

Thanks!

Hi all,

Looking for some help from the pros here, received some great advice last year.

I got a small money claim in the post, from Excel Parking Services Ltd, represented by ELMS Legal, regarding an alleged parking incident. Didn't know this was an issue until I got this letter from the courts.

Shortly after, I received a letter from ELMS Legal about notification of proceedings.

Due to limited time, I went ahead and submitted a defence without seeking help, possibly too quickly..so I'm hoping for some retrospective guidance from the experts.

Background..
Alleged contravention date: 12/01/25

Claim particulars mention parking in a disabled bay. I am the registered keeper. My father is a blue badge holder and does drive my car often.. but I don't remember what I had for tea last week let alone what happened in January.

Re: service of letters, I live in a tower block where mail often goes missing. We have an unmanned lobby where Royal Mail and other services leave letters and packages which often get stolen or lost.

Actions so far:
1. Defence submitted (attached for review).

2. Received "Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track" containing Form N180, and I’m unsure about Section D – “Suitability for determination without a hearing.”
I was going to tick yes, but now I'm thinking that might weaken my position if the claimant adds new evidence later and there's no chance to argue my side in person? Running the risk of having the judge decide based on whatever ELMS/Excel present.

Would be very kind if someone could help with the following:

1. Any input on how to handle Section D of the N180. Should I be pushing for the hearing? What can I expect?

2. Thoughts on my defence and whether I've missed something that could've been in my favour?

3. Any advice on what else I should be doing at this stage.

Attachments:

- Particulars of claim

- Letter from ELMS

- My submitted defence

Appreciate any help you guys can offer, thank you.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Update:

Just got back from the tribunal.

Success!!

I had 3 pages of defence ready, but the adjudicator took only 5 minutes to review the council's bundle and cancel the PCN immediately.

The adjudicator agreed that the PCN was full of inconsistencies and errors. Due to these multiple errors, the council had no credibility. The final ruling was that the PCN was not served.

I now want to explore compensation. It's ridiculous that a CEO can hand out fines with just a registration number. This means they could technically fine cars at will without needing any photographic proof.

CEOs are motivated by financial incentives.
Police officers are motivated by a commitment to public safety and protecting the vulnerable.
The credibility of a police officer cannot be equated to that of a civil enforcement officer. Yet, here we are so willing to accept the words of a CEO without any proof to back it up.

The case caused significant stress to my father, who is disabled with nervous system problems and high blood pressure. He now fears that upsetting anyone who knows a CEO could result in more fines. Additionally, we've spent countless hours dealing with this issue. My appeal to the NtO was clear, and the PCN should have been cancelled at that stage instead of dragging us through this process.

So my question is, does anyone know how to take further action?

And big thank you to all for spending your free time looking into this with me. It's incredible that a bunch of strangers online could be so willing to help.

When I asked the adjudicator rewarding costs and compensation, he made a remark "If this is the worst thing that's happened to you in your life, count yourself lucky" And "Well I've cancelled the PCN, that should be enough". Personally, that's ridiculous. How many people does this happen to? How much stress, and time goes into defending a PCN when the enforcement is unlawful? Why should we tolerate the council's misuse of their authority and their willingness to inconvenience everyday people to such an extent? I absolutely want to make Hounslow council pay; this was extremely unfair.

Just looking at the council's rejection of my appeal to their NtO. Photo is in my initial post.

This paragraph specifically

"In regards to evidence of the contravention, photographic evidence is considered as secondary evidence, and is not required to be taken for the PCN to be valid. The CEO makes notes of various details on their handheld computer including the location of the vehicle, how the PCN was served, and whether anything was displayed in the vehicle. In this instance, the information shows that the PCN was correctly issued and served".

The council claim their CEO noted how the PCN was served (must be the HTD in the notes).

But then, clearly distinguish between issued and served in the part I highlighted red.

Again more inconsistencies from the council. Is there anything here? I still think the argument is valid but would be great if someone could clear this up.

Quote from: Incandescent on May 19, 2024, 10:16:39 pm

The 2007 regs have been superceded by those of 2022.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/71/contents

Look at Regulation 10(2)(c)

@Incandescent, I'm grateful for that information.

Seems to me that the situation is not any different. There has been a "Procedural Impropriety" on the part of the Council.

The Civil Enforcement Officer's notes in the evidence pack state;
"A WC DS PT NLS UL NVDD NDBD HTD OS 376 DRIVER RETURNED AFTER ISSUED PCN AND DROVE OFF WHILE GETTING READY To TAKE photos".
Therefore the Council's own evidence shows that no Penalty Charge Notice was actually served on the appellant or his vehicle.

As such the Council may have had justification to serve a postal Penalty charge Notice under regulation 10 of the The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022, paragraph 10(2)(c).

The case progression log confirms that the Council never issued any such Regulation 10 Penalty Charge Notice. And certainly not within the 28 days stipulated by regulation 10(6) of the regulations.

10(2) An enforcement authority may give notification of the penalty charge by serving a penalty charge notice by post where—
(a).....
(b).....
(c)a civil enforcement officer had begun to prepare a penalty charge notice to be given in accordance with regulation 9, but the vehicle concerned was driven away from the place in which it was stationary before the civil enforcement officer had finished preparing the penalty charge notice or had given it in accordance with regulation 9.
(3).....
(4).....
(5).....
(6) Subject to paragraph (, an enforcement authority may not give a penalty charge notice under this regulation after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the contravention date (“the 28-day period”).

No such PCN has been lawfully served and is therefore unenforceable and null and void.

@notagain
See what others might have to add.
However I suggest that the above is your strongest argument.

If you do not understand the point and wish to explore it further then I suggest you request an adjournment at tomorrow's (Monday's) hearing.

Enceladus, massive thank you for this. I fully understand the point. I'm in the process of writing up our defence and this will be the first argument I rely upon. Hearing is at 12PM tomorrow.

I'm reading some of the references you and others have posted here, so may have a few more questions in due course.

Thanks again!

H C Anderson, thank you for taking the time!

I actually totally missed that first paragraph of the case summary. That’s another thing they’ve been inconsistent with then. I will be sure to point that out tomorrow.

And yes, I cannot say I know what happened. And I do understand your remarks about the council and their CEO. But it’s my dad - if it’s his fault, he’ll admit to it and ask if there’s a way out. Otherwise he’d pay.

Correct me if I’m wrong but I would argue the following supports my dad’s claims.

1. No picture of my dads car in any of the evidences, so cannot prove/disprove the displaying of blue badge.
2. ‘First events’ of PCN, shown on councils portal when viewing evidence, claims first event was the NtO being issued in March. Not the handed to driver PCN occurring allegedly in November.
3. General inconsistencies such as how long vehicle was observed for

Let me know what you think. And thank you again.