Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi Guys

I stayed up at my sisters and she paid the parking through her account.
Between us we managed to get the reg wrong three times.

Once last year and twice recently. Wandsworth Council waivered the original and the subsequent mistake but are not willing to waiver the third, which considering the arguments seems too arbitrary and harsh. You would have thought the wardens have access to the record of payment and could see that out reg was ONE LETTER out. An R instead of an L.

We sent the council screenshots of the account they already monitor to show them that we paid for parking. The car was actually there for three weeks - I was admitted to hospital during this time - and we parted with a hundred and fifty quid. We asked for leniency, goodwill and common decency and even sent them a reply to their office below, serving as a pre-emptive response to the imminent NtO. In it we offered to cover their admin fees or whatever they think takes that much money.

My question is: do I just send my reply for their official NtO, or is there something else I should be doing? And what boxes do I tick? I can attach the NtO if you need to see it, Thank you. Here was our reply:

Dear
I'm pre-empting the NtO and trying to reduce stress as I am currently in recovery after leaving hospital.

I write to make formal representations against the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). I do not dispute that my vehicle was parked at the stated location, but I submit that the penalty is disproportionate and unjust in circumstances where valid payment for parking had in fact been made, and the error was limited to a single-character registration mark mistake.

1. Payment Was Made
On the relevant dates, my sister activated visitor permits for my car. Unfortunately, due to a single-character mistake (“L” entered as “R”), the system did not match the registration precisely. Nevertheless, the Council received the correct payment for parking on the relevant dates (28 July – 1 August 2025).

For the avoidance of doubt, my sister subsequently activated and paid for permits for the second and third weeks of my stay (2 August – 15 August and 16 August – 22 August 2025), all of which were entered correctly. During the third week (16–22 August) I was in St George’s Hospital, Tooting, having been admitted critically ill due to stress-related complications. Parking was correctly covered during that week and the Council can verify those transactions.

2. Minor Keying Error – Industry Standards
The British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice distinguishes between minor and major keying errors. A one-character discrepancy is expressly defined as a minor keying error, for which the Code requires cancellation at the first stage of appeal, provided evidence of payment is shown.
BPA Code of Practice, January 2020, para. 17.4–17.5.

POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals) has also consistently ruled that even major keying errors should not result in full penalties, but instead a reduced charge of up to £20 should be offered.
I respectfully submit that if private operators are required to adopt this standard of fairness, it would be wholly disproportionate for a public authority — bound also by the Secretary of State’s Statutory Guidance — to act more harshly.

3. Proportionality and Statutory Guidance
The Statutory Guidance on Civil Parking Enforcement (DfT, 2022) makes clear that enforcement authorities must act fairly, proportionately, and not as a source of revenue. In this case:
The Council has not suffered any loss, as the parking was fully paid.
The enforcement of a £70 (or £140) penalty is therefore punitive, not compensatory.
The High Court in R (Hackney Drivers Association Ltd) v Parking Adjudicator & Lancashire CC [2012] recognised that a payment must match the correct vehicle registration. However, councils also have discretion in enforcement. Where the motorist can demonstrate payment was made, discretion should be exercised to avoid disproportionate penalties.

4. Mitigating Circumstances
At the time, I was staying with my sister during a period of recuperation from stress. She was also travelling abroad (Spain) during this period and activated the permits remotely using her Wandsworth Council account. Unfortunately, in the midst of this, both she and I overlooked the registration character error.
By the third week, I was admitted to St George’s Hospital in Tooting with stress-related complications, where I remained critically ill. The additional stress caused by this PCN has compounded the situation, although it should be emphasised again that all parking for the period of my stay was properly paid for.

5. Goodwill Offer
In line with the BPA Code’s treatment of keying errors, I would be willing to pay £20 as a show of goodwill to cover any administrative costs. This would be consistent with industry standards and would recognise the error without imposing a disproportionate penalty when full payment had already been made.

6. Request for Cancellation
I therefore respectfully request that Wandsworth Council cancel this PCN on the following grounds:
Parking was fully paid for, with only a minor keying error.
The Council has not suffered any loss.
BPA Code and POPLA case law support cancellation or, at most, a nominal charge (£20).
The penalty demanded is disproportionate in light of the statutory guidance and mitigating personal circumstances.
I trust that the Council will exercise its discretion in a fair and proportionate manner and cancel this PCN.
Yours faithfully

So I've asked for a review from the Tribunal - two days from the deadline for reviews - to include the representation I made to the council - being the original letter regarding the red route - as evidence, and they have accepted it... watch this space I guess...

thank you for the prompts

Oh I see, I've just got that.

Thanks for your help, but I wasn't switched on enough to emphasise that as I was fixated on why I couldn't use it to get my mattress.

I guess there's no way back now I have argued for loading.
Yes I should have posted what you wrote verbatim. My bad.

It may be best if I pay the 70 pounds - some you win....

I've lost the appeal with the adjudicator on the following grounds:
It is the Authority’s case that the Appellant’s vehicle was parked in a loading place or bay during restricted hours without loading. They rely in evidence on CCTV footage that shows the vehicle parked in a red route loading only bay.

It is the Appellant’s case that he wished to purchase a mattress, and he had been informed that there was a mattress for sale in a nearby charity shop. He parked in the loading bay with the intention of purchasing the mattress, but it had been sold. He was intending to attach the mattress to the roof of his vehicle using roof straps and he has provided a photograph of the unopened pack of roof straps in his boot.

The Authority maintain that the activity described by the Appellant does not amount to loading. They say in their appeal summary:
”It is clear from Mr Wills statement to the Tribunal that the mattress he was going to collect had not been purchased by him and was not ready to collect. He parked with the intention of purchasing the mattress. Motorists are only permitted to stop in the loading bay to load or unload. This does not extend to making purchases. We contend that Mr Wills should have found a legal place to park whilst going to make the purchase.”

Loading can be defined as the activity of moving goods to or from a vehicle which, due to their weight or bulk, require the use of a vehicle to transport them. The goods must be ready for collection when the vehicle enters the bay, and the vehicle must be moved from the bay as soon as the loading is complete. Whilst a vehicle would be required to transport a mattress, the Appellant cannot be said to have been collecting the mattress as there had been no arrangement with the shop to do so. He was simply hoping that the mattress would still be available for sale, but this proved not to be the case as it had been sold. In those circumstances, I am not satisfied that the said definition of loading has been met. It therefore follows that there was a contravention.

The Appellant also argues that the PCN refers to a parking contravention, namely: Code 25: “Parked in a loading place or bay during restricted hours without loading”, when the correct contravention was Code 46, namely: “Stopped where prohibited (on red route or clearway)”. Furthermore, he maintains that as Code 25 has been used the Authority were not entitled to issue the PCN by post. He says in his representations:
“I refer you to the High Court decision in Transport for London, R (on the application of) v London Tribunal’s (Environment and Traffic Adjudicators) [2023] EWHC 2889 (Admin) where it was held that service of postal PCNs is permitted in bays located along a red route, but only if the bays are part of the red route itself. A designated parking place cannot be a red route and a red route cannot be a designated parking place, as the two are mutually exclusive”.

The purpose of the contravention codes is to adequately describe to the motorist the nature of the alleged contravention in order to meet the requirement in the regulations that the PCN includes “the grounds on which the civil enforcement officer issuing the notice believes that the penalty charge is payable”. As a matter of fact, in this case, the Appellant was parked in a designated loading bay, which was situated on a red route. In those circumstances, I take the view that the PCN adequately describes the nature of the alleged contravention. The fact that the loading bay was situated on a red route and was part of the red route means that, pursuant to the said authority and in accordance with paragraph 11 of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and Gen Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022, “...notification of a penalty charge for a parking contravention on a road in a civil enforcement area may be given otherwise than by fixing a notice to the vehicle” ie it may be given by post, on the basis of a record produced by an approved device. In those circumstances, I am not persuaded that there has been a procedural impropriety by the Authority and I am satisfied that the PCN was valid and that service by post was effective.
In all the above circumstances, I must refuse the appeal.

Hi Guys

I've now been sent a Charge Certificate after responding to the council with the above advice.

I didn't receive an NoR by post with the tick box options to send to an adjudicator, it was just the PDF by email.

So far this is the history:
09/09/2024 07:20   Charge Certificate Issued
06/09/2024 11:33   Off hold no compensate
06/09/2024 11:33   Go to TPT
09/08/2024 17:33   On Hold: Representation Received
29/07/2024 13:56   Notice of Rejection discount CCTV
29/07/2024 13:52   Representation submitted Under review
29/07/2024 13:52   Representation Rejected
29/07/2024 13:50   Off Hold Compensate
29/07/2024 13:50   Representation submitted Under review
29/07/2024 13:50   Representation Rejected
05/07/2024 15:25   On Hold: Representation Received
17/06/2024 07:11   PCN Issued

I feel I should appeal now to the Traffic Penalty tribunal online immediately citing there was no posted NoR and I am surprised at the jump to Charge Certificate.

I responded online to the council so they would have received my argument.
The Charge Certificate cites contravention 25. Obviously they have used a camera and I'm citing contravention forty-six.

I will forward on a pic of my boot where I keep my roof straps for picking up a mattress. I'm not convinced this counts as shopping, as this is an in ordinate weight needing the benefit of a loading bay. the fact the mattress was no longer there was frustrating to me, plus it happened before in London - so I'm annoyed at myself for assuming the mattress would not be sold.

Anyway, your thoughts and advice would be greatly welcome as usual. And is there a place where I can make donations to help with running this website, thank you?

Kind regards
Jack

Thank you for your ground-breaking work

Thank you, will follow up all the appropriate advice. Meanwhile I went to the site and took some pics, just in case they are of any use. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/arosipg3x7jmcjmi4w9wl/AGFCNUgp0QVz-dWDfSeLdkY?rlkey=5sqng0rbd4yvmfdndtsrdh0rd&st=sd7ld17u&dl=0