Free Traffic Legal Advice

They have 6 months from the contravention date to serve an NTO to the registered keeper at the address on the V5C logbook.

Perfect, thanks very much. That would be February 18, so there's still a couple of months for them to send it out if they fancy it, then.

Case reference 2240394922
Decision Date 21 Nov 2024

Ms Ebanks credibly submitted that her car overheated, requiring her to stop. She provided a garage receipt. The Council did not accept that the receipt corroborated a breakdown and commented that it was handwritten and did not contain a VAT number. The absence of a typed receipt with a VAT number does not render the document worthless.
I find that the car could not be moved due to circumstances beyond the control of the driver.

Thanks also for this - shameful that this exact attempt at a sham fine has been attempted verbatim already. If the NtO does come through and I have to take it up again, I would be very surprised if I didn't get a response like this almost word-for-word. I can't believe councils even bother trying to go to tribunal on such pathetic grounds in the first place.

Are you able to let me know which council this was from, please? Or any other details on the case - just so I can have it on hand to refer to, if useful down the line.

Just by way of update, still no NtO.

Any thoughts on how long is reasonable to keep waiting until I can consider that one won't be coming at all?

Agreed. The local authority manages thousands of PCNs and is probably familiar with people trying to pull a fast one. No doubt these are a tiny minority but its strategy seems to be to try and poke holes in your defence in the hope you will give up if you are not genuine.

So, stick to your guns. I suspect if you provide more details on the recovery firm they will back down once they have enough info to establish they are legit. Be that address, contact details, whatever...

This is the thing: if you Google the recovery guy's mobile number, email address, it comes up with his Google Maps listing. I could reasonably ask him to give another invoice with his address that I could include when I respond to the NtO. That could mean it's over before it's begun, since they laid down this bizarre side-quest around VAT and address...

Thanks. And thanks again: if you're the same MrChips from That Other Forum, then this is the second time you've helped me out (previously YBJ / no luck).

Not sure why you're so focused on the VAT number. Their response points out that the invoice doesn't contain either a VAT number or a company address. Perhaps if it included the latter, they might accept it?

"Please be advised, as the documentation does not contain a company VAT number or a company address, I am unable to ascertain the validity of the invoice, therefore we would be looking at upholding this PCN."

That's my bad: I think either are odd grounds to suggest the recovery did not take place, given photo evidence. There is an email address there if they were serious about "ascertaining the validity of the invoice".

As an edit: I do get that an invoice should really contain an address. But what I don't get is how that is grounds to suggest I've staged a bunch of photos of my car being put on a recovery truck at the exact location the PCN was issued...

Quote from: dion_dublin_fan on October 03, 2024, 04:28:40 pm

There's no issue in the phrasing or any of the documents or in the issuance of the PCN, so don't see what's to gain from posting them. The location of the offence is of no relevance.

The question arises because the council say they will allow an appeal if the car had broken down. The car had broken down, and they have seen photos of it being towed. They have also seen an invoice for it being towed. Yet, they deny the appeal on the basis of a lack of VAT registration on the part of the towing agent.

The question is, will my evidence be seen more favourably at tribunal than at informal appeal?

But you haven't shown us anything at all? Or even mentioned what council is involved.

We can't comment on what an adjudicator would think of something we haven't seen.

OK, this is useful in itself - you're suggesting that an adjudicator in Doncaster would interpret this differently to an adjudicator in Swindon or London?

In a court, the council's position has no legs - I can proved beyond doubt that the car had broken down and needed recovering, and the council/whoever can offer no counter to that. But, we're not in a court of law. So that's why I'm seeking opinions (not necessarily accountable advice) on the way a tribunal or pre-tribunal assessment might look at it.

Is there anything you don't know about this situation that is holding you back from expressing an opinion? Happy to share specifics if they are relevant.

the council state the recovery invoice you supplied has no business address on it. is that correct?

Yes, that's correct.

To be clear - the question here is about proving the car was broken down, and whether the stages beyond NtO are likely to be as anal on VAT registration and invoice address as the responses to informal appeals have been, as opposed to engaging in a good faith assessment with the evidence of the car's ability to be driven or not.

I'm not going to comment without seeing the rejection letter and invoice except to say there is a formal notice to owner stage next before tribunal where they often reconsider.

The text of the three letters received from the council, in order from oldest to most recent, are as follows:

1. This first response followed the initial appeal, in which I described the situation, included specific times relating to the sequence of events in the breakdown, and included several photos showing the car being loaded and secured onto a recovery vehicle, visibly at the location of the PCN's issue.

"Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a residents’ parking place or zone without a valid virtual permit or clearly displaying a valid physical permit or voucher or pay and display ticket issued for that place where required, or without payment of the parking charge.

Having reviewed your correspondence and the evidence available to myself, whilst I appreciate that the vehicle may have broken down, please be advised, we would require documentation in support of your appeal, before we make an informed decision. This should take the form of a breakdown report, or towing invoice, containing the date, time and location of the breakdown or recovery. It may also be an invoice from a garage who completed the works that were required or an invoice for the part, parts or labour that was required.

Please note, providing this evidence will assist in a decision being made but it should be noted that this does not guarantee the PCN will be cancelled. Failure to provide the evidence, could result in the PCN being upheld."

2. This second response followed me uploading the invoice from the recovery agent as requested - the response is correct in pointing out that there is not a VAT registration or address, although there is an email address for the recovery agent.

"Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a residents’ parking place or zone without a valid virtual permit or clearly displaying a valid physical permit or voucher or pay and display ticket issued for that place where required, or without payment of the parking charge.

Having reviewed your correspondence and the evidence available, whilst I appreciate the invoice you have provided, please note that we are unable to accept this. Please be advised, as the documentation does not contain a company VAT number or a company address, I am unable to ascertain the validity of the invoice, therefore we would be looking at upholding this PCN.

Leaving a vehicle unattended for a period of time without a valid permit to park effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN.

It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times.

With that being said, we would have to inform you, the circumstances described do not warrant the cancellation of the PCN, and your appeal has been rejected at this stage.

Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN:
[ the same photos as originally included with the PCN are repeated in the body of the letter, showing the car in the bay from front and back, and the bay's 'Resident permit holders only' sign ]"


3. This third letter came after I responded and questioned why the VAT registration of the recovery agent was of relevance to demonstrating whether or not I had broken down:

"Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a residents’ parking place or zone without a valid virtual permit or clearly displaying a valid physical permit or voucher or pay and display ticket issued for that place where required, or without payment of the parking charge.

Having reviewed your most recent correspondence and the evidence available to myself, whilst I appreciate you may be disappointed with our decision, please be advised, should you wish to contest the matter further, I would have to advise to please await the Notice to Owner to arrive via post. Please do not respond to this correspondence as it will only delay the appeals process.

The Notice to Owner will establish liability for the PCN and the grounds under which representations may be made. If representations are made at this stage and they are rejected, there will be the right of appeal to an independent Environment and Traffic Adjudicator. We have now let the case off hold to allow it to progress to the next stage.

Further correspondence may not be responded to."

The invoice is as the council describes - it does not have an address or a VAT registration number. It has the company name, an email address, an invoice number, and in the description of the service provided, it states my vehicle reg number, the location it was recovered from (road and postcode), and the location it was recovered to (road and postcode), the date, the price, and that it was paid.

The photos I attached to the initial appeal showed (i) the car loaded onto the recovery truck, taken from in front of the recovery truck facing backwards, with the bays in which the PCN offence occurred clearly visible in the background; (ii) the car loaded onto the truck, with the photo taken from the opposite angle, with my car's reg plate clearly visible; (iii) the car parked up outside the garage having been recovered to there; (iv) the car up on a ramp at the garage.

For what it's worth, I'm not sure (iii) or (iv) are particularly convincing evidence on their own - since I don't have an invoice from the garage (since no work was actually carried out), these could, I guess, have been taken at any time in the past. So I don't think they come into play going forward, realistically - it wouldn't be worth labouring that. In any case, we're not trying to prove that my car got fixed here, we're trying to prove that it was broken down in the first place, hence why I couldn't move it from the bay and got a PCN.