Show Posts
1
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: PCN in my own estate bay from Islington Council - no yellow ticket
« on: May 01, 2026, 08:24:17 am »
Does this sound ok? From Resolvo. I found 'the keeper' a bit informal but the AI thinks is better.
To Whom It May Concern,
The registered keeper of the above vehicle writes to make formal representations against the Notice to Owner.
The vehicle was parked on 30 March 2026 in a designated estate permit bay within the keeper’s residential estate. The keeper has held a valid permit for this bay, issued by the council, for approximately 10 years and uses this space on a daily basis.
A valid permit was in place for the vehicle at the time. A current photograph of the permit, along with supporting evidence of entitlement, can be provided.The council’s photographs indicate that the permit was not visible at the time of inspection. While the keeper cannot confirm the exact circumstances at that moment, it is possible that the permit had been temporarily removed or displaced earlier that same morning.
Importantly, this was not a case of parking without authorisation. The vehicle was parked in a bay for which a valid permit was held at all times.The keeper has rented and used this bay continuously for around 10 years. This is a regular and authorised arrangement with the council, and the vehicle is routinely parked in this location in full compliance with the permit conditions.
The keeper also holds a valid Blue Badge. While it is understood that this does not replace the requirement to display a permit in this location, it further demonstrates that the vehicle was being used by an authorised individual with legitimate parking needs.
There has been no misuse of the bay and no attempt to avoid the rules. This appears to be an isolated and unintended situation.
No Penalty Charge Notice was observed on the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention. The first correspondence received was the Notice to Owner.
As the vehicle is visible from the keeper’s residence, it is unlikely that a PCN remained on the vehicle for any significant period. It is therefore possible that it was removed before it could be seen, which prevented any earlier action from being taken.
Given that:
A valid permit was held at all times
The keeper is a long-term authorised user of the bay
There was no intentional contravention
The original PCN was not seen
The keeper respectfully asks that the council exercise its discretion and cancel this Penalty Charge Notice.
If cancellation is not considered appropriate, the keeper would be grateful if the discounted amount could be reinstated, given the circumstances and the lack of opportunity to respond at an earlier stage.
In light of the above, the keeper respectfully requests that this Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.
To Whom It May Concern,
The registered keeper of the above vehicle writes to make formal representations against the Notice to Owner.
The vehicle was parked on 30 March 2026 in a designated estate permit bay within the keeper’s residential estate. The keeper has held a valid permit for this bay, issued by the council, for approximately 10 years and uses this space on a daily basis.
A valid permit was in place for the vehicle at the time. A current photograph of the permit, along with supporting evidence of entitlement, can be provided.The council’s photographs indicate that the permit was not visible at the time of inspection. While the keeper cannot confirm the exact circumstances at that moment, it is possible that the permit had been temporarily removed or displaced earlier that same morning.
Importantly, this was not a case of parking without authorisation. The vehicle was parked in a bay for which a valid permit was held at all times.The keeper has rented and used this bay continuously for around 10 years. This is a regular and authorised arrangement with the council, and the vehicle is routinely parked in this location in full compliance with the permit conditions.
The keeper also holds a valid Blue Badge. While it is understood that this does not replace the requirement to display a permit in this location, it further demonstrates that the vehicle was being used by an authorised individual with legitimate parking needs.
There has been no misuse of the bay and no attempt to avoid the rules. This appears to be an isolated and unintended situation.
No Penalty Charge Notice was observed on the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention. The first correspondence received was the Notice to Owner.
As the vehicle is visible from the keeper’s residence, it is unlikely that a PCN remained on the vehicle for any significant period. It is therefore possible that it was removed before it could be seen, which prevented any earlier action from being taken.
Given that:
A valid permit was held at all times
The keeper is a long-term authorised user of the bay
There was no intentional contravention
The original PCN was not seen
The keeper respectfully asks that the council exercise its discretion and cancel this Penalty Charge Notice.
If cancellation is not considered appropriate, the keeper would be grateful if the discounted amount could be reinstated, given the circumstances and the lack of opportunity to respond at an earlier stage.
In light of the above, the keeper respectfully requests that this Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.