Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - thucydides

Pages: [1]
1
Thanks, so just write the above out in a pdf and submit it verbatim in the appeal? I've had a look on the website and will screenshot what I can find. There's a general page here https://www.hounslow.gov.uk/penalty-charge-notices/pcn-contravention-codes/5 but I'll see if there's anything more in depth.

Thanks again for your help.

2
Thanks very much, that's most helpful.

3
Thanks. Here are the pictures.










I'm not entirely sure where the camera is but here is a sign on Heath Road

https://maps.app.goo.gl/BAfZahLq5wyiX5px5

Thanks again.

4
Hello everyone,

My wife received this PCN for entering the this zone 3 minutes early. The wording on page 2 however is the same as the one that Hippocrates posted in the bookmarked thread so I was wondering if I could appeal based on the same principle? If so, is it just a matter of following the appeal link on the PCN and copying and pasting in the text below?

Many thanks.



For future ease of reference:

I make this collateral challenge against the validity of the PCN as it is missing mandatory information as provided at Para. 4 (8 ) (v) of


https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/section/4/enacted

(v)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased

charge may be payable.

Clearly, this refers to Para. 4 (8 ) (iii):

(iii)that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning

with the date of the notice;

Therefore, it follows that the statement: "If you fail to pay the Penalty Charge or make representations before the end of a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice an increased charge of £240 may be payable” adds to the lack of clarity by its omission. Even on its own, whether the required information was included or not, it is also arguable that it conflates the two periods using the word "or" which many would view as being conjunctive. Furthermore, even if the statement were to be interpreted disjunctively, there is still no clarity due to the missing information. So, it follows that it cannot possibly be interpreted disjunctively.

Pages: [1]