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 - victor volt

Pages: [1]
1
As an eventual update, it won’t be going to tribunal as the local authority didn’t get round to dealing with it:

“ After reviewing the PCN including the facts surrounding the contravention, I have authorised its cancellation.
Although the PCN may have been issued correctly, Bristol City Council has not responded within the required time frame and therefore the PCN has been cancelled.”

Received today!

2
To quote Ms Sheppard
"There is no power in Regulation 7 for the PCN to require the road user charge to be paid in
addition to the penalty charge. Nor is there a power for the charging authority to refuse to
allocate a payment made for a crossing to that crossing, and hold it, possibly indefinitely, for
future use."

To me the second part is the key part, they were adding the crossing charge even though he had paid it (late).

I read that as two separate points, and the first part stands on its own.

Quote
11. (1) A penalty charge will be payable, in addition to the charge imposed under article
7, for each charging day as respects which—
(a) a relevant vehicle has been used on a designated road in circumstances in which a
charge is imposed by article 7; and
(b) that charge has not been paid in full in the manner in which and within the time by
which it is required to be paid by article 9.

Is stated in the charging order. Whether that makes any difference I don't know.

I guess that would need to be tested at a tribunal. I'll keep you posted.

3
OK, how about this:

I am challenging this PCN due to multiple procedural improprieties on the part of the charging authority:

1 The PCN references the Bristol City Council Clean Air Zone Charging Order 2022, legislation that does not exist. The PCN should in fact refer to the Bristol Clean Air Zone Charging Order 2022

2 The PCN is seeking to claim the CAZ charge in addition to a penalty. There is no provision for this in The Road User Charging Schemes (Penalty Charges, Adjudication and Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2013 which means that the PCN amount is greater than the amount that may legitimately be claimed. This was clarified by the Traffic Penalty Tribunal Chief Adjudicator in Mr Luke Moran - v - Secretary of State for Transport, case number IA01249-1803, on 13 June 2018 when she stated "There is no power in Regulation 7 for the PCN to require the road user charge to be paid in addition to the penalty charge"

3 The Road User Charging Schemes (Penalty Charges, Adjudication and Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2013 7(3)(f) requires that a PCN states the amount of penalty charge that is payable if the penalty charge is paid in full:
(i)within 14 days of the day on which the penalty charge notice is served;
(ii)after the expiry of such 14 day period but within 28 days of the day on which the penalty charge notice is served;
(iii)after the service of a charge certificate
Only (i) and (ii) are included in the PCN, the amount for (iii) has been omitted therefore the PCN is invalid

4 The PCN includes an 0870 premium rate telephone number for payment. In Paul Bateman v Derbyshire County Council, case number DJ00037-2209, on 10 November 2022) the Traffic Penalty Tribunal Adjudicator found that this amounts to a demand that exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case making the PCN invalid.

4
Visiting Bristol, didn't realise I had gone into the CAZ and got this a month later which came as a bit of a surprise!

I've had a search and it looks like the 0870 number for payment may be a failing, and also charging the fee plus the penalty (does the Dart Crossing adjudication apply here?).

Any thoughts would be welcome.



[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Pages: [1]