Free Traffic Legal Advice

Well..I got a response back today and the Dart CS rep has refused my challenge but canceled the charge and just asked for the crossing payments.
I'm happy with the fine being removed but they haven't even acknowledged the issues they are facing. I expect there will be a lot of people in the same boat who will pay up for a quicker resolution.




[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

I've received two PCNs from the Department for Transport today for their error in failing to take automatic payment for a Dartford Bridge crossing.

As confirmed by the Customer Service manager I've been speaking to, the company the Government used to handle admin and collect the PCN's was split from one into two separate companies July 28th.

This meant they needed all users to re-register card details which has turned into a fiasco.

In short, I updated card details online as requested but payments weren't being taken despite valid details.


Apologies if this raft of emails from the provider below (also attached) aren't easy to follow but I need to include it for context.


Order of emails
1. 20/07/23 - Notice of the service provider change.

2. 15/08/23 - 21:51 - Email confirmation my payment method update completed via their online site.

3. 15/08/23 - 22:39 - Email to inform  account payment failed. (Card details were correct so it was an admin error on their side)
Also noted with: 'Due to service issues users have faced since the implementation of the new service we have extended payment deadlines to ensure everyone has sufficient time to take action.'

4. 16/08/23 - 11:27 - Email confirmation account reactivated

5. 16/08/23 - 11:27 - Email confirmation (again) my payment method
completed via their online site a second time.

6. 20/08/23 - 19:13 - Email confirmation payment failed and the account suspended
(admin error their side)

7. 20/08/23 - 19:15 - Final Email received - confirmation our payment method completed via their online site a third time.


>>

I tried speaking to both the admin and PCN departments and they both blamed each other and transferred back and forth before insisting on a dispute online.

Objections
1. DfT's administrative system (contracted to Emovis Operations Leeds Ltd) for payments is not working.
2. Date of PCN issue was 1/11/23 but the supposed infraction was August 16, ten weeks prior.

I'd appreciate any advice on this.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

I just got a response back from the council's Parking Services and after some finger-wagging, they have cancelled it.

Thank you for the prompt advice and assistance.

---

Dear

PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE
VEHICLE REGISTRATION NUMBER

Thank you for writing to us.

Although your Penalty Charge Notice was correctly given, we have cancelled it on this occasion.
You were issued a Penalty Charge Notice because part of your vehicle was outside the white lines of the parking bay.

You are not allowed to park like this even if you have paid to park, are displaying an item correctly (for example a permit or disabled badge) or other cars have not left you enough room.

If you get another Penalty Charge Notice in similar circumstances, we may not be able to cancel it.

Yours sincerely
Civil Enforcement Technical Officer

Thank you for the. quick responses, and appreciate the extra details cp8759.

Here goes draft 1!

>>>

[My Name]
[My Address]
[City, Postal Code]
[My Email Address]
[My Phone Number]
[Date]

[Council Name]
[Address]
[City, Postal Code]

Subject: Formal Dispute of Parking Charge Notification (PCN) - Ambiguous Signage and Poor Ground Markings

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to formally dispute the Parking Charge Notification (PCN) issued to me on [Date of PCN], reference number [PCN Reference Number]. I received the PCN for an alleged parking infringement related to parking over two bays at [Location of Parking]. I firmly believe that this charge is unjust, as the ground markings at the site have poor visibility, primarily due to the worn-away paint and also the recent heavy rainfall with inadequate drainage. Furthermore, the presence of very prominent marks on the wall directly in front implies bay separation, which only adds to the confusion.

I wish to submit the following points, along with the attached video and photographic evidence, to support my dispute:

URL1: [Video1]
URL2: [video2]

The video evidence provided clearly depicts the adverse conditions of the ground markings due to heavy rainfall and inadequate drainage. These conditions are entirely beyond my control as a driver and should not lead to a valid PCN.

Additionally, the photographic evidence illustrates the extent to which the ground markings have deteriorated and the very prominent marks on the wall, which are misleadingly suggestive of bay separation. This creates significant ambiguity for drivers, making it difficult to determine the exact boundaries of the parking spaces.

Due to the poor visibility of the ground markings, exacerbated by adverse weather conditions and misleading wall markings, I contend that the PCN should be canceled. The circumstances surrounding the parking situation were beyond my control, and the signage on-site is unclear and confusing.

I kindly request that you thoroughly review this dispute, taking into account the evidence presented. In accordance with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice, I expect a response within 14 days of receiving this letter. Failure to provide a satisfactory response may result in further escalation of this matter, including seeking legal advice and submitting formal complaints to the relevant regulatory authorities.

Please acknowledge the receipt of this letter and any supporting evidence submitted. I trust that you will address this dispute in a fair and reasonable manner and aim for a prompt resolution to this issue.

Yours sincerely,
My Name