Show Posts
1
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Greenwich - Crooms Hill / Nevada St - 52m failing to comply with prohibition on certain types of vehicle
« on: Yesterday at 02:41:05 pm »
Thanks all for the earlier advice. As expected, Greenwich have now rejected my representations.
Their rejection does not appear to meaningfully address the de minimis argument. My representations were based primarily on the alleged contravention occurring at 18:59:35, with the restriction ending at 19:00 (approx. 25 seconds only within the restricted period).
In the Notice of Rejection they simply state that because the vehicle was observed at 18:59, the PCN was correctly issued, and that it is the driver’s responsibility to be aware of the restriction times. They also refer to signage compliance and my mitigating circumstances, but do not appear to engage with the argument that enforcement in these circumstances is trivial/disproportionate. This seems to sidestep the substance of the appeal.
I am now minded to appeal to London Tribunals on the basis that:
the contravention was de minimis (c.25 seconds only);
the vehicle’s presence had no meaningful impact on the purpose of the restriction;
the council failed to properly consider my representations by not addressing proportionality/de minimis.
Does this seem like the correct tribunal approach, and is there anything else in the Notice of Rejection worth raising?
I have attached the rejection notice and an image of the signage.
Their rejection does not appear to meaningfully address the de minimis argument. My representations were based primarily on the alleged contravention occurring at 18:59:35, with the restriction ending at 19:00 (approx. 25 seconds only within the restricted period).
In the Notice of Rejection they simply state that because the vehicle was observed at 18:59, the PCN was correctly issued, and that it is the driver’s responsibility to be aware of the restriction times. They also refer to signage compliance and my mitigating circumstances, but do not appear to engage with the argument that enforcement in these circumstances is trivial/disproportionate. This seems to sidestep the substance of the appeal.
I am now minded to appeal to London Tribunals on the basis that:
the contravention was de minimis (c.25 seconds only);
the vehicle’s presence had no meaningful impact on the purpose of the restriction;
the council failed to properly consider my representations by not addressing proportionality/de minimis.
Does this seem like the correct tribunal approach, and is there anything else in the Notice of Rejection worth raising?
I have attached the rejection notice and an image of the signage.
