Show Posts - Captainships

Was in a hurry and thought I'd just book the slot as I was walking.So I have no way out of this and should just pay?

Any advice on this?

Hi all,I submitted the challenge below for a PCN we recieved but the council has rejected it. Was walking away from the car while trying to use the Ringo app but phone battery died. So immediately turned back but found pcn issued.Please could someone advise if it's worth fighting or paying the discounted rate offered? Here is the PCN:https://freeimage.host/i/BplFnQpHere is the council rejection letter:Page 1 https://freeimage.host/i/BpcpToFPage 2 https://freeimage.host/i/Bpcpzt1And here is the challenge we had submitted:​I am challenging this PCN on the grounds of procedural impropriety and that the contravention did not occur.​1. Lack of Required Observation Period:The PCN itself records an observation time of 16:13 to 16:13. This is a zero-minute observation. For a Code 11u contravention in a bay where mobile phone payment is required and loading/unloading is permitted, a zero-minute observation is a breach of standard enforcement procedure.​2. Evidence of Instant Enforcement:Your own photographic evidence confirms this premature issuance. The first photo was taken at 16:13:36 and the final photo at 16:14:20. This total duration of 44 seconds is grossly insufficient to allow a driver to exit the vehicle, consult the signage, and initiate a RingGo session.​3. Failure to Account for Exemptions:As this bay allows for the exemption of loading/unloading, the CEO is required to observe the vehicle for a sufficient period (typically 5 minutes) to ensure no such activity is taking place. By issuing the PCN in under a minute, the CEO failed to establish that a contravention was actually occurring.​Under the Secretary of State’s Statutory Guidance, enforcement must be fair and proportionate. 'Instant' enforcement in a parking bay is considered predatory. I request that this PCN be cancelled immediately due to these procedural defects.

Thank you Intercity. Would it work against the driver if the appeal if what I drafted above was used in addition to your wording? Just thinking what would give a greater chance of them cancelling it.

I can submit pictures over the weekend. Given the imminent deadline to submit the appeal, shall we just not submit it while trying to contact the leisure centre to get it cancelled? Getting a response from the centre will take some time.

I'm planning on appealing this PCN with the below. Please can someone advise if this is good? I believe I need to submit this by tomorrow. I am writing as the registered keeper of the vehicle referenced in the Parking Charge Notice.I wish to appeal this charge.The vehicle was parked at the leisure centre while it was being used for its intended purpose: transporting children to their regular weekly swimming session. Parking at this location is advertised as free for leisure centre users, subject to vehicle registration being entered on the reception iPad.It appears that on this occasion, the driver may have inadvertently failed to input the vehicle registration details at reception. There was no intention to breach any parking terms, no misuse of the car park, and no loss caused to the landowner. The vehicle was parked for the duration of a legitimate leisure centre visit.I will be supplying screenshots confirming the swimming session attended on the date and time in question in support of this appeal.Given that:-the vehicle was entitled to free parking as a leisure centre user,-this was a genuine and regular visit, and -any failure to register the vehicle was a simple and unintentional oversight,I respectfully request that this Parking Charge Notice be cancelled.Please note that I am appealing as the registered keeper only. I am under no obligation to identify the driver, and I will not be doing so.If you choose not to cancel the charge, please provide:-a full written rejection, and-the relevant independent appeals code (POPLA or IAS, as applicable),so that the matter may be escalated accordingly.I look forward to your confirmation that the charge has been cancelled.Yours faithfully,

Thank you mate. Please let me know what to do.

Hi all,Can I get some help with this PCN please?Was taking children for their regular swimming session and I must've forgotten to register the car on the ipad at reception for free parking.Can someone help with the appeal? I think I have a couple of days left to do this. Here are the images to the postal PCN:Page 1: https://freeimage.host/i/f8xcTRpPage 2: https://freeimage.host/i/f8xcuONMany thanks

I agree. It's a disgraceful letter from the Council. I'm happy to take it to tribunal if anyone here is able to help with the appeal?

Hi all, They sent the Notice of Rejection just before Xmas, dated 22/12/24. They rejected the rep despite the letter:-acknowledging that it was a genuine mistake and no financial loss occurred  -acknowledging that the car was indeed parked for less than an hour (within the one hour free parking)-acknowledging "payment was made" for a session, albeit in a different location (NB no payment was made, it was a Ringo booking for a one hour free parking). Additionally, the letter responds to my request for discretion by saying:"Regarding your request for discretion, enforcement authoritles are required to act fairly and proportionately. While we appreciate that this was a genuine mistake and that no financial loss occurred to the Council, the contravention is enforceable under the Traffic Management Act 2004. After reviewing the circumstances, we are satisfied that the contravention occurred....and remains payable"Please can you advise what to do next?Here is a link to the full NoR letter:Page 1: https://freeimage.host/i/fvZb73JPage 2:https://freeimage.host/i/fvZbR4a

Hi all,I forgot to update:1. They've cancelled one of the pcns (the one that had the incorrect road name) saying "Thank you for your letter regarding the above Penally Charge Notice.The matter has been considered and as a resultit is considered that there are suffcient grounds for the notice to be cancelled. No further action wilbe taken."2. For the PCN that had the correct road name (which is what the original post here is about), we recieved the NtO giving the reason as" parked without payment of the parking charge". Here is the NtO: https://freeimage.host/i/faL1lZxI have only until tomorrow I believe to submit a rep (however the NtO says 28 days from when the letter was served, which would mean I have another two days or so).I've lost the discount so can someone help with the rep? Should I just re submit what I sent for the challenge?Many thanks

OK will remove that para and submit. Thank you all!

Quote from: stamfordman on 08 Nov, 2025 10:21Pastbybest is saying just say something like:I checked my car clock and it said 7:59 (or before 8am) so was reassured I was able to proceed before the restriction started.OK have amended. See below. Should I also remove the second para under no. 1? Or is it all now good to go? Many thanks.I am writing to challenge this PCN on the following grounds:1. Trivial Timing – De Minimis BreachI checked my car clock and it was not yet 8am, so was reassured I was able to proceed before the restriction started.I do not have independent confirmation of the accuracy of the council’s recording device time. If the council’s timing is accurate, any contravention was entirely unintentional and occurred in a very brief period (53 seconds) immediately after the restriction began.2. Unclear “Term Time Only” SignageAlthough I believed I had entered the road before the restricted time shown on the sign, I was not certain if the restriction was in force due to the accompanying sign that said "restricted access term-time only". The  sign does not specify any term dates or provide a means of knowing when those terms begin and end. Adjudicators have previously criticised such signage as ambiguous and unfair, since motorists cannot be expected to know school term dates, which vary between boroughs and regions.Without clear dates displayed or referenced, the signage fails to convey the restriction adequately, and any enforcement based on it is therefore unreasonable.For these reasons, I ask the PCN to be cancelled. Best wishes,

Quote from: H C Andersen on 08 Nov, 2025 10:17To whom is the PCN addressed, you by name? You refer to 'driver' in the third person. The procedure has nothing to do with the driver, it's the registered keeper whose details appear as addressee who must respond. To avoid stumbling at this procedural hurdle, pl tell us who's who here?Yes it is the registered keeper who drove and will be submitting the rep.

OK, as per advice, I have removed point no. 3 and have amended point no. 1:I am writing to challenge this PCN on the following grounds:1. Trivial Timing – De Minimis BreachAccording to the still images accompanying the PCN, the vehicle entered the zone at 08:00:53, only 53 seconds after the restriction came into effect at 8:00 am. I do not have independent confirmation of the accuracy of the council’s recording device time. If the council’s timing is accurate, any contravention was entirely unintentional and occurred in a very brief period immediately after the restriction began.Such a minimal difference clearly falls within a reasonable margin of timing variation between clocks and recording systems. Entering the zone less than a minute after the restriction began did not endanger pedestrians nor undermine the purpose of the restriction. This is plainly a de minimis case — one so minor that enforcement would be disproportionate and contrary to the spirit of fair regulation.2. Unclear “Term Time Only” SignageAlthough I believed I had entered the road before the restricted time shown on the sign, I was not certain if the restriction was in force due to the accompanying sign that said "restricted access term-time only". The  sign does not specify any term dates or provide a means of knowing when those terms begin and end. Adjudicators have previously criticised such signage as ambiguous and unfair, since motorists cannot be expected to know school term dates, which vary between boroughs and regions.Without clear dates displayed or referenced, the signage fails to convey the restriction adequately, and any enforcement based on it is therefore unreasonable.For these reasons, I ask the PCN to be cancelled. Best wishes