Free Traffic Legal Advice

IMO, TfL actions are subject to the Act and Practice Direction, in this case:

https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Practice%20Direction%2003-2024%20on%20behalf%20of%20ETA%2028%20November%202024%20%28PWS%29.pdf

OP, you are Ground 2. This means that TfL have options:


1. To refer the matter to the adjudicator at which point the Proper Officer 'will write' to your wife to get confirmation that reps were made. With this option the decision lies with LT whether to register TfL's referral as an appeal(para. , or

2. To refer the matter to the adjudicator AND re-serve the NOR, in which case no action is required of the adjudicator unless your wife fails to pay or appeal to the adjudicator within the period allowed (paras. 10 and 11).

TfL should act promptly in either case and I don't see that they would or may hold progression simply because the owner claims that a CD was broken. Under 1 above, the issue is procedural(were proper reps actually made) and if ultimately registered as an appeal(NB. not your wife's choice) then she would have plenty of time to be supplied with the CD. 2 above doesn't seem to apply because you've not suggested that a NOR has been re-served. But let's see the covering letter which came with the bundle pl. 

In short, IMO her next communication should be from LT and your wife doesn't need to do anything. However, if she doesn't have a copy of the reps, then ask for one from TfL, assuming there isn't a copy in the bundle. 

Thanks.

Good find stamfordman.

On *** I was, as can be seen in the council's photos, parked on double yellow lines. I am aware of the meaning of these when used in the prescribed and mandated context, namely on a road, but not when used off-street as here.

The council's position is that these alone create and mark a 'restricted area' in the car park, however, there is no legal basis for such a contention: these are authorised for use on roads only. If the council wishes to use them for a different purpose, as here, then it cannot rely on motorist have powers of clairvoyance, their meaning and the potential remedies available to the council must be brought to motorists' attention on site. Please see a recent adjudication decision on this point of law.
**********

Absent any signage to this effect, the restriction does not exist, the contravention did not occur and the PCN must be cancelled.

PCN dated 30 April = day 0.

Day 14 = 13 May TODAY.

Submission within the 14-day period usually means the discount would be re-offered for unsuccessful reps.

IMO, yet another example of a council which thinks that off-street parking can be regulated using traffic signs prescribed for use on-street only.


And for good measure, the sign in the photo has the legal definition as follows:

"permit parking area”
an area—
(a)
into which each entrance for vehicular traffic has been indicated by the sign provided for at item 5 of the sign table in Part 3 of Schedule 5[the one in the photo); and

(b)
where any parking place within that area reserved for the use of the permit holders as indicated on that sign is not shown by markings on the road (whether or not an upright sign is placed next to, or near, such a parking place to indicate that only the permit holders in question may use the place)

So there cannot be bay markings, there aren't any with this sign(when it's used as permitted i.e. on-street).

But the bozos put the sign up, so you can probably rest assured that they think it's correct. C'est la vie.


Contravention did not occur.

I parked as seen in the council's photos and, as can be seen, the sign which the CEO felt should be included as evidence simply says on its face that vehicles displaying permit **** may park beyond this point which makes my case and not the council's because this sign only has legal meaning if placed on and regulating a road, not an off-street parking area, and the inclusion of the words 'Park in marked bays only' is an oxymoron because when used correctly the sign conveys the meaning that none of the specified permit spaces beyond is or may be marked.

See Definitions 'permit parking area': https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/1


I was therefore parked where permitted, irrespective of any numbers on my permit.

I  am submitting these representations more in hope than expectation as regards the council's approach, but nonetheless confident that an adjudicator would allow an appeal by applying the law.

Wait for others and use your own words. But submit something online today.

Who is WBAC?

As per others, let's see the docs pl or at least a concise summary. As per Incandescent's post, in law you are only liable for contraventions occurring while you were the 'owner', so a simple timeline would help. For example:

Sold car to WBAC on *****. Vehicle registration number *****.

Dates of PCN contraventions......

And importantly: I've just updated the DVLA on the correct dates of when I sold the car,

..and they've undertaken to do what, for example to backdate your record as registered keeper to the actual date of sale? Do you have anything in writing?

I also made a complaint and involved the registered keeper (my sister) after Brent said they could only discuss the case with her, but we still received no response.

The council are absolutely correct. In parking procedure, once a NTO is served this has nothing to do with you and you have no standing therefore under GDPR they may not discuss anything with you other than your informal reps and their response.

The registered keeper with DVLA is presumed to have received the NTO at the postal address held by DVLA 2 working days after it was posted.

We know the procedure and are trying to get the essential info from you in order for the matter to be understood. IMO, 'I have details of it' doesn't convey what we need. Pl get away from possible grounds for challenging the PCN because unless the registered keeper is within procedure that opportunity may have gone.

So, to be clear(and even these may not scope the issue fully):

is your sister by name the registered keeper?
If not, who is(you mention that the car is held under a lease). 'Who' includes corporate entities;
If a corporate body, can your sister act for them;
Or is the leaseholder e.g. VW Finance etc. the registered keeper;
By whom was the NTO received, and
Do you have the NTO?

OP, IMO these are vital procedural issues which must be scoped before a course of action could be suggested.

On 6 March you posted: Yes, I am the registered keeper and my address is current with DVLA.

It now appears that a NTO has been served at a different address and its 28-day period for making reps has expired.

We need more info pl.

Do you have the NTO;
Date of issue of the NTO;
The circumstances surrounding why you did not receive it in time e.g. have you moved, if so when, as the DVLA shows last log book change 10 May, then presumably you've just updated it..etc?