It seems costs can be obtained if the PCN should never have been issued in the first place, see
Ricardo Bowden v London Borough of Newham (2240295228, 2 January 2025)They won't care about having to pay costs as they made £22,975.00, see the EIR response
here, however I might use the formal complaints route to force them to refund the whole lot.
@mrmustard one for the auditors.
Final outcome:
Complaint Review 37194601 for Mr Ricardo Bowden
I am the Resolution Lead for this case, and I am writing in response to your request for review of Mr Bowden's complaint.
Firstly, let me sincerely apologise for the prolonged delay in responding to your Stage 2 review. I appreciate your patience and understanding.
Summary of your review request
In your review request you take issue with the Stage 1 response to suggest that the position of continuing to enable enforcement action while roadworks were in place at the location in question was effectively placing the responsibility of blame on motorists for not appealing. Those motorists affected by this approach should also have their PCNs cancelled and refunded.
Review findings
I have carefully reviewed the Stage 1 complaint, the response provided, and the details outlined in your Stage 2 request. Following a thorough investigation, I acknowledge and uphold the complaint.
It has been confirmed that a road closure was in place at the location where Mr Bowden's vehicle was issued with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for entering and stopping in a box junction. As a result, when the PCN was challenged with the independent parking adjudicator, the Council did not contest it, as it was established that the PCN should not have been issued under these circumstances.
I recognise that, in the Stage 1 response, the local authority has acknowledged its willingness to review any cases as requested to determine whether there are grounds for cancellation. The possibility that not all PCNs may have been issued in error is something you appear to have also acknowledged in your reply:
"In this particular case, it might be that not every PCN was issued when the cones were in place (which is what rendered the YBJ enforcement action unlawful), but the obvious solution to that is to review the CCTV footage for all the PCNs and issue refunds to all motorists who were penalised in circumstances identical to those of Mr. Bowden. Alternatively, you might decide it is more pragmatic to simply refund all affected PCNs, rather than review them all individually.'
As such, we have carefully considered your comments and have decided it is appropriate to refund all PCNs issued at this location during the relevant period. Given the significant time and resources required to review each case individually, this approach ensures a fair and efficient resolution for those who were adversely affected.
Once again, I apologise for any inconvenience caused and appreciate your patience while this matter was reviewed.
Next steps
The local authority will separately cancel PCNs and refund the motorists affected.
Due to the delay in this response and the inconvenience this may have caused to Mr Bowden, I would like to offer to him a goodwill payment of £50.
If this is acceptable to Mr Bowden and it is confirmed that the same bank details as previously supplied can be used, I will arrange for the payment to be processed as soon as possible.
Absolutely fantastic result.
Many thanks to cp8759 for all of the time and effort put in on behalf of myself and the 200+ motorists that will be seeing that refund letter arriving through the door in the coming weeks.
Like x 1
View List
Winner x 1