PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Islington wrong bay Ringo PCN
haso182
post Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 21:34
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 6 May 2017
Member No.: 91,811



Hi,
I unfortunately received a parking ticket for parking using Ringo and apparently using the wrong location code, the 2 locations are next to each other and this is a genuine mistake on my part. I realise I was at fault but paying £130 for a small error that hasn't caused any financial loss to the council seems a bit unfair.
I have already appealed the ticket at the initial stage and the appeal has been rejected.

I have tried to upload all the correspondence I have had with the council so far.

I would appreciate it if someone could advise on how I should go about appealing the PCN, also I'm curious as to how sympathetic the adjudicator would be if it got to that stage.

Thanks.



Location:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5632645,-0....6384!8i8192



PCN:



Original Appeal Email:
Dear Sir/Madam,

I wish to appeal PCN XXXXX issued to vehicle XXXXX on 10/11/2018 14:32-14:38.
A payment was made at that location from 14:10-16:10 using ringo for vehicle XXXXX
I have attached a VAT receipt for the transaction as proof.

I would therefore appreciate it if you can cancel the PCN and confirm it in writing when it is done.

Kind Regards.


Email rejection to first appeal:
Dear Mr X


Penalty Charge Notice No. XXXXXXXXX Date of Issue 10/11/2018 at 14:38
Location of Contravention St Thomas`s Road [Zone H]


Thank you for your letter regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) which was recently received at this office.

The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a residents’ or shared use parking place or zone without clearly displaying a valid permit or voucher or pay and display ticket issued for that place or without payment of the parking charge.



I have reviewed the information you have provided along with the details held on our systems and note that whilst payment for parking was made, it was made to an incorrect parking bay location. You used location 61684 whereas the vehicle was parked in location 61685, which is a different parking bay.

There are often several different types of parking bay and restrictions in place on the same street. It is your responsibility as a driver to ensure that you have checked and understand the time plate and restrictions in place within the confines of the bay in which you are parked before you leave your vehicle unattended. The time plate for the bay in which you have parked may not necessarily be the one closest to you or the first one you see.

Whilst I appreciate that this may have been a genuine error, it is a council directive that in order to ensure vehicles are correctly parked and do not stay for longer than permitted in time any payments made to an incorrect vehicle registration or location number do not present grounds for a correctly issued PCN to be cancelled.

I am satisfied that the contravention occurred and the Civil Enforcement Officer was correct to issue the ticket, therefore the PCN has been upheld.

As the PCN was issued correctly, payment is now due. I have decided that we can accept the discounted amount of £65.00 provided we receive that before 22 December 2018. Please bear in mind that on that date the charge will increase to £130.00.

If you wish to continue to contest the matter, the next stage is that a Notice to Owner will be sent to the person responsible for the penalty charge. This is a necessary legal step and further correspondence will only delay this process.

I am afraid you are unlikely to get a further opportunity to make discounted payment. However, the Notice to Owner will establish liability for the Penalty Charge Notice and the grounds under which representations may be made. If representations are made at this stage and they are rejected, there will be the right of appeal to an independent Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.

You can make a credit or debit card payment on our automated payment line on 020 7527 8000 at any time or speak to an advisor on 020 7527 2000 – between 09:00 to 17:00. You can also pay on line at www.islington.gov.uk. If you prefer to pay by cheque, please make it payable to LB Islington and send it to the above address. Please write the PCN number on the back of the cheque. You may also send postal orders (quoting the PCN number).


Yours sincerely



Martin Thorpe
Correspondence and Appeals Officer
Islington Parking Services
PO Box 2019, Pershore, WR10 9BN
Contact Islington: 0207 527 2000
Email: islingtonparking@civica-rm.co.uk
Web: www.islington.gov.uk



Photos provided by islington on first appeal:










This post has been edited by haso182: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 12:29
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 21:34
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 21:40
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



What a venal council Islington is becoming. Do you know how the one digit error came about? Did you enter the digits manually or locate it using the Ringgo app?

In fact looking at GSV there are three small bays in a row all with different locations varying by one digit, which seems ludicrous. They all seem to be 2 hour parking bays on same terms.

Also:

"Whilst I appreciate that this may have been a genuine error, it is a council directive that in order to ensure vehicles are correctly parked and do not stay for longer than permitted in time any payments made to an incorrect vehicle registration or location number do not present grounds for a correctly issued PCN to be cancelled"

fetters their discretion and I would be inclined to pursue this, but sadly you'd have to risk the extra £65.

This post has been edited by stamfordman: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 22:02
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 22:36
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,915
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



I would take them to adjudication on this one on a de minimis basis. As SFM says, tey have three bays close together with the same restrictions, but all have a different number. A recipe for a trap scam ? What other reason can there be for having three separate numbers for the same location and restrictions ? OK, you'll have to risk the full PCN amount, but I would hope an adjudication will see sense and accept your appeal. What a venal and rapacious council they are !!! Boiling oil has to be in there somewhere for them when they pass on from this life.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 21:40
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Well this is utter rubbish:

"Whilst I appreciate that this may have been a genuine error, it is a council directive that in order to ensure vehicles are correctly parked and do not stay for longer than permitted in time any payments made to an incorrect vehicle registration or location number do not present grounds for a correctly issued PCN to be cancelled.

I am satisfied that the contravention occurred and the Civil Enforcement Officer was correct to issue the ticket, therefore the PCN has been upheld.
"

But the Islington policy says nothing of the sort: https://www.scribd.com/document/388126288/Canc-Guidance

In particular see page 15, under "Mitigation - attempted to park correctly"


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 23:01
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,915
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 21:40) *
Well this is utter rubbish:

"Whilst I appreciate that this may have been a genuine error, it is a council directive that in order to ensure vehicles are correctly parked and do not stay for longer than permitted in time any payments made to an incorrect vehicle registration or location number do not present grounds for a correctly issued PCN to be cancelled.

I am satisfied that the contravention occurred and the Civil Enforcement Officer was correct to issue the ticket, therefore the PCN has been upheld.
"

But the Islington policy says nothing of the sort: https://www.scribd.com/document/388126288/Canc-Guidance

In particular see page 15, under "Mitigation - attempted to park correctly"

This will be seen by an adjudicator as it must be in their evidence pack. If OP takes them to London Tribunals he must make sure this is highlighted as it is a blatant fettering of discretion. This mob really are hopeless, but the trouble is being hopeless makes them lots of money as most people would now cough-up !
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 11:40
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



haso182 the consensus seems to be that you should wait for the Notice to Owner. In the meantime I would check that the name and address on the V5C is 100% correct (don't assume, actually check it).


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 11:47
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 11:40) *
haso182 the consensus seems to be that you should wait for the Notice to Owner. In the meantime I would check that the name and address on the V5C is 100% correct (don't assume, actually check it).



+ 1 This is one that has a good chance of being reviewed properly by the council. The outrageous different codes for the bays and the nonsense on policy should be enough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
haso182
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 12:38
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 6 May 2017
Member No.: 91,811



Thanks all for the feedback. I will be hoping to appeal and if necessary take this to the parking adjudicator.
I would appreciate advice on what I should put in my appeal at this stage. Also I'm wondering if the fact that from all I can see none of the documentation so far mentions the actual location number, rather they all state the road I was parked on, would this be another ground for an appeal.

I have received the Notice to owner:








Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 13:05
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



when did you get the NTO - it's dated 31/12 - you don't have long to submit reps so suggest you write a draft now we can tweak
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 13:13
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Draft reps:
--------------
Dear Sir or Madam,

I wish to challenge PCN XXXXX issued to vehicle XXXXX on 10/11/2018 14:32-14:38. A payment was made, although I keyed in parking location 61684 whereas the vehicle was parked in location 61685, I have attached a VAT receipt for the transaction. While I accept this was an error on my part, it was nothing more than a trivial mistake and in all the circumstances, I made a genuine attempt to park correctly.

In the informal rejection letter Martin Thorpe states that "Whilst I appreciate that this may have been a genuine error, it is a council directive that in order to ensure vehicles are correctly parked and do not stay for longer than permitted in time any payments made to an incorrect vehicle registration or location number do not present grounds for a correctly issued PCN to be cancelled.", this is not correct. The Islington Parking Services Penalty Charge Notice Cancellation Guidance provides as follows on page 10:



In this instance, I made a serious attempt to park correctly and the council receive the correct parking fee, so neither the council nor any other motorists has been disadvantaged by this minor infraction. In the circumstances, I invite you to exercise your discretionary powers to cancel the penalty.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 13:17
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



I would also point out that there are three small bays with the same terms with different location numbers right next to each other, which compounds the trivial nature of the error. It's bizarre that they are not grouped under one location.

This post has been edited by stamfordman: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 13:28
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
haso182
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 21:22
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 6 May 2017
Member No.: 91,811



Unfortunately received a response from the council today and they have decided to reject my appeal, I will provide my original email to appeal the PCN and the email I have just received.

The response makes no mention about being able to appeal further but I guess the bit that says "allow the matter to progress against the person to whom we sent the Notice to Owner" might cover this.Can I just check do I have the option of escalating this appeal to the independent adjudicator and if I was to, what do you guys think would be the chance of success at the end of it?


My appeal email:
Dear Sir or Madam,

I wish to challenge PCN XXXXXX issued to vehicle XXXX on 10/11/2018 14:32-14:38. A payment was made, although I keyed in parking location 61684 whereas the vehicle was parked in location 61685, I have attached a VAT receipt for the transaction. While I accept this was an error on my part, it was nothing more than a trivial mistake and in all the circumstances, I made a genuine attempt to park correctly.

In the informal rejection letter Martin Thorpe states that "Whilst I appreciate that this may have been a genuine error, it is a council directive that in order to ensure vehicles are correctly parked and do not stay for longer than permitted in time any payments made to an incorrect vehicle registration or location number do not present grounds for a correctly issued PCN to be cancelled.", this is not correct. The Islington Parking Services Penalty Charge Notice Cancellation Guidance provides as follows on page 10:



In this instance, I made a serious attempt to park correctly and the council received the correct parking fee, so neither the council nor any other motorists has been disadvantaged by this minor infraction.
I would also point out that there are three small bays with the same terms with different location numbers right next to each other, which compounds the trivial nature of the error. It's bizarre that they are not grouped under one location.
In the circumstances, I invite you to exercise your discretionary powers to cancel the penalty.

Thanks.


This is the email I have received today as a response to my appeal:

Dear ----



Penalty Charge Notice No. XXXXX Date of Issue 10/11/2018 at 14:38
Location of Contravention St Thomas`s Road [Zone H]



Thank you for your further email regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

I have noted your further comments, however, we have to ensure that vehicles have not been parked in another bay before relocating to this bay and using the same session. The only way we can do this is by ensuring drivers use the correct code. With this in mind, I remain satisfied that the contravention occurred as you had not paid for the location you were parked in and I am therefore not satisfied that the PCN should not be cancelled on the grounds submitted.

I am therefore upholding the parking ticket.

Your choices now are to either to pay the penalty charge or allow the matter to progress against the person to whom we sent the Notice to Owner. If no action is taken we may issue a Charge Certificate to that person advising that the right to appeal has expired and that the charge has increased to £195.00 I have decided that, if you wish to settle the matter, we can accept the discounted amount of £65.00 provided we receive that before 1 March 2019. Please bear in mind that on that date the charge will revert to £130.00 before increasing to £195.00 when the Charge Certificate is sent out.

You can make a credit or debit card payment on our automated payment line on 020 7527 8000 at any time or speak to an advisor on 020 7527 2000 – between 09:00 to 17:00. You can also pay on line at www.islington.gov.uk. If you prefer to pay by cheque, please make it payable to LB Islington and send it to the above address. Please write the PCN number on the back of the cheque. You may also send postal orders (quoting the PCN number).


Yours sincerely
http://prwebsrv04/ICPSWord/ICPSWordImageHa...ignature=819279

Danielle Nuttall
Correspondence and Appeals Officer



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 22:14
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



QUOTE (haso182 @ Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 21:22) *
I have noted your further comments, however, we have to ensure that vehicles have not been parked in another bay before relocating to this bay and using the same session. The only way we can do this is by ensuring drivers use the correct code. With this in mind, I remain satisfied that the contravention occurred as you had not paid for the location you were parked in and I am therefore not satisfied that the PCN should not be cancelled on the grounds submitted.


OK let's unpack this.

1. I don't understand the point. Why would you move to an incorrect bay? maybe i'm missing something.The proximity of the signage is baffling.

2. "I am therefore not satisfied that the PCN should not be cancelled on the grounds submitted." Well this double negative means she is, er not satisfied it should not be cancelled....

I would go on with this to the adjudicator. Are you the RK?

See what others say but this to me is Islington idiocy. That they are reoffering the discount hints they may not contest.

This post has been edited by stamfordman: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 22:20
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
haso182
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 22:46
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 6 May 2017
Member No.: 91,811



Hi Stamfordman, thanks for the reply,
I am not the registered keeper, the van is leased from a leasing company by the company I work for.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 22:51
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Is PCN in your name. You got the NTO. That their reply doesn't set out the appeal route is another thing but maybe there is a postal letter on its way.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
haso182
post Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 23:05
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 6 May 2017
Member No.: 91,811



the NTO was sent to the leasing company, they sent it to our fleet manager, who in turn forwarded it to me. I'm guessing it will be the same thing with their official rejection letter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 00:18
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Did you provide evidence in the email that the registered keeper had given you authority to make representations on their behalf?

If not, you need to get written authorisation from the registered keeper, something along the lines of:

----------
Dear Sir or Madam,

We, leaving company Ltd, hereby authorise haso182 to make formal representations on our behalf against PCN XXXXX, and we ask that you consider those representations accordingly

Hugs and kisses

Leasing Company Ltd
------------

Then re-submit.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 08:11
Post #18


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9,710
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



Hang about.

The owner/driver procedural impropriety route might be available given the Council's e-mail but I would be wary of a Charge Certificate now being issued to the hire company. Are we certain that the e-mail constitutes a NOR? If so this case is important:-

2160277323

Owner/Driver issues:-

Mrs Nicholl attended as the Appellant.

The owner of the vehicle is Mr John Nicholl, Mrs Nicholl's husband. Mr Nicholl was correctly served with the Notice to Owner but Mrs Nicholl responded. Mrs Nicholl identified herself as the driver and that her husband was the owner of the vehicle. This does not give Mrs Nicholl the right to make formal representations nor can anything Mrs Nicholl said be treated as formal representations. The Notice of Rejection which in addressed to Mr Nicholl is therefore invalid because Mr Nicholl had not made any representations.

There has been a procedural impropriety. I allow the appeal.
--------------------------------
The NTO is dated 31/12/2018 so a Charge Certificate may be imminent. However I would say their statement "Your choices now are to either to pay the penalty charge or allow the matter to progress against the person to whom we sent the Notice to Owner" gives some grace to the time-scale. Ergo cp8759's suggestion should be followed up soonest.

Mick

This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 08:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
haso182
post Sun, 3 Mar 2019 - 12:38
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 6 May 2017
Member No.: 91,811



Hi,

I received the following email from the council with regards to my appeal, after the hire company intervened and contacted the council directly and provided them with authorisation for myself to appeal the PCN.

Just wondering if there can be anything else I can add to the original appeal I have made, maybe an addition about the owner/driver procedural impropriety as mentioned by Mad Mick V above.

Thanks.




Dear XX XXX,



Penalty Charge Notice No. XXXXXX Date of Issue 10/11/2018 at 14:38
Location of Contravention St Thomas`s Road [Zone H]



We have recently been contacted by XXXX who own the vehicle to which the above PCN was issued. At your request they have provided authority for you as a representative of XXXX to make representations against the PCN on their behalf.

I now propose to treat your email dated 22 January 2019 as formal representations against the PCN. Before I do this I would like to give you the opportunity to submit any further comments you would like us to consider before we make a decision on your appeal.

In the meantime, I am going to place this case on hold until 12 March 2019 to allow you enough time to supply the supporting documentation. Should you decide to pay then a payment of £65 will be accepted in settlement if we receive it before that date. If we don`t hear from you by then, I will formally reject your representations and the full charge of £130.00 will be due.

You can make a credit or debit card payment on our automated payment line on 020 7527 8000 at any time or speak to an advisor on 020 7527 2000 – between 09:00 to 17:00. You can also pay on line at www.islington.gov.uk. If you prefer to pay by cheque, please make it payable to LB Islington and send it to the above address. Please write the PCN number on the back of the cheque. You may also send postal orders (quoting the PCN number).


Yours sincerely
http://prwebsrv04/ICPSWord/ICPSWordImageHa...ignature=819277





Jacqueline Thorpe

Correspondence & Appeals Officer

Islington Traffic & Parking Services

PO Box 2019

Pershore

WR10 9BN

Email: islingtonparking@civica-rm.co.uk

Website: www.islington.gov.uk

Follow us on Twitter @IslingtonBC and @IslingtonLife
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 3 Mar 2019 - 14:35
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Am in two minds about this one - £65 makes it go away but I would like to see an adjudicator take a look given that Islington will probably reject formal reps.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 15:21
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here