Afternoon

Used a genuine Visitor Permit today only to get a PCN, 2 hours into my alloted 6 hours of parking.

My Visitor Permit ticket is below.


image upload

The PCN issued


image upload

Any advice you can guys can offer in my appeal as i was clearly within the time limit.

Thanks

This post has been edited by URBAN TECH: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 - 14:36

I'd rather hit them head on re the allegation.

'I was not parked longer than permitted as I was displaying a visitor permit for the bay concerned'.

Maybe don't say 'valid' visitor permit. Leave it to them to dig themselves a hole.

Sure but this a game as we know they will reject. Maybe it's best to get the permit markup on the table from the start as it will save time.

Thanks for your advice.

I will refer to the pictures uploaded and question why the CEO found it invalid, but will stick to my argument that the permit was valid.

Update to follow.

Thanks

Why flag up something that has not been mentioned and, so far, albeit likely, is an assumption of ours?

Other than speculating we don't know why a PCN was issued. Let them tell us.




No, you are still not getting it.
Where/when have they said the permit was invalid.
That is not the allegation (so far).

Wait for others' views.

PCN *****


I refer to the above which alleges that 'I parked for longer than permitted'.

At 10.30 on the day in question I parked at the location marked by the traffic sign in the authority's photos i.e. permit holders GSN or 30 minutes.

I displayed a GSN visitor's permit which can be seen in your photos, copy enclosed, which allowed parking for 6 hours i.e. 4.30pm.

The PCN was served at 12.17 pm and therefore I was not in contravention as I had more than 4 hours' permitted parking remaining.

Please confirm that you have cancelled the PCN.

Yes they have not said that it was invalid, just that I had overstayed, based on what information I dont no




Sounds accurate. Thanks I will go ahead with that.

Afternoon

Newham have finally replied to my appeal which I sent on the 13th of November 2019


image upload



image upload


Their main argument is the following line

" the permit you have displayed (they spelt it as , dispplayed) had been preciously used and you also stayed longer then the free period allowed" '

Have 14 days from the 24th of December to pay the reduce amount of it will rise.

They have also mentioned they will not consider any further correspondence regarding the penalty charge until the notice is issued.

Thoughts?

Thanks

So the key is they think you've used it before. You are quite sure it hasn't be used? looking closely at the pics there does seem to be something on October and maybe 4. But really nothing at all clear.





This post has been edited by stamfordman: Tue, 31 Dec 2019 - 15:12

No not been used, but the i appreciate it can be interpreted as used. Is it worth fighting councils in general? As Newham are the worst when it comes to appeal

You don't have to convince council - thankfully we have the tribunal. Let's see what others say - I think the possible markings aren't enough and you also can tell the truth in front of an adjudicator.

The cited contravention is parked for longer than permitted, so used before or not does not come into it wait for the NTO

I'd write back to them:

Dear Sir,
PCN *******

I refer to the above, my challenge received by you on 13 Nov. and your letter dated 24 Dec. received after a period of 6 weeks.


For the avoidance of doubt, this letter is a request that you clarify what you mean by 'the permit ..had been previously used' which is stated without explanation in your letter. Clearly, if I am to consider and rebut this assertion in formal representations or pay the discount beforehand then you must state the basis of your belief. With respect, although I note your comment that you will not 'consider further correspondence', this is not an option available to you in these circumstances and I must request that you clarify your reasoning.



OP, I would not bother about the discount period: you have stated that the permit was unused when you completed it, so you take this all the way to adjudication.

Well it does and it doesn't. If the permit is invalid, then the 30 minute free period has been exceeded. I would take this to the tribunal and simply hand the permit to the adjudicator. The first step of course is to wait for the NtO.

Sounds reasonable to me.
I wonder if urban is happy with that?

What do you mean, it can be interpreted as being used?

Examples: the permits are in a book and if you fill them in before you detach them the permit underneath gets slightly marked, or I started filling it in thinking it was the 4th and quickly rubbed it out as i realised it was the 7th.