Hi
I was recently towed for having a front wheel on a low pavement (pavement is level with road) on a side street - bit of rubbish parking on my part I admit. No road markings on the side of the road where I was parked and not obstructing anything. There was no signage saying it was OK to park on the pavement - it was just a mistake on my part. They issued PCN and towed 6 minutes later - they told me this was OK as it was an immediate lift.
Can they really tow me for something so minor, I wasnt obstructing anything at all? And its so much money and I am so skint...
Here is all the documentation I have - no photos were available apparantly they send those to me at a later date
So here is PCN front and back and the appeal form




This post has been edited by feadie: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 - 20:52

A few things:

-Are there more pages to that appeal info document?

-Post up the receipt - may be useful

-How far were you onto the dropped kerb?

-Question for other members - if he's only on the kerb of a DK, should they have done him for DK rather than footway parking?

Thanks loads for your reply great to know that there is some hope - I dont know how far I was onto the kerb as no photos but reckon that I had most of the front wheel on it. Will scan in the receipt and the appeal document tomorrow

Location would be good so we can see if StreetView has anything useful.

Hi
Here are the requested receipt and other pages of representation document.
I have noticed a discrepancy in the documentation
PCN number starts with HQ
Receipt starts with HK

The location was Hackney

This post has been edited by Stan134: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 - 19:26

Footway will count in London. DK may have been a damaged kerb or private house where OP could have had permission.... no way could they justify an immediate tow for that.
Not sure they can justify an immediate tow anyway for one wheel unless actual (not theoretical) obstruction occurred.

OP...what do you mean they will send the photos later ??
Did you request them or did they offer and anything in writing ?

Yeah we really need to see those pics.

How do I get the pics?
I asked at the pound and they told me I have to complete the appeal form first and then I would be sent the pictures. Is there any way of getting the photos in advance of completing the form? There is no phone number on the documentation
Thanks

Wish they'd put that in writing.

Email Hackney...re PCN ????
Request for Information
So I may consider the worth or otherwise of any potential challenge please supply copies of all photos and CEO notes that you may rely on.
Time for a challenge is limited so I must press you for a timely reply by email.
Reply address is ????@?????

Add your name and send it.

Hi
Thanks I have now got the photos from the Hackney PCN website. Looks like both wheels on the pavement........



Uploaded with ImageShack.us



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This post has been edited by Stan134: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 - 19:25

Hi
Any ideas anyone????
Cheers

Well you did commit the contravention.

There is nothing to lose in appealing though.

I would make an appeal based on Bogsy's point about being forced to pay before appealing. I would make a very clear demand for CEO notes. It appears you have been lifted immediately after ticketing, so the CEO may have messed something up in his haste - perhaps not authorised it properly. I can see there is a PCN on your screen, but no authorisation sticker.

Thanks - and yup those wheels are on the pavement - yup I'm an idiot! but it seems crazy that they can tow for parking on a quiet sidestreet - its not like I was blocking a bus lane in Oxford Street.....so I'm going to make my representation anyway. But I do need some more help!!

There was no notification sticker on the car when I collected it and no sign of it in any of the photos posted for the PCN. Also the PCN envelope isnt filled in.

Couple of questions
1. I have emailed Hackney to ask for CEO notes but if I dont hear back within the 28 day timeframe should I go ahead and make my representation anyway and ask for the CEO notes in my representation

2. I cant find the relevant posting from Bogsy that you mentioned

3. What are my grounds for representation - is it the last box "procedural impropriety" ?

There are wording issues on the documents. Both DD and myself found some in the other recent thread.

Laterz for that but some questions first cos you have obscured a lot of relevant info.

Need the PCN number, CEO number and authorising officer number please.

Also. Please answer this question >

What is the last date on which your representations can reach the Council in order to be valid?

-

Agreed Neil


Re notes/photos.
You've asked for them and clearly statd that they are needed urgently.
If you do not get them we add that to your challenge .

Here is my template letter that you can adapt if need be to suit but do keep in any bld, italics, etc.



Dear Sirs

Prior to the removal of my vehicle a CEO served a regulation 9 PCN. Once a regulation 9 PCN is served then the law gives the recipient the statutory right to submit an informal appeal that must be considered and a statutory 28 day period in which to pay the penalty charge should they not want to appeal informally or formally.

When I collected my vehicle, the Council insisted the penalty charge be paid immediately. I do not consider that the regulation 9 penalty charge was “payable” at the time I paid it, since I wanted to informally appeal with the possibility, should my informal appeal fail, of paying it later at the re-offered discounted rate or proceeding to adjudication. Section 101A of the RTRA 1984 requires “any penalty charge payable” to be paid on recovery of a vehicle. If a person has no intention of appealing then a regulation 9 PCN is not immediately “payable” but can be paid at any time no later than 28 days from the date of service. This is a statutory provision. However, where a person does wish to appeal, then a regulation 9 PCN only becomes “payable” by virtue of regulation 4 of “the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007” once all appeal stages have been exhausted and an adjudicator has dismissed the appeal having found as fact that the contravention was “committed”. For clarity, below is what regulation 4 advises;

4. Subject to the provisions of these Regulations a penalty charge is payable with respect to a vehicle where there has been committed in relation to that vehicle—

(a)a parking contravention within paragraph 2 of Schedule 7 to the 2004 Act (contraventions relating to parking places in Greater London);

(b)a parking contravention within paragraph 3 of that Schedule (other parking contraventions in Greater London) in a civil enforcement area in Greater London; or

© a parking contravention within paragraph 4 of that Schedule (parking contraventions outside Greater London) in a civil enforcement area outside Greater London.

One of the "subject provisions" is that a person is given a statutory 28 day period to pay the PCN or otherwise appeal before service of an NtO. The law requires one or the other not both. This principle is commonly emphasised on many council PCN’s that warn the recipient that they must not pay the PCN if they want to challenge it. In other words the PCN is not considered “payable” if you intend to appeal; this is similar to being assumed innocent until proven guilty. Regulation 4 further advises that the penalty charge is "payable......... where there has been committed" a parking contravention. The PCN however only states an allegation of a parking contravention. If a person pays the penalty charge without coercion then this is accepted as admitting that the contravention was "committed" but if a person does not think the allegation is correct then they can appeal until ultimately an adjudicator finds as fact that the contravention was or was not "committed". Therefore I believe the Council acted ultra vires in demanding payment of the regulation 9 PCN immediately on recovery of my vehicle, contrary to what statute provides and contrary to what the PCN advised were my rights.

In addition, I was given no opportunity to submit an informal appeal. Being able to submit an informal appeal following receipt of a regulation 9 PCN is also one of the “subject provisions” and therefore a statutory right. The PCN confirms this right and the Secretary of State’s statutory guidance does under paragraph 83 make it clear that the loss of the right to an informal appeal is only applicable to regulation 10 PCN’s. I was served with a regulation 9 PCN.

83. The vehicle owner may dispute the issuing of a PCN at three stages:
• Owners may make so-called ‘informal challenges’ or ‘informal
representations’ against the PCN before the authority has served an NtO
(this does not apply when the PCN is issued by post as the PCN then acts as the NtO).

Although I was given information on how to appeal this was only in regard to a formal appeal. There was nothing given to me that advised that any right to an informal appeal as advised by the PCN was lost or had been revoked. At the pound, I was given both the PCN and formal appeal documents and these items gave conflicting information as to what my legal rights were. This was and is confusing and prejudicial.

It should also be noted that where a regulation 9 PCN is served then statute provides that any formal appeal against the PCN (not the removal costs) should be in response to receiving a Notice to Owner. The formal appeal document given to me was not a Notice to Owner but simply appeared to be a document served by virtue of regulation 11 of “the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007” informing me that I could make representations against removal (not the PCN). This gave me differing and more restrictive grounds for appeal than a Notice to Owner. Although my vehicle was removed it seems irregular and unjust to give me differing and more restrictive grounds for appeal than any other situation where a regulation 9 PCN is served. I believe such unfair restrictions and limitations to be contrary to the general principles of law.

The Traffic Management Act 2004 and its associated regulations as well as the RTRA 1984 do not stipulate that the statutory rights, provisions and procedures relating to the service of a regulation 9 PCN are revoked and void where that vehicle is later removed by virtue of s.99 RTRA 1984. Therefore I believe the Council has acted ultra vires and is guilty of procedural improprieties.

In addition “The Removal and Disposal of Vehicles Regulations 1986” (S.I. 1986/183) do not prescribe the method of removal used in regard to my vehicle.

With the commencement of the Traffic Management Act 2004 and the introduction of Civil Enforcement Officers, S.I. 1986/183 was amended by “The Removal and Disposal of Vehicles (Amendment)(England) Regulations 2007” (S.I. 2007/3484) to include new regulation 5C.
However, regulation 6 of S.I. 1986/183 has not been amended to take into consideration the newly inserted 5C regulation. As such there is no prescribed method of removal for vehicles that are removed by arrangement of a Civil Enforcement Officer. Without the methods of removal available to Civil Enforcement Officers being prescribed it cannot be certain that the method used was lawful and therefore the Council needs to establish that the method of removal was lawful.

Under the provisions of the Traffic Management Act 2004 I am entitled to a submit an appeal that you have a duty to consider and to which you have a duty, should you reject my appeal, to provide me with clear and full reasons in reply to my points of appeal. This duty is set down in the Secretary of State’s Statutory Guidance and the Traffic Management Act 2004 under section 87 clearly advises that local authorities must have regard to this statutory guidance. Therefore should you fail to reply specifically to each point and substantiate any reason for rejection then I will bring this failure to the attention of the adjudicator.

Yours with love, hugs and kisses.

As an aside, has anyone got details on what the agreed charges are for removal & storage in London? I want to see if the sum actually charged follows the sec of state's statutory guidance.

61. Storage charges should apply for each day or part of day, reckoned from
2400 midnight on the day following removal of a vehicle .

To me this implies that no storage charge should apply on the day of removal or the next day. so if a vehicle was stored at 15.00 hours on a Tuesday, by my reckoning no storage charge should apply until after midnight on Wednesday. In other words no charge applies to the part day on Tuesday or the whole day on Wednesday. If a council does not follow this then its a procedural impropriety since s.87 TMA 2004 requires a council to have regard to this statutory guidance.

Hi
Here are the extra bits of info

PCN HQ 01266225 or on the receipt it says HK 01266225
CEO: 0556
Authorising Officer: I cant find this anywhere - there is the number of Attending Officer on representation form: 556
Last day to submit representaion is Fri 18th Feb

Re CEO notes and photos I have just rung Hackney and they will only supply CEO notes in reply to my representation and are unable to supply them now. The photos have been made available as they are all posted online as part of the PCN - and there is no notification of removal sticker in any of them.

Thanks for all your help - I am totally bamboozled by all this...

'Authorised by or something similar IS on one of the documents. You have obliterated it. I have a wierd theory about it.

Deadline - I've just realised is of no use to make my point since we don't know date of PCN or retrieval of vehicle - you obliterated that too??!

Sorry I thought I have to delete everything personal - clearly I have been a bit OTT

I have been through all the documents and there is no authorised by. I have posted everything I have up, can you see it anywhere, or where it should be?? - even if I have deleted it I would have left the wording "authorised by"

Date of PCN: 21/01/2001 Time 1349
Date of Contravention: 21/01/2011
Vehicle was seen in
Morpeth Road
Location Description: NR/7
From at: 1347 to 1349

Date of vehicle release: 22/01/11

This post has been edited by Stan134: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 - 13:25