PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Merton. One box unscratched in ½ day Parking Permit = PCN.
ZigZagZog
post Wed, 11 Jul 2018 - 20:53
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



My mate John was issued PCN by Merton Council. On the Half Day Parking Permit he used he omitted scratching clear the 'month' box.

Any chance of a succesful appeal against this PCN?

TIA











This post has been edited by ZigZagZog: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 13:50
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Wed, 11 Jul 2018 - 20:53
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
DJ Lexy
post Sat, 22 Sep 2018 - 15:06
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 593
Joined: 7 Sep 2016
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 86,985



Could’ve been used on Monday 9th April 2018. That’s the counter-argument.

This post has been edited by DJ Lexy: Sat, 22 Sep 2018 - 15:06
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Sun, 23 Sep 2018 - 16:50
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



I've just been informed that the car is registered to one of John's parental units, not to John himself.

Does that change anything?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 23 Sep 2018 - 17:20
Post #43


Member


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



QUOTE (ZigZagZog @ Sun, 23 Sep 2018 - 17:50) *
I've just been informed that the car is registered to one of John's parental units, not to John himself.

Does that change anything?


Is a parental unit a mother or father?

The appeal must come form the keeper. But you can draft it for them. They must be aware they are liable.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Sun, 23 Sep 2018 - 17:53
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



Mother.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Mon, 24 Sep 2018 - 16:32
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



John's representations to Merton.

I received the PCN XXXXXXXX with the parking contravention 19s on xx/xx/18 at xx.xx. I would ask the council to please use their discretion to kindly waive this PCN for the reasons outlined below.

I used a valid parking permit but forgot to scratch off the month part, in this case for 'July'. It was a foolish, honest mistake – I was pushed for time as I was running late and in my haste simply omitted scratching off the last of the four sections, the month the permit was for. The car was otherwise parked properly and safely as you can see from your CEO's photos.

I'd like to point out that with the boxes I had scratched out on the parking permit I used it could only have been used on the xx/xx/2018 in 2018 as there is not another Monday the 9th to come in any month remaining in 2018. I do not believe any fair minded person would agree that the month section of the permit was intentionally left blank with the intention of reusing it on Monday, the 9th of September, 2019, the next time the 9th day of any month falls on a Monday, some 14 months after the permit was used.

Furthermore, I believe mistakes have been made in the rejection of my appeal and it is therefore due further consideration. Firstly, the rejection completely fails to address the key point outlined in the paragraph above - this ticket could not be re-used for any month remaining in 2018 and not again for a further 14 months. Secondly, the rejection is erroneous in stating ‘I note you have stated you work for Merton Council’ when no such assertion was made in the appeal. Similarly, the rejection speaks of a full-day permit when I used a Half Day Permit (see your own CEO's photo evidence), suggesting that Merton's PCN department has made a mistake. The kindest interpretation of this I believe is that the response Merton sent to me was a response intended for another person.

I would also like to note that the Contravention Code notes ‘Code 19 should only be issued if a permit that is or was valid for that bay is used but is invalid at time of PCN due to:

It has expired
It is in the wrong vehicle
Obscured date/VRM


This permit had not expired, was not in the wrong vehicle and the date and VRM were not obscured. This was an honest and silly mistake, arguably a de minimis mistake, with no intention on my part to game the system or parking regulations, and there was no gain to be made. I was working in Wimbledon at the Tennis Championships for a period of two weeks only, and will not be returning to Wimbledon again.

I am very sorry about the inconvenience to your department and to have wasted your time and I would be very, very grateful if you would look kindly upon this request and please let me off for this silly omission. However, be aware that if your department decides not to cancel this PCN, I intend to pursue this appeal process to the independent adjudicator as I strongly believe that this ticket should be waived.

Yours sincerely,


This post has been edited by ZigZagZog: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 - 18:42
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Wed, 26 Sep 2018 - 09:19
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



I see that perhaps I wasn't clear in my last post. That ^^^^ was John's 1st draft of his reps to Merton, it hasn't been submitted.

I'd be most grateful for the panel's guidance on fine tuning it to give him his best shot at beating this.

TIA.

This post has been edited by ZigZagZog: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 - 09:21
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Thu, 27 Sep 2018 - 21:41
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



Can I take it this (post 45) is good to go?

The registered keeper of the car, the mother, was unaware that a ticket had been issued & is now fretting to a degree inconsistent with the £60 penalty at stake here.

She's insistent that the PCN appeal be submitted immediately or the 60 quid be paid. Frankly, she'd prefer the fine was paid but we don't want to do that, we want to beat it.

This will be submitted by 3pm tomorrow so if anyone has anything to offer so as to improve it it's pretty much now or never.

This post has been edited by ZigZagZog: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 - 21:42
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Thu, 27 Sep 2018 - 22:19
Post #48


Member


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



Looks good to me. Go for it - must come from mother. You have nothing to lose now and if they reject you can add some case reports for adjudication stage, and with the satisfaction of making the council spend time and money on an evidence pack.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Fri, 28 Sep 2018 - 07:23
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



Okeydoke, it'll be on it's way at 3 pm.

Once again many thanks stamfordman for your help, guidance & advice with this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Tue, 6 Nov 2018 - 21:01
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



More of a FYI than anything else.

Seems someone at Merton has actually gone ahead & read this stuff now & have sent back the letter below after over a month. No problem with doing as they ask from John's end, just wondered if it changes anything in the procedure.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John U.K.
post Tue, 6 Nov 2018 - 21:13
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,308
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,515



Please give or re-instate dates in letter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 6 Nov 2018 - 22:10
Post #52


Member


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



Just go ahead and do as they ask.


--------------------
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
ZigZagZog
post Tue, 6 Nov 2018 - 23:12
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



QUOTE (John U.K. @ Tue, 6 Nov 2018 - 21:13) *
Please give or re-instate dates in letter.


Merton wrote the letter on 2.11.2018.

Authorization must be received by 16.11.2018.

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 6 Nov 2018 - 22:10) *
Just go ahead and do as they ask.


Done.

This post has been edited by ZigZagZog: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 - 23:14
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 13:48
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



Rejected! Now there's a surprise.

There's also a Notice of Appeal form attached after this rejection letter which doesn't lend itself well to C&Ping. I'll try to get a version of it up tonight.

Notice of Appeal
Parking Penalty Charge
Traffic Management Act 2004.....



....................................................................

NOTICE OF REJECTION

Penalty Charge Notice:XXXXXXX
ETA Verification Code:XXXXXXX
Contravention Date: XX/XX/2018 Vehicle Registration:XXXXXXX
Location: XXXXXX

Thank you for writing to us.

We have carefully considered what you say but we have decided not to cancel your Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

There is a sign where you parked that explains that the bay you parked in is for people with a permit. Although you were displaying a permit, the Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) believed it was not valid.

Whilst I note your comments I must advise that on this occasion when the CEO observed the vehicle a half-day visitor’s permit was seen on display. However, I must advise that the permit had not been completed correctly as the month had not been scratched.

In order for a half-day parking permit to be valid the driver must ensure that they scratch off AM or PM and one day, date and month. This information is clearly on the parking permit. A permit is only considered valid if all the correct details are marked out.

Please note that regarding your point about not been able to use the permit again as the 9th of September, 2019, the next time the 9th day of any month falls on a Monday, some 14 months after the permit was used. However, this would not offer grounds to cancel the PCN. It is the responsibility of the motorists to abide by the terms and condition of their permit

Please note contravention codes guidelines are set out within our policies and that I am satisfied that code 19 has been correctly applied to this case. In regards to the part where you state:- I would also like to note that the Contravention Code notes 'Code 19 should only be issued if a permit that is or was valid for that bay is used but is invalid at time of PCN due to:

- It has expired
- It is in the wrong vehicle
- Obscured date/VRM’


Please note that whilst these are examples relates more to Permits rather than Visitors Permits, this is not an extensive list of examples that covers all scenarios including scenarios that may involve a visitor’s permit.

I apologise for the administrative error in our refusal letter dated XX/XX/2018 where your permit was referred to as a full day’s permit and also that you work with Merton council. Whilst we are sorry for this error please note that this does not invalidate the PCN.

We note your comments and that this was a genuine error made which resulted in this contravention. However, it is still up to abide by the terms and condition of use of their permit.

So, whilst I sympathise with your circumstances and note that it was not your intention to park in contravention of the restrictions that are in force, I am satisfied that the notice has been correctly issued and that there are no grounds in which to cancel the charge.

You can view photographic evidence of your case online at www.merton.gov.uk/pcn.

Before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice you must either:


• pay £60.00; or
• appeal to the Parking Adjudicator using the enclosed form. The Adjudicator can ask one side to pay costs if he or she believes, for example, that they have been vexatious, frivolous or wholly unreasonable. However, the Adjudicator rarely asks either side to pay costs. The Adjudicator is independent and both sides must accept the Adjudicator's decision. For more information about the Adjudicator please visit www.londontribunals.gov.uk. YOU CANNOT PAY THE PENALTY CHARGE AND APPEAL TO THE ADJUDICATOR.

If you do nothing

If you take none of the above actions in the timescale shown, we may send you a Charge Certificate increasing the charge from £60.00 to £90.00. If you do not pay the increased charge before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the Charge Certificate being served we may apply to the County Court to recover the money - plus court costs - from you.

How to pay
Online at www.merton.gov.uk/pay.
By phone 020 8545 3518 (24 hours). Please note that we do not accept AMEX or Diner’s Club Cards.
Post Office (cash or a debit card only) or at Pay Point Shops (cash only) using the bar code as shown on this letter or on the PCN.
By post Please make your cheque or postal order payable to ‘London Borough of Merton’, write your PCN number (MT.........), vehicle registration and your address on the back, then send it to the address above.

Please note London Borough of Merton does not offer payment or instalment plans for PCNs. Payment is made when it is received by the council and not from the date written on a cheque or the date payment is posted. The council cannot be held responsible for any payments that are delayed or lost by the Postal Services. Yours sincerely Parking Services
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 15:57
Post #55


Member


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



Well as they've not reoffered the discount there's nothing to be lost in appealing. Unfortunately you don't really seem to have any solid statutory grounds of appeal, but you can still ask the adjudicator to recommend to the enforcement authority that it cancels the notice due to mitigating circumstances. If they don't respond to the adjudicator's recommendation within 35 days you automatically win, so you never know you might get lucky.


--------------------
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, 13 Nov 2018 - 16:02
Post #56


Member


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



+1

I'm hopeful the adjudicator will consider the permit substantially valid given the case reports we've seen and which should be built into your appeal - but nothing to lose now.

This post has been edited by stamfordman: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 16:08
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Sun, 25 Nov 2018 - 17:39
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



John has decided to re-do his submission to the adjudicator. Stay tuned for the update.

This post has been edited by ZigZagZog: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 00:15
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Mon, 3 Dec 2018 - 22:18
Post #58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



Right gang, here's the 1st draft of the letter for the Adjudicator. Any suggestions to strengthen the argument? Let's hear 'em.

If anyone can come up with a case or two where a silly mistake has been overlooked by Merton, another council, the Adjudicator or I suppose anyone else involved in the Council Parking world supporting the argument that would be wonderful.

This has to be submitted by Saturday so please, let's be hearing from anyone with anything to say.


I received the PCN XXXXXXXX with the parking contravention 19s on 00/00/00 at XX.XX. I would ask the Adjudicator to please consider my case, and using common sense see that it was always my intention to abide by and comply with Merton's parking rules & regulations, that I had nothing to gain, wasn't gaming the system and, considering that Merton have lost nothing, waive this PCN for the reasons outlined below.

I used a valid parking permit but forgot to scratch off the month part, in this case for 'July'. It was a minor, honest mistake – I was pushed for time as I was running late and in my haste simply omitted scratching off the last of the four sections, the month the permit was for. The car was otherwise parked properly, legally and safely as you can see from the evidence provided.

I'd like to point out that with the boxes I had scratched out on the parking permit I used, it could only have been used on 09/07/2018 in 2018 as there is not another Monday the 9th to come in any month remaining in 2018. I do not believe any fair minded person would agree that the month section of the permit was purposely left blank with the intention of reusing it on Monday the 9th of September, 2019, the next time the 9th day of any month falls on a Monday, some 14 months after the permit was used. I was working in Wimbledon at the Tennis Championships for a period of two weeks only, and will not be returning Wimbledon again.

Furthermore, I believe Merton's casual, haphazard & amateurish handling of my appeal to them, with mistakes made throughout the rejection of that appeal demonstrate a cynical and mercenary attitude that wilfully ignores common sense so that as many PCN fines can be collected as possible. Firstly, the first rejection letter completely failed to address the key point outlined in the paragraph above - this ticket could not be re-used for any month remaining in 2018 and not again for a further 14 months. Secondly, the first rejection letter was erroneous in stating ‘I note you have stated you work for Merton Council’ when I had never made such an assertion. Similarly, the rejection spoke of a Full Day Permit when I used a Half Day Permit (see CEO's photo evidence), showing systematic carelessness on the part of Merton’s PCN department. The kindest interpretation of this, I believe, is that the response Merton sent to me was a response intended for someone else. A more cynical person might interpret it as a systematic policy of casual, automatic rejection of any appeal with only the most cursory examination of the merits of that appeal in the hope the appellant will give up on their appeal and pay the PCN. Merton do not make any money by granting appeals.

Although the Council have since responded to these issues upon prompting, I believe their reply was both insufficient and dismissive, hence my decision to take this to independent adjudication. This whole process has been made difficult by the considerable laxity shown by the Council and the amateurish way in which my case has been dealt with. Rejected regardless of the content - evidenced by the fact that Merton did not even read my appeal and were apparently replying to someone else - the Council have demonstrated that they regard PCNs as simply an endless money making machine and that this is a numbers game they are playing, rejecting appeals unread and out of hand in the knowledge most people will give up and pay them.

I would also like to note that the Contravention Code notes ‘Code 19 should only be issued if a permit that is or was valid for that bay is used but is invalid at time of PCN due to:

· It has expired

· It is in the wrong vehicle

· Obscured date/VRM

This permit had not expired, was not in the wrong vehicle and the date and VRM were not obscured.

This was an honest, very minor mistake made on filling out a parking permit which was substantially compliant, arguably a de minimis mistake, with no intention on my part to game the system or parking regulations, with no gain to be made by me and no loss to be suffered by Merton. I would ask that the adjudicator allows the appeal on the grounds that
the penalty exceeds the relevant amount in the circumstances of the case being that the error in not scratching the month is of no consequence, and is so trivial as to be de minimis. Indeed, an argument could be made that the contravention did not occur.

Yours sincerely,


This post has been edited by ZigZagZog: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 - 12:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZigZagZog
post Tue, 4 Dec 2018 - 12:24
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,544



Any thoughts?

just changed the last para. to include a request that the adjudicator recommends Merton cancels the notice due to mitigating circumstances, per cp8759's post 55 above.

stamfordman, your post 56 above - "I'm hopeful the adjudicator will consider the permit substantially valid given the case reports we've seen and which should be built into your appeal... "

Where do I find such case reports that would bolster my appeal?

TIA.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Tue, 4 Dec 2018 - 12:48
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,916
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



Adjudicators cannot allow appeals on mitigating circumstances. They can however, allow them on "the penalty exceeded the relevant amount in the circumstances of the case", the circumstances being that your error in not scratching the month is of no consequence, and is so trivial as to be de minimis. This could also come under "the contravention did not occur" (de minimis)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
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 - 22:27
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