PCN |
PCN |
Thu, 31 May 2018 - 14:43
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 31 May 2018 Member No.: 98,199 |
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 31 May 2018 - 14:43
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 31 May 2018 - 15:24
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
So, obvious question - were you displaying a valid permit?
-------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 31 May 2018 - 17:14
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Upload the back of the PC, it might have a fatal flaw.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Thu, 31 May 2018 - 17:59
Post
#4
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 31 May 2018 Member No.: 98,199 |
Upload the back of the PC, it might have a fatal flaw. Here it is.. So, obvious question - were you displaying a valid permit? stupidly had a permit on for the day before but not today, was wondering if there was any loophole to avoid |
|
|
Thu, 31 May 2018 - 18:13
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
So it would seem bang to rights on the contravention. See if anyone come up with a weakness in the PCN.
-------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 31 May 2018 - 20:00
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
The council are not entitled to charge 2p a minute on the 0870 number so you can challenge on the ground that the amount due, it's the same as the credit card surcharge that councils used to charge (someone will post the relevant case). If you want to fight it on this basis you'll need to take it to the tribunal as the council won't accept it.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Thu, 31 May 2018 - 23:26
Post
#7
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 31 May 2018 Member No.: 98,199 |
The council are not entitled to charge 2p a minute on the 0870 number so you can challenge on the ground that the amount due, it's the same as the credit card surcharge that councils used to charge (someone will post the relevant case). If you want to fight it on this basis you'll need to take it to the tribunal as the council won't accept it. Thank you for your help, will look into it. Besides the PCN itself, do you think there is anything regarding the road markings and height of the road signs (those in the vicinity are low down and one is surrounded by foliage)? |
|
|
Thu, 31 May 2018 - 23:28
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
do you think there is anything regarding the road markings and height of the road signs (those in the vicinity are low down and one is surrounded by foliage)? IMHO, road markings and signage could not be clearer. You were aware a permit was required since you had one for the previous day. -------------------- |
|
|
Fri, 1 Jun 2018 - 11:31
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
The council are not entitled to charge 2p a minute on the 0870 number so you can challenge on the ground that the amount due, it's the same as the credit card surcharge that councils used to charge (someone will post the relevant case). If you want to fight it on this basis you'll need to take it to the tribunal as the council won't accept it. Thank you for your help, will look into it. Besides the PCN itself, do you think there is anything regarding the road markings and height of the road signs (those in the vicinity are low down and one is surrounded by foliage)? I don't think there's any point in challenging the contravention itself, it would just detract from your credibility. Have a read of London Tribunals case 2090198127 The key passage: "Considering the matter carefully, I find as a matter of law that, for the reasons set out above, the local authority are neither entitled nor empowered to impose any sum, whether for the method of payment or anything else, in addition to the statutory penalty charge imposed under the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. For completeness, this obviously also means that no sum in addition to the reduced penalty of 50% or the Charge Certificate amount of 150% of the original charge, as the case may be, can be imposed. It is therefore immaterial whether or not the fact of the surcharge is actually printed on the Penalty Charge Notice. Although I do not need to determine the issue, it must follow that this is the same for any Penalty Charge Notice or, where relevant, on any Notice to Owner or Enforcement Notice issued under the Road Traffic Act 1991, other of the London Local Authorities Acts 1990 to 2003 or the Traffic Management Act 2004. It is agreed that the local authority did require an additional fee for payment by credit card of this particular penalty charge. For the reasons set out, I find that the penalty charge in this case did exceed the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed." As the service charge for the 0870 number is a sum imposed for "anything else" over and above the statutory penalty, the penalty now demanded exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case. A properly constructed appeal to the tribunal is highly likely to succeed IMO. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sun, 3 Jun 2018 - 15:58
Post
#10
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 31 May 2018 Member No.: 98,199 |
The council are not entitled to charge 2p a minute on the 0870 number so you can challenge on the ground that the amount due, it's the same as the credit card surcharge that councils used to charge (someone will post the relevant case). If you want to fight it on this basis you'll need to take it to the tribunal as the council won't accept it. Thank you for your help, will look into it. Besides the PCN itself, do you think there is anything regarding the road markings and height of the road signs (those in the vicinity are low down and one is surrounded by foliage)? I don't think there's any point in challenging the contravention itself, it would just detract from your credibility. Have a read of London Tribunals case 2090198127 The key passage: "Considering the matter carefully, I find as a matter of law that, for the reasons set out above, the local authority are neither entitled nor empowered to impose any sum, whether for the method of payment or anything else, in addition to the statutory penalty charge imposed under the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. For completeness, this obviously also means that no sum in addition to the reduced penalty of 50% or the Charge Certificate amount of 150% of the original charge, as the case may be, can be imposed. It is therefore immaterial whether or not the fact of the surcharge is actually printed on the Penalty Charge Notice. Although I do not need to determine the issue, it must follow that this is the same for any Penalty Charge Notice or, where relevant, on any Notice to Owner or Enforcement Notice issued under the Road Traffic Act 1991, other of the London Local Authorities Acts 1990 to 2003 or the Traffic Management Act 2004. It is agreed that the local authority did require an additional fee for payment by credit card of this particular penalty charge. For the reasons set out, I find that the penalty charge in this case did exceed the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed." As the service charge for the 0870 number is a sum imposed for "anything else" over and above the statutory penalty, the penalty now demanded exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case. A properly constructed appeal to the tribunal is highly likely to succeed IMO. Thanks, will give the case a proper read. If I did take this to the tribunal and the appeal was rejected, would I have to pay the full fine or would the 14-day half-fine still be valid? The council are not entitled to charge 2p a minute on the 0870 number so you can challenge on the ground that the amount due, it's the same as the credit card surcharge that councils used to charge (someone will post the relevant case). If you want to fight it on this basis you'll need to take it to the tribunal as the council won't accept it. Thank you for your help, will look into it. Besides the PCN itself, do you think there is anything regarding the road markings and height of the road signs (those in the vicinity are low down and one is surrounded by foliage)? I don't think there's any point in challenging the contravention itself, it would just detract from your credibility. Have a read of London Tribunals case 2090198127 The key passage: "Considering the matter carefully, I find as a matter of law that, for the reasons set out above, the local authority are neither entitled nor empowered to impose any sum, whether for the method of payment or anything else, in addition to the statutory penalty charge imposed under the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. For completeness, this obviously also means that no sum in addition to the reduced penalty of 50% or the Charge Certificate amount of 150% of the original charge, as the case may be, can be imposed. It is therefore immaterial whether or not the fact of the surcharge is actually printed on the Penalty Charge Notice. Although I do not need to determine the issue, it must follow that this is the same for any Penalty Charge Notice or, where relevant, on any Notice to Owner or Enforcement Notice issued under the Road Traffic Act 1991, other of the London Local Authorities Acts 1990 to 2003 or the Traffic Management Act 2004. It is agreed that the local authority did require an additional fee for payment by credit card of this particular penalty charge. For the reasons set out, I find that the penalty charge in this case did exceed the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed." As the service charge for the 0870 number is a sum imposed for "anything else" over and above the statutory penalty, the penalty now demanded exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case. A properly constructed appeal to the tribunal is highly likely to succeed IMO. Is it also correct that I will need to appeal to the council first, in order to receive a NOR to then proceed with an appeal to the tribunal? Thanks |
|
|
Sun, 3 Jun 2018 - 16:13
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
Here's the core case:-
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/295.html I would also contend that the mounting height of the signs is inadequate (there's something in the sticky thread on this). This one:- http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...t&p=1233436 Mick This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 - 16:18 |
|
|
Sun, 3 Jun 2018 - 16:21
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
If I did take this to the tribunal and the appeal was rejected, would I have to pay the full fine or would the 14-day half-fine still be valid? The full amount would be payable. -------------------- |
|
|
Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 06:36
Post
#13
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 31 May 2018 Member No.: 98,199 |
I decided to pay the fine as have been out of the country, regardless, thank you for your help!
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 15:57 |