Ealing Council - 18 months to respond to letter and now demanding £165 in 14 days |
Ealing Council - 18 months to respond to letter and now demanding £165 in 14 days |
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 18:47
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 15 Dec 2011 Member No.: 51,803 |
I was wondering if someone could advise.
Back on the 30th September 2016 I paid for a parking permit. Ealing council sent an email saying application was successful and we would receive a receipt or an email if payment wasn't successful. On the 8th October 2016 and on the 10th October 2016. I received 2 parking tickets. I called up on the Monday 10th and was advised that their system was down and so payment was not taken. It was their fault. I paid for the permit at that point. I complained and basically said this isn't my fault but they insisted that I would have to go through the process and I just got standard letters back not addressing the fact that the fault was with them because their system was down. Finally in December or early January I wrote one final time asking for a non standard letter and for someone to look into this. I heard nothing back from them. Last week I got two letters regarding the two tickets essentially saying I have 14 days to pay £165. And that I will have to wait till the Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court issues an order for recovery. Can someone offer some advise on what I should do. Also are they allowed to have a delay of 16-17 months between correspondence? I can't remember enough of the information regarding order and timeline to know exactly what I did and didn't do and can't find copies of the letters on my computer. thank you in advance. |
|
|
Advertisement |
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 18:47
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 18:52
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,280 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
I just got standard letters back not addressing the fact that the fault was with them Does not sound good. These 'letters' were titled as --? -------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 19:31
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
|
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 19:37
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
Westminster tried this tactic and got their heads handed to them on a platter at Review.
The worry is that this is the second Ealing case we have seen this week. If the OP believes that there are unanswered issue or that his representations have been ignored the delay in responding is unfair without adequate explanation. That is the key to this case ---the Council has not responded either to informal challenges or formal representations---an audit trail would be good. That should take care of the OfR stage. Now we can supplement the unfairness angle with the following:- The Council probably believes it can pursue this "debt" under the Limitation Act. However, against that, there must be a breach of Art 6 ECHR in that these cases have not or nor cannot be brought to adjudication under the "reasonable time" requirement. Here's a little snippet on the latter (bit out of date):- http://europeanlawblog.eu/2013/12/09/the-r...-and-charybdis/ Mick |
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 20:01
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 15 Dec 2011 Member No.: 51,803 |
Thanks for the advise. Should I respond to the letter and say that I will wait for the OfR as was suggested in the other post, or should I just wait? Also someone advised me to contact my local councilor to get them to potentially intervene. Is that worth doing?
|
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 20:20
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,280 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Thanks for the advise. Should I respond to the letter and say that I will wait for the OfR as was suggested in the other post, or should I just wait? Also someone advised me to contact my local councilor to get them to potentially intervene. Is that worth doing? You could answer the first question; what "standard letters" ? Westminster tried this tactic and got their heads handed to them on a platter at Review. The worry is that this is the second Ealing case we have seen this week. If the OP believes that there are unanswered issue or that his representations have been ignored the delay in responding is unfair without adequate explanation. That is the key to this case ---the Council has not responded either to informal challenges or formal representations---an audit trail would be good. That should take care of the OfR stage. Now we can supplement the unfairness angle with the following:- The Council probably believes it can pursue this "debt" under the Limitation Act. However, against that, there must be a breach of Art 6 ECHR in that these cases have not or nor cannot be brought to adjudication under the "reasonable time" requirement. Here's a little snippet on the latter (bit out of date):- http://europeanlawblog.eu/2013/12/09/the-r...-and-charybdis/ Mick No dispute Ealing are out of order but opening post sounds like OP complicit. -------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 20:22
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 15 Dec 2011 Member No.: 51,803 |
I'm sorry I can't remember what the letters were titled as I just remember that I wrote about how the permit was paid but because their system was down it was their fault that they didn't collect payment and we never received an email saying that payment wasn't taken and their response was a boilerplate response that they would not be removing the charge and not addressing any points that I made. Sorry I can't be more helpful but I can't find the letters that they sent.
Should I request from the council that a file of all correspondence be sent to me? |
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 20:29
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 21,015 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
If OP would kindly post up these "letters" it would make things easier for all of us, OP included !
Charge Certificates cannot legally be issued unless two previous documents have been issued, viz (1) Notice to Owner, and then assuming reps were sent for the NtO, (2) Rejection of Formal Representations letter. |
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 20:31
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,280 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
Should I request from the council that a file of all correspondence be sent to me? Would be useful but they're reportedly impossible to contact. (You could ask your Councillor to help with getting a response - but only that: They may not intervene otherwise) My problem is that you say you had respones. It then sounds like you didn't pursue further. The OfR allows you to make a sworn Statement but without knowing or understanding what has happened you can't. There are only 4 tick-box options. -------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 20:40
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 21,015 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Oh woe, woe ! OP throws away all the letters and documents and expects rapid help !
OP, you haven't really helped yourself here in a case which would be eminently winnable if we know what has gone on. The key thing is this: - 1. Did you get a Notice to Owner asking for the full PCN penalty ? 2.Did you send in reps against this NtO 3.Did you get a rejection of your reps in response ? In order to turn things around, after the Charge Certificate, the Order for Recovery, (the next stage) is snet out, and at this point you can submit a Witness Statement, but on only a limited set of circumstances two of which are (1) you did not received an NtO, and (2) you made reps to the NtO but didn't get a response rejecting those reps. If either of these is true, then the OfR is revoked and matters revert to the Notice to Owner. So what is it ? This post has been edited by Incandescent: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 20:42 |
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 22:13
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 15 Dec 2011 Member No.: 51,803 |
Hi Thanks for all the help,
I have found the letters Ealing Council have sent me - I believe this is all of them. I still can't find the letters I sent to them. I do appreciate that makes everyones life harder so I am grateful for the advise. I received a Notice of Decline of Challange - dated 11th November 2016 I received a Notice to Owner - dated 14th December 2016 I received a Charge Certificate - dated 19th January 2017 I don't have a Notice of rejection of Representations and I remember that I wrote them another letter once I received the charge certificate saying that I would like someone to look into it because I never received a response to my previous letter. |
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 22:29
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Did you make formal representations against the Notice to Owner?
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 07:51
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
This reflects what Westminster did--a huge hiatus between the Charge Certificate and OFR. However as members have pointed out the OP NEEDS to show that a formal response to the NTO was made.
London Tribunals are now tightening up on this procedural step as shown in the following case:- 2160354606 The Enforcement Authority has referred a Witness Statement made by Mr Taimuri on 18 July 2016 stating he made written representations to the Enforcement Authority in response to the Notice to Owner issued for a parking contravention on 13 February 2016 in St Martins Lane but did not receive a Notice of Rejection. The Enforcement Authority state no representation was received in response to the Notice to Owner. The statutory process is as follows: 1. The Enforcement Authority serves a Penalty Charge Notice. 2. The Enforcement Authority then serves a Notice to Owner on the person it believes to be the owner/registered keeper or the hirer of the vehicle. 3. The recipient then has 28 days to make representations to the Enforcement Authority. The Enforcement Authority may disregard any representations not made within this time. 4. The Enforcement Authority must then serve a notice in response rejecting or accepting the representations. 5. If the Enforcement Authority serves a Notice of Rejection, the recipient of the notice then has 28 days to appeal to the Adjudicator. This procedure must be followed correctly to contest liability and ultimately appeal to the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service. Failure to either make representations or to appeal within the required time means there will be no right to contest liability further however strong the merits of the case. The Enforcement Authority sent a Notice to Owner on 21 March 2016. Because no representation was received the Authority did not issue a Notice of Rejection. I accept Mr Taimuri made informal representations before receiving the Notice to Owner but this communication cannot form formal representations in response to the Notice to Owner. However this communication was not received by the Enforcement Authority. On receipt of the County Court Order the Authority wrote on 27 July 2016 seeking a copy of the formal representations made in response to the Notice to Owner. No response was received and the case was referred to the Tribunal. In his reply to the Tribunal’s letter of 28 March 2018 Mr Taimuri of has failed to provide any evidence to show written representations were made in response to the Notice to Owner. The ground relied on in the Witness Statement has not been substantiated. There is now no right of appeal to the Adjudicator. I have made this direction because Mr Taimuri failed to follow the required procedure. I have not and cannot consider the merits of the case. Mr Taimuri is now on notice that no further witness statement will be accepted by this Tribunal. Any further challenge must be by way of an application to the High Court for a judicial review. Mick |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 11:10
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 15 Dec 2011 Member No.: 51,803 |
I did write a letter and I received no reply. I said something like I had paid in good faith and I shouldn't have to pay the PCN as the issue was wholly with Ealing council not taking payment because of their system. I assume that letter would be considered as formal representations?
It sounds like I am going to be in the same position as Mr Taimuri? As I can't find any of my correspondence to the Council. Also today I received an order for recovery for £173. This has come only 9 days after the last letter. But their letter said I would have 14 days to make payment. Is that something they are allowed to do? This post has been edited by MarkBerg: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 11:13 |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 11:20
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,280 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
I assume that letter would be considered as formal representations? No because you can't tell us at which stage you wrote to them. Is correspondence not in your computer? -------------------- |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 12:10
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 21,015 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
So,
- 11th Nov 2016 they rejected your informal challenge, date of your submission unknown - 14th Dec 2016 they issue a Notice to Owner to you as no payment was made within 28 days after sending the above rejection - 19th Jan 2018 they issue a Charge Certificate as no payment has been made in relation to the NtO, nor (apparently) have any formal reps been received. So what you need to tell us is whether you responded to the Notice to Owner and if you did, on approximately what date. You mention getting two PCNs so what happened about the other one ? |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 12:57
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,156 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
OP, don't get hung up on the term 'formal representations', it might mislead you.
All you need to have done is to have communicated with the authority in any of the ways permitted in the NTO after the NTO was issued and before the end of the 28-day period for making representations. That communication must have referenced the PCN and in some way challenged the penalty. You would not have had to write Formal Representations, or use their form or even state grounds as they are presented in the NTO. To the best of your knowledge and belief did you? Like the Home Office, we're not all expert record keepers and, given the period which has elapsed since the CC and the lack of follow up from the authority in a timely manner, you could be forgiven for thinking that the matter was dead and buried and cleansed your records. IMO, at adjudication the adj would firstly have to satisfy themselves that the authority were acting in a procedurally correct manner in resisting your appeal before worrying about whether you could present your reps. In any event, this would not prevent you from submitting an appeal under directions from the adjudicator. The Westminster case is a little misleading on this point. In that case the adj did not believe that the appellant had submitted reps but simply submitted a witness statement when the issue did not go away. In your case and in the event that the authority could not produce your reps, I think an adj would exercise discretion and not presume that you not having reps in evidence meant that none was made. And pl sort out the separate PCNs, twin-tracking within a thread is nearly always a recipe for disaster. |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 13:38
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 15 Dec 2011 Member No.: 51,803 |
Firstly I just want to thank everyone for their help.
To clarify, I am getting dual letters for the council for both PCN's. They are pursuing both at the same time. I found the letters! and I'm sorry I've made this harder then it has to be for everyone to help me! The first response I don't have as I remember doing it on the website. So the date for that is unknown but they obviously received that. The response to the Notice to Owner, I have attached a version of which was written around a week after I received that correspondence, I did not get a response from them. Next correspondence was charge certificate and I wrote another letter at that point and sent that letter by recorded delivery. I still have the receipt for that and sent that letter on the 3rd February. I have attached a version of that to. thanks,
Attached File(s)
Formal_Notice_redact.pdf ( 21.13K )
Number of downloads: 34
RE_EAxxxxx.pdf ( 20.27K ) Number of downloads: 26 |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 13:47
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
The key is the first one - but it's undated. What is the file date on your computer? Did you post it? Was there any reference to the NTOs? You've only posted one NTO.
you do refer to not getting response to the NTO in the reply to the CC - but you say NTO singular? This post has been edited by stamfordman: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 13:52 |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 14:54
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 71 Joined: 15 Dec 2011 Member No.: 51,803 |
The File date on my computer is the 21st December 2016. I did post it on or around that date but I did not do it as a recorded delivery so I don't know when I posted it.
"Was there any reference to the NTOs? - I'm sorry I don't understand this question. "You've only posted one NTO". - on this forum? I can put up both. Sorry if I've over complicated this. I'm currently contesting both NTO's but at the same time. "but you say NTO singular" That's an omission on my part but I've header up the original letter as RE EAxxx and EAxxx and I've mentioned both parking fines in the letter. I've received identical correspondence regarding the two PCN's last week so I am assuming they have taken that letter for both PCN's. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Wednesday, 17th April 2024 - 09:50 |