Parking Warden said no PCN but now have received Notice to Owner |
Parking Warden said no PCN but now have received Notice to Owner |
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 - 20:49
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 73 Joined: 15 Feb 2016 Member No.: 82,400 |
Hi all
My wife was parked on a single yellow for a period of time (she thought it was only active for 1 hour a day as is the case on another part of the road. She returned to the car with a friend to see a parking warden with the car. She was told with her friend present that no PCN had been issued. Now we have received a Notice to Owner with no discount on ticket as we never received PCN. Photos: There are photos of the PCN on the car on the council website but wasnt there when wife got back to car. Seems unfair! Sorry I realise that I should have posted this in Council Parking Notices, if anyone knows how I can move it to there would be greatly appreciated! |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 - 20:49
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 10 Jan 2019 - 22:32
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
option 3 might be unlikely but not impossible
2170228109 The Appellant, Mr A Chmiel has attended his appeal and is represented by a witness Mrs U Durojaiye. I find them to be honest, convincing and consistent witnesses I believe what they tell me. The Authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part of a road other than a carriageway when in Charles Road on 21 February 2017 at 10.25. The Appellant's case is that he had parked on the footway to alert Mrs Durojaiye and her husband that he had arrived to do some pluming work for them, and required a vehicle to be moved so that he could park to work. During this time an Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) had served a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) to his vehicle. The CEO was confronted with this explanation from the Appellant, Mr and Mrs Durojaiye and another person, Mr Raymond Bates. The CEO then removed the PCN and tore it up. The first time the Appellant new of the actual PCN was when a Notice to Owner was served, which is dated 29 March 2017. I have considered the evidence in this case and I find that this PCN cannot be upheld for the following reasons: First, I find that the evidence of the Appellant and his witness Mrs Durojaiye to be credible and I find that the CEO did tear up the PCN thus withdrawing service. Second, I find that the written statements, which have been submitted and exhibited from Mr Raymond Bates and Mr A Durojaiye to be supportive and confirm the evidence of the Appellant and Mrs Durojaiye. Third, I find that the act of removing and tearing up the PCN by the CEO to be a withdrawal of service of the PCN. Accordingly, I find, as a fact, that the CEO withdrew service of the PCN and that this PCN is not proved. -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Thu, 10 Jan 2019 - 23:10
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 73 Joined: 15 Feb 2016 Member No.: 82,400 |
My wife says the conversation happened approx 340-345pm After school pick up. No pcn on this car but ceo present Not really sure how I have massively departed from my account in post 1? The difficulty you face is that the tribunal would decide what happened based on the balance of probabilities, i.e. on the version of events that is more likely to have occurred. There are three possible explanations of the evidence: 1) The "Two CEOs" theory I put above (but you seem to want to discount this) 2) The CEO served the PCN on the vehicle and your wife's account is untruthful 3) The CEO served the PCN, then removed it form the car for some unknown reason but remained at the scene, and then when your wife's friend and your wife came up said that they didn't need to worry about it but not to park there again, then returned to base and instead of informing his supervisor that the PCN had not been served, he maliciously allowed it to be processed as if it had been served correctly. It's not for me to Impugn anyone's account of events, but it should be obvious to you that version 3 is intrinsically unlikely so the adjudicator might not accept that this is the most likely interpretation of the evidence. i believe he removed the pcn in my wife’s friends precence who arrived there slightly before my wife The time ion the pcn is 3.38. Of course he didn’t wait and remove the Pcn for some unknown reason. I will ask my wife to confirm what was exactly said between her friend and ceo |
|
|
Fri, 11 Jan 2019 - 07:50
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,057 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
She returned to the car with a friend to see a parking warden with the car. She was told with her friend present that no PCN had been issued. Now we have received a Notice to Owner with no discount on ticket as we never received PCN.
..is inconsistent with Her friend was at the car first: she thinks spoke with the parking warden she thought it was only active for 1 hour a day as is the case on another part of the road. ..is also inconsistent with.. you need to park on these roads nearby where the yellow line is not active at this time After school pick up. So where was/were the children? The recipient of the NTO needs to make reps. They can put forward the arguments aired so far. IMO, there is no silver bullet in the account and none that we can supply unless there's a subsequent procedural error on their part. To be frank, the story as given so far would be rejected but it's probable that the discount would be re-offered. |
|
|
Fri, 11 Jan 2019 - 16:19
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
i believe he removed the pcn in my wife’s friends precence who arrived there slightly before my wife The time ion the pcn is 3.38. Of course he didn’t wait and remove the Pcn for some unknown reason. I will ask my wife to confirm what was exactly said between her friend and ceo If the CEO removed the PCN from the car in the presence of your wife or her friend, that is new evidence that materially chances the situation. You really must confirm if this happened. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 20:18
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 73 Joined: 15 Feb 2016 Member No.: 82,400 |
Evening all
So the wife has been in touch with her friend. Here is what happened. They were returning to their cars after collecting kids from school. My wife's friend was back at her car first and saw a parking warden at my wifes car. She is adamant there was no ticket on the car. She asked him not to put one on the car as my wife was just down the road. She watched the car till my wife got there. My wife then spoke with him and he said dont worry about it but next time dont park here, you can park there (a location either on a side road or further down the road). So I cant really understand this myself now. Apparently my wifes friend has had this happen before to her, and has somehow phoned someone in parking who then put the discount back on? And she also said she has shouted at this CEO before so maybe this was done maliciously - how I dont know, and of course I have no evidence that he did this maliciously so will be giving him the benefit of the doubt. So I suppose I put in an appeal to the council and explain the situation and just hope for the best? |
|
|
Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 23:17
Post
#26
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Evening all So the wife has been in touch with her friend. Here is what happened. They were returning to their cars after collecting kids from school. My wife's friend was back at her car first and saw a parking warden at my wifes car. She is adamant there was no ticket on the car. She asked him not to put one on the car as my wife was just down the road. She watched the car till my wife got there. My wife then spoke with him and he said dont worry about it but next time dont park here, you can park there (a location either on a side road or further down the road). So I cant really understand this myself now. Apparently my wifes friend has had this happen before to her, and has somehow phoned someone in parking who then put the discount back on? And she also said she has shouted at this CEO before so maybe this was done maliciously - how I dont know, and of course I have no evidence that he did this maliciously so will be giving him the benefit of the doubt. So I suppose I put in an appeal to the council and explain the situation and just hope for the best? I hate to go round the houses again but from the information you have given us, these are the possible explanations I can see: 1) The "Two CEOs" theory I put above 2) The CEO served the PCN on the vehicle and the account of events from your wife and/or her friend is untruthful. 3) The CEO served the PCN, then removed it form the car for some unknown reason but remained at the scene, and then when your wife's friend and your wife came up said that they didn't need to worry about it but not to park there again, then returned to base and instead of informing his supervisor that the PCN had not been served, he maliciously allowed it to be processed as if it had been served correctly. You have chosen to discount option 1 (i.e. another CEO had already put a PCN on the car, and this had already been removed) as you say there's only 1 CEO in the area. So this leaves options 2 & 3, and without more option 3 seems very unlikely. Therefore on balance option 2 seems the most likely, so by default the tribunal would simply side with the council as option 2 is the most likely explanation. Of course, the best option would be to see if there's any CCTV covering the area, you could then make a GDPR request to obtain a copy, that would provide a definitive explanation. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 15 Jan 2019 - 09:00
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,057 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
This is a bit like peeling an onion.
A perfectly plausible explanation is that the contravention occurred at around 3.40 after the car was parked and your wife went to collect children from school. ( I asked about the children before but still no answer from the OP. They are not incidental if they were there). Driver returns children in tow. Their cherubic faces and their mother convince the CEO to not issue a PCN because assisted boarding is an exemption. However, unbeknown to her, a PCN had already been issued, and removed.(now you understand the need for clarity around the timings of events!) So, did your wife, and her friend, have any children in tow, of what ages? And if there were children, then they'd been collected. And the collection time of the school would nail the earliest time of the conversation etc. Over to you OP: Children; ages; collection time; |
|
|
Tue, 15 Jan 2019 - 13:37
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 73 Joined: 15 Feb 2016 Member No.: 82,400 |
This is a bit like peeling an onion. A perfectly plausible explanation is that the contravention occurred at around 3.40 after the car was parked and your wife went to collect children from school. ( I asked about the children before but still no answer from the OP. They are not incidental if they were there). Driver returns children in tow. Their cherubic faces and their mother convince the CEO to not issue a PCN because assisted boarding is an exemption. However, unbeknown to her, a PCN had already been issued, and removed.(now you understand the need for clarity around the timings of events!) So, did your wife, and her friend, have any children in tow, of what ages? And if there were children, then they'd been collected. And the collection time of the school would nail the earliest time of the conversation etc. Over to you OP: Children; ages; collection time; So the school pick up time is 315. My wife would have parked, walked with our 2 year old in a buggy to the school. Collected our 7 year old and 5 year old boys from separate classes from the school. They tend to dawdle, so after walking back to the car with the boys and pushing the buggy she reached the car at approx 340. Her friend reached the car slightly before my wife with her children, 5 and 3 years old. Hope this is what u were asking for. Hope peeling the onion hasn’t been tearful Thanks again |
|
|
Tue, 15 Jan 2019 - 14:39
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,057 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
So the school pick up time is 315. My wife would have parked, walked with our 2 year old in a buggy to the school.
Collected our 7 year old and 5 year old boys from separate classes from the school. They tend to dawdle, so after walking back to the car with the boys and pushing the buggy she reached the car at approx 340. Having done this yesterday, the sequence is fresh in my mind. And as it is a sequence repeated daily by parents, whether the events were yesterday or 2 months ago would not alter the routine. School pick-up time 3.15. This is the time at the classroom doors, reception probably coming out 5 mins before the infants. So parked at least by 3.10. And then we have a PCN on an unattended vehicle at 3.38 with your wife not back until 3.40. And why would it take 20 minutes to get back from the school? Inter-parent chit-chat is the answer! You could not squeeze assisted boarding into this sequence, so I don't think any exemption applies. And as regards her timings, the conversation and time of the photos, I'm still struggling to find a solution which fits. Another pipe of shag needed. What school did they go to? Elementary, my dear Watsoní ½í¸ƒ This post has been edited by hcandersen: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 22:09 |
|
|
Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 20:25
Post
#30
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 73 Joined: 15 Feb 2016 Member No.: 82,400 |
So Ive had another think about this. In the photos of the car with the pcn on the council website, my wife's friends car is not in the photo!
Ive already said my wife and her friend are not lying. This must be a different incident to the one I have been describing on here. My wife genuinely thought she could park on that road in that spot, and has parked there on other occasions. So I think on a different day to the one described the Ceo has issued the ticket, and it has been removed by someone. My wife is adamant there she has not returned to the car with a ticket on it, and I believe her. I will try and appeal to their good nature and see if they will offer the discount again and pay it.... |
|
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 20:26
Post
#31
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
So Ive had another think about this. In the photos of the car with the pcn on the council website, my wife's friends car is not in the photo! Ive already said my wife and her friend are not lying. This must be a different incident to the one I have been describing on here. My wife genuinely thought she could park on that road in that spot, and has parked there on other occasions. So I think on a different day to the one described the Ceo has issued the ticket, and it has been removed by someone. My wife is adamant there she has not returned to the car with a ticket on it, and I believe her. I will try and appeal to their good nature and see if they will offer the discount again and pay it.... They will almost certainly re-offer the discount, however if you can tell us anything about the circumstances on 29 November, rather than on some other day your wife might be thinking of, we can look at whether there's any point in trying to get it cancelled altogether. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 5 Mar 2019 - 23:09
Post
#32
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 73 Joined: 15 Feb 2016 Member No.: 82,400 |
Just received a letter from LB Redbridge saying after receiving my representations they have cancelled the PCN as a gesture of goodwill. Was expecting to have to pay the discounted PCN, so pleased with that obviously. Wonder why they didnt offer the discount in the end....
|
|
|
Wed, 6 Mar 2019 - 17:35
Post
#33
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Just received a letter from LB Redbridge saying after receiving my representations they have cancelled the PCN as a gesture of goodwill. Was expecting to have to pay the discounted PCN, so pleased with that obviously. Wonder why they didnt offer the discount in the end.... Good result, goes to show that despite the occasional conspiracy theories about how councils are just out there to collect revenue, they do on occasion exercise discretion to cancel. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 14:43 |