PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Didnt receive a Notice of Rejection on PCN
lab211
post Wed, 20 Jun 2018 - 17:40
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,432



So I got a PCN a while back and decided to challenge it and sent back a representation against it. I assumed they would just reject it and was expecting a notice back to that effect, but it has been nearly three months since I sent that back and I haven't heard anything. The PCN was in a hire car and reissuing the ticket in my name took them ages so I assumed they would be slow too but even so I was starting to get worried and was going to try contact them but of course they have no phone number.

Anyway today I received a "Charge Certificate" with a 50% uplift on the original amount and no mention of ways to challenge. I was planning on taking this to a tribunal to challenge but what can I do now? I assume they will say they did send out a notice of rejection but I never received anything.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Wed, 20 Jun 2018 - 17:40
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 27 Jul 2018 - 19:40
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,395
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Form PE3 is owned by Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service and can be downloaded here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...y-charge-notice

I'm not sure why Lambeth feel the need to send an amended form of their own concoction, but if you use the original HMCTS form you can't go wrong. That page also gives you the official guidance notes. Any solicitor can witness a statutory declaration providing they are authorised to practice, i.e. they hold a current, valid authorisation from the Solicitor's Regulatory Authority. The address in the "at*" address is simply the address of wherever your neighbour witnesses you sign the form, I would suggest his address would be the most appropriate choice (because in the vanishingly unlikely event that the court write to him to check he exists and he is in fact a solicitor, he'll receive the letter and will be able to reply / give his SRA authorisation number).

This post has been edited by cp8759: Fri, 27 Jul 2018 - 19:41


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lab211
post Wed, 22 Aug 2018 - 22:38
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,432



I went to the County Court in the end just to be sure, so thanks for directing me there I didn't know you could get it done there.

I now have the response back from Lambeth, they have now directed me to submit an appeal to the ETA. I was going to submit an appeal on the basis that the discount period is wrong (21 days instead of 14) and statement about charge certificate being wrong. Does that sound ok? Anything else I need to be aware of?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Wed, 22 Aug 2018 - 22:42
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,384
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (lab211 @ Wed, 22 Aug 2018 - 23:38) *
I went to the County Court in the end just to be sure, so thanks for directing me there I didn't know you could get it done there.

I now have the response back from Lambeth, they have now directed me to submit an appeal to the ETA. I was going to submit an appeal on the basis that the discount period is wrong (21 days instead of 14) and statement about charge certificate being wrong. Does that sound ok? Anything else I need to be aware of?


You need to post these documents
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lab211
post Fri, 24 Aug 2018 - 22:04
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,432



The original documents are at the top of the thread, the latest letters are below:





Thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Enceladus
post Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 01:39
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,424
Joined: 14 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,447



Lambeth haven't advised correct procedure. You shouldn't have to make an appeal submission to the Independent Adjudicator at the London tribunals as yet. The ball is now with Lambeth, they can either cancel the PCN or they can refer the case to the Adjudicator for 'direction on how to proceed'. Given the circumstances the Adjudicator would normally direct that the matter be held as an appeal. Assuming they do refer, then the London Tribunals would inform you and invite you to make a submission. Lambeth have no power to preempt the Adjudicator.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lab211
post Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 10:19
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,432



QUOTE (Enceladus @ Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 02:39) *
Lambeth haven't advised correct procedure. You shouldn't have to make an appeal submission to the Independent Adjudicator at the London tribunals as yet. The ball is now with Lambeth, they can either cancel the PCN or they can refer the case to the Adjudicator for 'direction on how to proceed'. Given the circumstances the Adjudicator would normally direct that the matter be held as an appeal. Assuming they do refer, then the London Tribunals would inform you and invite you to make a submission. Lambeth have no power to preempt the Adjudicator.


So what should I do?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 10:33
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,395
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (lab211 @ Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 11:19) *
QUOTE (Enceladus @ Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 02:39) *
Lambeth haven't advised correct procedure. You shouldn't have to make an appeal submission to the Independent Adjudicator at the London tribunals as yet. The ball is now with Lambeth, they can either cancel the PCN or they can refer the case to the Adjudicator for 'direction on how to proceed'. Given the circumstances the Adjudicator would normally direct that the matter be held as an appeal. Assuming they do refer, then the London Tribunals would inform you and invite you to make a submission. Lambeth have no power to preempt the Adjudicator.


So what should I do?

For the sake of getting this dealt with you should file an appeal with the tribunal. While Enceladus is correct in saying that technically you don't *have to* do this, there is no benefit in dragging this on for longer than needed. Or you can pay the discounted charge. But don't do nothing, or you'll end up with another charge certificate.

We haven't seen your representations to the council so can't say how strong your case is, show us a copy.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Enceladus
post Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 11:22
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,424
Joined: 14 Jan 2009
Member No.: 25,447



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 11:33) *
Or you can pay the discounted charge. But don't do nothing, or you'll end up with another charge certificate.

How so? Lambeth can't serve another Charge Cert, they have no power. They can only cancel the PCN or refer the case to the Adjudicator.

Playing off-piste usually ends badly. So I'd be inclined to follow the correct procedure and wait and see if Lambeth do refer and how quickly.

Paragraph 7 (11) of Schedule 1 of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 applies.
7 (11) Where a declaration has been served under sub-paragraph (2)(b) <---- applies to you or (c) above, the enforcing authority shall refer the case to the traffic adjudicator who may give such direction as he considers appropriate.

The OP has not been offered another chance to pay the PCN at the discount rate so he might as well submit an appeal if Lambeth do refer. But certainly don't pay at this stage.

This post has been edited by Enceladus: Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 11:25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 11:42
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,395
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Enceladus @ Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 12:22) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 11:33) *
Or you can pay the discounted charge. But don't do nothing, or you'll end up with another charge certificate.

How so? Lambeth can't serve another Charge Cert, they have no power. They can only cancel the PCN or refer the case to the Adjudicator.

The latest correspondence from the council says pay or appeal. Regardless of whether they have the necessary powers, they will purport to service a charge certificate, and in due course they will purport to serve an order for recovery. If the OP ignores that too (following your philosophy that unlawful actions of the council can be simply ignored) then the bailiffs will turn up, and the OP is unlikely to have much success with persuading the bailiff that the whole thing is illegal and the bailiff has no lawful authority to seize any property, the bailiff will end up thinking the OP's one of those FMOTL nutjobs and will carry on with enforcement regardless.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lab211
post Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 12:05
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,432



I am inclined to make the appeal, I don't want to complicate things really and I fear not doing so would cause more problems than it would be worth, it has already dragged out quite a bit.

The appeal I submitted to the council was solely on the basis that the signage is not great and there was a market stall which partially obscures the sign from my approach direction. I didn't mention about the technicalities as I got the impression that would be ignored by them anyway.

For the adjudicator appeal I was going to say the same but also add the technical points as well. From a previous thread I was told two points, one being the discount time of 21 days instead of 14 and the other to do with the charge certificate statement, not so clear on what the problem with that one is though, could someone clarify?

Thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 13:00
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,757
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Enceladus @ Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 02:39) *
Lambeth haven't advised correct procedure.

They have.
I guess you missed it, being away from the forum for a while.

There are now 'standing directions' from LT in such circumstances.

Briefly, whichever party does not receive something at reps stage is to be furnished with a copy and
then decides how to proceed.

Exactly as they've done here.

QUOTE (Enceladus @ Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 12:22) *
The OP has not been offered another chance to pay the PCN at the discount rate

Interesting point.
It's unclear what happens to the previously extended discount offer where copy rejections
are provided.

This post has been edited by Neil B: Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 12:56


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lab211
post Sun, 26 Aug 2018 - 16:27
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,432



So any further suggestions on the appeal? I am still not totally clear on what the issue is with the statement about the charge certificate on the initial PCN, I would like to include this if it is valid.

Thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sun, 26 Aug 2018 - 16:51
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,384
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (lab211 @ Sun, 26 Aug 2018 - 17:27) *
So any further suggestions on the appeal? I am still not totally clear on what the issue is with the statement about the charge certificate on the initial PCN, I would like to include this if it is valid.

Thanks


Two PCN's only one CC and one revocation what has happened to the second PCN.

Both state 21 days for discount payment and both state the may issue a CC after 28 days beginning with the date of notice. The regulations state the discount period is 14 days and that the PCN must state this.

The PCN does not require that they state a CC may be issued but it does so it should give the correct time frame 28 days beginning with date of service at least two days later. As representations cannot be made after it issue of a CC in telling you they will do so 2 days before they can truncates the time allowed for you to make reps.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 26 Aug 2018 - 17:20
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,395
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (lab211 @ Sun, 26 Aug 2018 - 17:27) *
So any further suggestions on the appeal? I am still not totally clear on what the issue is with the statement about the charge certificate on the initial PCN, I would like to include this if it is valid.

Thanks

For the CC issue, you can use ground 2 from this draft: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...p;#entry1409111

I know it's lengthy but I would recommend you try and get your head round it.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lab211
post Mon, 27 Aug 2018 - 16:06
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,432



Thanks for pointing me to that, I think I get it now.

I've drafted an appeal, using some previous ones posted on here. Does this sounds ok?:


Ground 1: The alleged contravention did not occur:

Whilst I accept that the vehicle under my control did enter a pedestrian zone on Binfield Road, the signage informing motorists of this restriction is inadequate. In particular for eastbound traffic on Clapham Road turning left into Binfield Road the sign at the entrance is positioned such that it is only visible at the last moment after the motorist is fully committed to the turn. Clapham Road is a busy A road such that by the time motorists making a left turn might be able to see the sign it would be dangerous to cancel the manoeuvre and re-join the traffic. Furthermore, on the particular day I entered Binfield Road a market stall was operating which was located on the pavement in a position that obstructed the sign for approaching eastbound traffic, as is evidenced on the CCTV footage.

Ground 2: The penalty demanded exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case: The Penalty Charge Notice is not substantially compliant with the legislation:

The enforcement authority served a Penalty Charge Notice under section 4(2) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. Section 4(8) provides that the PCN must state, amongst other things, "that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable".

The relevant 28 day period is found in paragraph 5 of schedule 1 to the Act, which specifies that:

"Where a penalty charge notice is served on any person and the penalty charge to which it relates is not paid before the end of the relevant period, the enforcing authority may serve on that person a statement (in this paragraph referred to as a “charge certificate”) to the effect that the penalty charge in question is increased by 50 per cent.
(2)The relevant period, in relation to a penalty charge notice is the period of 28 days beginning—
(a)where no representations are made under paragraph 1 above, with the date on which the penalty charge notice is served;"

Paragraph 5 therefore prescribes that the enforcement authority may only increase the penalty charge if it has not been paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the PCN.

The PCN served by the enforcement authority however states that: "Failure to pay the penalty charge in full before the end of the 28 day period may lead to the charge increasing by 50% to £195.00 and a Charge Certificate being served seeking payment of the increased charge", the Penalty Charge Notice also makes the definition “the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of this notice (‘the 28 Day Period’)” and there are no other statements relating to a 28 day period.

While one might ponder why Parliament has required that the penalty charge notice must specify, under section 4(8)(iii) of the Act, that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice, but also that the 28 day period for the purposes of the charge certificate only starts with the date of service of the notice (which is two working days later), ultimately the legislation is what it is and the enforcement authority is required to comply with it if it wishes to lawfully impose penalty charges.

By purporting to empower itself to serve a charge certificate some two days earlier than is permitted, the enforcement authority is acting prejudicially and it is depriving the recipient of the PCN of two days during which the option of either making representations, or indeed payment as the £130 penalty charge should still be available.

While the decisions in previous cases are not binding they can be persuasive and I submit Robert Atlas v London Borough of Barnet (case reference 2170053479) as persuasive authority in this instance. The decision and its review are lengthy and are attached in full to this appeal, however the relevant passages for the purposes of this appeal are as follows:

"Section 4(8)(a) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 provides that A penalty charge notice under this section must [amongst other things] state … (iii) that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice; … (v) that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable; (vi) the amount of the increased charge; … and (viii) that the person on whom the notice is served may be entitled to make representations under paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Act; and (8)(b) requires that they specify the form in which any such representations are to be made.

Paragraph 1(3) of the Schedule provides that the enforcing authority may disregard any such representations which are received by them after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the penalty charge notice in question was served.

Mr Atlas correctly points out that in this case the Penalty Charge Notice states: ‘The penalty charge of £130 must be paid not later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of this notice. If the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period and no representations have been made, an increased charge of 50% to £195 may be payable and a charge certificate may be issued.’

Mr Atlas submits that this wording is not compliant with the requirements of the 2003 Act and, further, effectively limits the time he has to make representations.

I accept this submission. The wording does not comply with the requirements of the Act and therefore effectively limits the time a recipient has to make representations or, indeed, to pay the full penalty charge before a Charge Certificate is issued.
...
Accordingly, I accept the application for review and the appeal must be allowed."

I submit that the same principle applies in the present case, the Penalty Charge Notice does not show substantial compliance with the 2003 Act and it follows that the only penalty that may be demanded is nil.

Ground 3: The penalty demanded exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case: The Penalty Charge Notice is not substantially compliant with the legislation:

The enforcement authority served a Penalty Charge Notice under section 4(2) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. Section 4(8) provides that the PCN must state, amongst other things, "that if the penalty charge is paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the notice, the amount of the penalty charge will be reduced by the specified proportion".
The PCN served by the enforcement authority however states that: "The amount of the penalty charge is reduced by 50% to £65.00 if the penalty charge is paid before the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the date of this notice".
It is indeed generous that an extended discount period is offered, however, the wording is clearly wrong and does not comply with the prescribed format mandated by the legislation.
I bring to your attention case reference 2160047866. The relevant passages for the purposes of this appeal are as follows:
"Article 4 (8) (iv) of the Act states that the Penalty Charge Notice should state ‘that if the penalty charge is paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the notice, the amount of the penalty charge will be reduced by the specified proportion’

The Penalty Charge Notice sent to Miss Allan stated that ‘a reduced charge of £65 is payable….if the penalty charge is paid not later than the last day of the period of 21 days beginning with the date on which this notice was served…’

In its case summary the local authority states that the Penalty Charge Notice does comply with the legislation. I am not satisfied that it does. Although the Penalty Charge Notice offers a more generous timetable than prescribed by the legislation I am not satisfied that the Penalty Charge Notice in this case did comply with the requirements of the London Local Authorities Act 2003."
I argue that the same principle applies in this case, the Penalty Charge Notice does not comply with the 2003 Act and it follows that no penalty may be demanded.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 27 Aug 2018 - 20:58
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,395
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Seems good to me.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lab211
post Tue, 28 Aug 2018 - 20:32
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,432



Thanks again for everyones help with this, I have submitted my appeal now so lets see what happens. I will update once I know the outcome.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lab211
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 15:39
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,432



Just a quick query on this, when I submitted the appeal it went through as an out of time appeal and has to be considered by an adjudicator before the appeal can actually be heard. Is that normal for this sort of case where the notice of rejection wasn't received and ended up getting put back to the appeal stage? The letter I got from the authority just said submit an appeal within 28 days of 13th August it didn't say it was only at the discretion of an adjudicator.

Sorry for all the Q's just want to make sure there isn't some mistake.

This post has been edited by lab211: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 15:40
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 17:13
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,835
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



So much for the so-called directions by LT.

They are clearly flawed, if not actually unlawful, unless the authority advise the owner of the directions. I seem to remember seeing these some time ago and what appears to have happened since is that people have been summarising them, and wrongly, mostly authorities.

Anyway, OP, you must post whatever you’ve received, not summarise because you will miss out something. In this case, I suspect that the webcode in the NOR gives LT a NOR date. But you didn’t receive it! This would support my contention that the directions are not as simple as made out. As the NOR date must effectively be re-set then either the authority must notify LT or the owner input a new date in their online appeal to do which they must know to do so.

So OP, what have you received?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lab211
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 17:21
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,432



What I received are the two letters attatched to post #24 above.

One is a copy of the notice of rejection that I didn't receive which is dated April 27th the second is stating they will start again and allow appeal, saying to appeal at london tribunals using the appeal code on the April 27th letter.

This post has been edited by lab211: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 17:27
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: Monday, 17th December 2018 - 13:28
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.