PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

LEZ massive fine not mine?
A27
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 19:04
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 14 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,434



The LEZ offence was on the A40 Westway 00:59 18/11/17
I got a call from the garage owner who is the registered keeper of a courtesy van which had been loaned to me during repair work to my car. It was early morning on May 9th this year, he insisted I pay £1500 to TFL immediately or he 'would have bailiffs coming round to (his) place'. He repeated the PCN number over and over.
I appealed the PCN in the hope TFL would revert to the original fine given the circumstances. They've sent me a letter acknowledging the correspondence against the PCN. It states 'a response has been sent to the registered keeper'. Here is the challenge with any identifying parts replaced with asterisks, I thought it was the best way to explain. He's now started ringing again insisting I pay. Is this actually my responsibility, particularly at the higher level of a fine that started off at £100 and fifty for prompt payment? If not, what should I do next?

PCN CHALLENGE 9/5/18
THE PCN WAS CORRECTLY ISSUED TO THE CORRECTLY REGISTERED VEHICLE KEEPER/OWNER. THIS IS NOT ME.*****
I HAVE NEVER OWNED OR BEEN THE KEEPER OF VEHICLE REGISTRATION ******
I HAVE BEEN INFORMED BY *****THAT I WAS THE DRIVER AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENCE, SO I MUST PAY £1500, DIRECT TO TFL IMMEDIATELY TO SETTLE IT.
I HAVE BEEN A CUSTOMER OF THE GARAGE AND THE VEHICLE WAS LOANED TO ME AS A 'COURTESY CAR' WITHOUT CHARGE WHILST MY OWN VEHICLE WAS BEING REPAIRED.
I WAS INFORMED ABOUT THE PCN***** BY 'PHONE FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY, 9/5/2018.
I ASKED WHY IT HAD BEEN SO LONG (7 MONTHS EXACTLY) AND HE SAID THAT HIS GARAGE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY CHARGE NOTICE UNTIL 8/2/18. I ASKED 'WHY NOT INFORM ME THEN'? HE SAID HE WAS ABROAD AND IT WAS NOT OPENED. FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE ABOUT THIS WAS RECEIVED BY THE GARAGE ON 10/4/18. THAT HAD ONLY JUST BEEN OPENED YESTERDAY.
I AM TOLD I WAS THE DRIVER, BUT THERE IS NOTHING TO SUPPORT THIS.
IF I DID ACCEPT THAT I WAS DRIVING AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENCE I AM WILLING TO PAY THE ORIGINAL PENALTY CHARGE TO THE GARAGE OR DIRECTLY TO TFL AS AT THE ORIGINAL TIME OF ISSUE. SINCE I HAVE HAD ABSOLUTELY NO INDICATION OF THE CHARGE UNTIL NOW I DO NOT ACCEPT THE INFLATED FINE AS RESPONSIBILITY FOR A VASTLY INFLATED PAYMENT HAS BEEN REDIRECTED TO ME. INFORMATION ABOUT IT WAS NOT GIVEN TO ME AT THE CORRECT TIME, BUT 7 MONTHS AFTER IT WAS WILFULLY DELAYED. I HAVE NO DOCUMENTS TO SUPPORT A WILFUL DELAY AS THE REGISTERED KEEPER HAS NONE AND AS THE VEHICLE DOES NOT OR EVER HAS BELONGED TO ME.


I AM COMPELLED TO CHALLENGE PCN***** BECAUSE THE REGISTERED OWNER BELIEVES THE INFLATED FINE (DUE TO THE OWNER/KEEPER NOT INFORMING WHO HE BELIEVED TO BE THE DRIVER, FOR 7 MONTHS) TO BE ENTIRELY MY RESPONSIBILITY. I HAVE STATED THAT IF IT CAN BE SHOWN CONCLUSIVELY BY THE KEEPER/OWNER THAT I WAS DRIVING, I AM WILLING TO PAY THE UNDERLYING FINE AS AT THE ORIGINAL TIME OF ISSUE, WITH THE DISCOUNT OFFER FOR PAYMENT WITHIN 14 DAYS. THE BASIS FOR MY (PROXY?) CHALLENGE IS THAT IT WAS THE OWNER/ KEEPERS RESPONSIBILITY TO HAVE SUCH IMPORTANT INFORMATION PASSED POSITIVELY TO ME IMMEDIATELY TO AVOID ESCALATED FINES. IF A VEHICLE OWNER /KEEPER IS KNOWINGLY NOT GOING TO BE IN RECEIPT OF POSTED MAIL FOR 7 MONTHS, PARTICULARLY WITH A MOTOR TRADE BUSINESS REMAINING OPEN (OR OTHERWISE) IT WOULD BE EXPECTED AND IS INCUMBENT UPON THE BUSINESS OWNER IN MANY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES TOO, THAT A MANAGER WOULD BE INSTRUCTED TO OPEN LETTERS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES SUCH AS THIS PCN TAKE THE APPROPRIATE AND PROMPT ACTIONS REQUIRED. THIS NOR ANYTHING ELSE TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE TOOK PLACE UNTIL TODAY. I AM WILLING TO MAKE A SWORN OATH OR AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF THIS.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 8)
Advertisement
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 19:04
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Neil B
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 19:48
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,992
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



I read a tiny bit and got bored.

Bailiff is pursuing a debt from the owner of the vehicle.

You are not currently involved or liable.

End of story.

This post has been edited by Neil B: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 19:56


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 19:57
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,903
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



The owner of the vehicle lent you a vehicle that did not comply with LEZ rules, may or may not have warned you of this, then ignored the resultant PCN et al until it ended up with bailiffs.
And this affects you how ?
Most I would be prepared to do, if they did warn me on the LEZ compliance, is pay the original PCN.
Anything else is firmly and fully within their court.

This post has been edited by DancingDad: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 19:57
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 20:41
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,992
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 20:57) *
Most I would be prepared to do, if they did warn me on the LEZ compliance, is pay the original PCN.


By that we mean as a gesture; you are not legally liable for even that.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 22:38
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,903
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (Neil B @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 21:41) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 20:57) *
Most I would be prepared to do, if they did warn me on the LEZ compliance, is pay the original PCN.


By that we mean as a gesture; you are not legally liable for even that.


Not strictly true, the Owner is liable for the PCN but always has separate option of claiming against driver in small claims court for reimbursement.
I cannot see any court accepting driver liability for anything but the original PCN value (plus cost).
There is always an onus on any claimant to mitigate losses and not dealing with a PCN until bailiffs arrive is not something the driver could be held liable for.
Hence if I (as the driver) believed I was in the wrong in getting the PCN I would make the gesture (avoiding any court costs) but that would be the most.
If I didn't believe I was wrong, ie had not been given the information on LEZ compliance, the owner could whistle for anything from me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
A27
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 10:57
Post #6


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 14 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,434



Thanks, Neil and Dancing Dad, It's pretty much as I thought. The best thing now is if I write to the owner telling him that I won't be paying the fine and that if he wishes he has the option of the Small Claims Court. Sorry about the length of my post, I figure that if I get as much info as possible in, then it saves the to and fro of questions. Shame really, it was a good repair and MOT garage.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 11:07
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,992
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (A27 @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 11:57) *
if he wishes he has the option of the Small Claims Court.

Why would you put ideas in his head: He ignored the notices and incurred bailiff fees.
Although it's a funny amount; what's the exact figure? Some LEZ penalties are £1K to start I think, not sure.

To put your mind further at rest, would you ever have been liable at all, i.e. did you sign a 'hire agreement'?

and Dad's other questions on whether you were warned of LEZ compliance?


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Steve_999
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 11:23
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 969
Joined: 12 Jun 2008
From: West Sussex
Member No.: 20,304



QUOTE (Neil B @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 12:07) *
QUOTE (A27 @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 11:57) *
if he wishes he has the option of the Small Claims Court.

Why would you put ideas in his head: He ignored the notices and incurred bailiff fees.
Although it's a funny amount; what's the exact figure? Some LEZ penalties are £1K to start I think, not sure.

To put your mind further at rest, would you ever have been liable at all, i.e. did you sign a 'hire agreement'?

and Dad's other questions on whether you were warned of LEZ compliance?


And do not forget that, by his actions (or inaction), you have been deprived of an opportunity to challenge the penalty.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
A27
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 14:21
Post #9


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 14 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,434



Yeah, you're right Steve_999, I'll just tell him not paying. Just wanted to prevent a load of traumatic exchange and messages on the phone' although it's gone quiet, maybe he's delivering another boat which takes him away for some time.
The vehicle loan was pretty relaxed, no hire agreement or anything signed. There was no warning about LEZ, although in my research recently I discovered the vehicle had been pulled for LEZ a couple of years ago and let off. That could be why TFL were not prepared to do it again upon my appeal, particularly after the seven month delay. I did check the insurance etc.
He hasn't incurred bailiff fees yet; 1500 is the correct figure, I checked, when you leave it that long. When I originally questioned him about the very high amount he said "that's what it's like with all this pollution stuff now and I was done on my bike for 160+, it cost me a fortune".
Anyway, a lesson learned and hopefully will help others.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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, 16th July 2018 - 04:46
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.