PCN but no marking/bays and parked off road, Threads merged |
PCN but no marking/bays and parked off road, Threads merged |
Wed, 24 Oct 2018 - 12:41
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 24 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,571 |
I have been given PCN for not parking in a marked bay however there are no markings and the location is all off road so it cannot be classed as a parking spot anyway, i will add pictures shortly
This post has been edited by My_space: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 - 13:47 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Wed, 24 Oct 2018 - 12:41
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 26 May 2019 - 11:23
Post
#61
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 24 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,571 |
update:
got a letter from the TEC which says: the order for recovery of the unpaid penalty charge has been revoked and the charge certifcate to be cancelled thanks for your help guys |
|
|
Sun, 26 May 2019 - 12:25
Post
#62
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,064 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
This isn't the end.
For clarity, on what grounds did you submit your witness statement, 'I made representations but did not receive a notice of rejection'? |
|
|
Sun, 26 May 2019 - 12:46
Post
#63
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 24 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,571 |
This isn't the end. For clarity, on what grounds did you submit your witness statement, 'I made representations but did not receive a notice of rejection'? yes it was: I made representations about the penalty charge to the enforcing authority concerned within 28 days of the service of the Notice to Owner, but did not receive a rejection notice. |
|
|
Sun, 26 May 2019 - 14:06
Post
#64
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
This isn't the end. For clarity, on what grounds did you submit your witness statement, 'I made representations but did not receive a notice of rejection'? yes it was: I made representations about the penalty charge to the enforcing authority concerned within 28 days of the service of the Notice to Owner, but did not receive a rejection notice. So now the case will be passed to the tribunal. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 17:01
Post
#65
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 24 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,571 |
the case proceeded as follows
Notice of rejection 080719 https://imgur.com/gxBPpAD charge certificate 260719 https://imgur.com/rI1K7hG Decision 120919 https://imgur.com/ic2xapd review page 1 https://imgur.com/5jLQJbl review page 2 https://imgur.com/bsEGZIE review page 3 https://imgur.com/un1UWm4 I challenged the case based on the fact that the charge certificate was sent to early (within 28 days and not after 28 days) Judicial review has been mentioned as the next option in the review What do you suggest next? |
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 17:40
Post
#66
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
No No No!
Ask for a further Review. Knapp is wrong in law to rule that a mistake in issuing the Charge Certificate can be glossed over. If this is deemed a procedural impropriety, issuing something before the legislation permits, an adjudicator "shall" allow the appeal. No if, buts, the appellant hasn't been prejudiced malarkey. An adjudicators hands are tied with the word shall. "If, on an appeal under this regulation, the adjudicator after considering the representations in question together with any other representations made to the effect referred to in regulation 4(2)(b) and any representations made by the enforcement authority, concludes that a ground specified in regulation 4(4) applies, he shall allow the appeal and may give such directions to the enforcement authority as he may consider appropriate for the purpose of giving effect to his decision, and such directions may in particular include directions requiring— (a)the cancellation of the penalty charge notice; (b)the cancellation of the notice to owner; and ©the refund of such sum (if any) as may have been paid to the enforcement authority in respect of the penalty charge". http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/34...gulation/7/made If, on the other hand, he maintains that there was never a substantive appeal on the premature charge certificate that might kill the above, but it would be unfair and prejudicial IMO. Mick This post has been edited by Mad Mick V: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 17:42 |
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 18:35
Post
#67
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 24 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,571 |
No No No! Ask for a further Review. Knapp is wrong in law to rule that a mistake in issuing the Charge Certificate can be glossed over. If this is deemed a procedural impropriety, issuing something before the legislation permits, an adjudicator "shall" allow the appeal. No if, buts, the appellant hasn't been prejudiced malarkey. An adjudicators hands are tied with the word shall. "If, on an appeal under this regulation, the adjudicator after considering the representations in question together with any other representations made to the effect referred to in regulation 4(2)(b) and any representations made by the enforcement authority, concludes that a ground specified in regulation 4(4) applies, he shall allow the appeal and may give such directions to the enforcement authority as he may consider appropriate for the purpose of giving effect to his decision, and such directions may in particular include directions requiring— (a)the cancellation of the penalty charge notice; (b)the cancellation of the notice to owner; and ©the refund of such sum (if any) as may have been paid to the enforcement authority in respect of the penalty charge". http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/34...gulation/7/made If, on the other hand, he maintains that there was never a substantive appeal on the premature charge certificate that might kill the above, but it would be unfair and prejudicial IMO. Mick how do i go about asking for a further review? it says your review request has been dismissed on trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk |
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 18:49
Post
#68
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
What do you suggest next? Next time don't go it alone. I'm sure PMB will suggest something but it's a shame you didn't get our help at an earlier stage, this would have been an easy win. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 19:16
Post
#69
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
What do you suggest next? Next time don't go it alone. I'm sure PMB will suggest something but it's a shame you didn't get our help at an earlier stage, this would have been an easy win. Not without seeing a full copy of the appeal I won't. If the CC was not brought up at appeal then there is not a ground for review -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 19:41
Post
#70
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 24 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,571 |
What do you suggest next? Next time don't go it alone. I'm sure PMB will suggest something but it's a shame you didn't get our help at an earlier stage, this would have been an easy win. Not without seeing a full copy of the appeal I won't. If the CC was not brought up at appeal then there is not a ground for review it was brought up this is the written appeal https://imgur.com/TlKyyRx this is the comments added to the evidence (NOR) https://imgur.com/z5CY1nu this is the comments added to the evidence (CC) https://imgur.com/Hvd5F6P all the above was brought up for the appeal and then later for the review request |
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 20:01
Post
#71
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Ok can I see the request for the original review and I will have a look tomorrow
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 20:09
Post
#72
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 24 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,571 |
Ok can I see the request for the original review and I will have a look tomorrow Review request: https://imgur.com/nHt3EGz This post has been edited by My_space: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 20:09 |
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 20:57
Post
#73
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,064 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
As per PMB, the issue is not whether the taking of any step other than in accordance with the regulations took place, it's whether this was made clear in the OP's appeal. And as we've not seen this decision in full as far as I can see, then I cannot tell.
The other problem for the OP is that a review does not consider the appeal de novo and that the issue of the premature CC does not fall under the heading of new evidence which was not known at the time of the first hearing. By going it alone the OP appears to have dragged defeat from the jaws of victory. |
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 21:08
Post
#74
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 719 Joined: 19 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,615 |
Perhaps there are two angles here?
Firstly the "shall" point, which is a cast iron win in my book, but adjudicators don't like overruling each other. Secondly, I think that by saying 'it doesn't matter, we cancelled it soon after' the council has asked the adjudicator to consider mitigation. Adjudicators can't consider mitigation, but this one has not only considered it but accepted it. It's unfair to have a blanket ban on mitigation from appellants but accept mitigation from councils. See what PMB says, but potentially the second point might open such a can of worms that an adjudicator might accept the first point just so they don't have to consider the second one. |
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 22:11
Post
#75
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
There may be a chance please add the decision in full a copy of the NOR only first page needed and a copy of the CC again only first page
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Tue, 22 Oct 2019 - 16:16
Post
#76
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 24 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,571 |
There may be a chance please add the decision in full a copy of the NOR only first page needed and a copy of the CC again only first page Notice of rejection 080719 https://imgur.com/gxBPpAD NOR 1st page https://imgur.com/zQrBIfO charge certificate 260719 https://imgur.com/rI1K7hG Decision 120919 https://imgur.com/ic2xapd |
|
|
Tue, 22 Oct 2019 - 18:09
Post
#77
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
That is not the whole decision. No matter I have read the review and read fully the high court case the adjudicator has relied on to reach his decision that in cancelling the CC brought adherence to the regulation into substantial compliance.
You would need to argue that the adjudicator erred in law or made a finding in fact that was so unreasonable that no rational person could make it. I do not think you could make this argument The relevance of the CC needed to be made at appeal. You could apply for a judicial review and argue that strict interpretation should be applied to the regulations but this would cost far more than the outstanding penalty, without sure success I advise you pay the penalty and let it go, but the choice is yours -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Wed, 23 Oct 2019 - 16:34
Post
#78
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I think a substantive judicial review might succeed, but for a judicial review you'd have to persuade the court to give you permission to bring the claim. I very much doubt you'd get past the permission stage because there's no real reason why the CC issue wasn't fully argued before the tribunal, so chances are the court would refuse you permission to bring the claim.
-------------------- 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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 09:31 |