PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Served or Not?, Issued with PCN, but served after I paid
Irksome
post Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 00:51
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
From: sw11
Member No.: 38,303



Dear PePiPoo experts,

I'll start with the PCN :






And here is the record of the payment I made for the parking session


The images uploaded by the CEO are key and are in the post below.


I was going to the bank, less than 100m away from where I parked. I parked my car and walked towards the bank, past the payment machine with my phone in hand. I expected to see the large sticker on the side of the machine as I have used in the area for years - but there were no stickers on the side of the machine. No problem, living locally (in an adjacent parking zone) I know that Wandsworth have the foresight to have stickers on every lamppost with the 5 digit code for that zone and the number to call to pay. But there was no sticker on the only lamppost I past. So rather than carry on to the corner to the bank, I crossed the road and double backed on myself to hunt for the code - but there are none as I walked half way back up the road ... so I recrossed the road and walked back down the road, and saw a couple of other machines with no stickers on the side, no stickers on the lampposts (we still have them outside my home) until I got back to the car to find the CEO (who I'd clocked when I parked a few hundred yards up the road) apparently issuing a PCN. I explained to him that I was hunting for the 5 digit code to pay for parking, and took him to the machine, to explain there was no large sticker on the side showing the code (indeed you could see the shadow of the previous sticker) when he pointed out to me, in plain sight had I looked that on the face of the machine there is a small sticker with the telephone number and 5 digit code!

As he showed me the code I already had my phone in my hand, at which point he assured me there was no point in paying now, as he had already generated the ticket, and proceeded to remove it from his machine and put it in the plastic envelope. I said that was ridiculous, he'd seen me trying to pay and asking him for the clarification - however he continued to state that he had no ability to show discretion (I specifically asked him on this point). Whilst I discussed this with him (and attempted to prevent him from photographing the car without me in the photo - but specifically did not prevent him from placing the ticket on the car event though he suggested that was what I was trying to do) I managed to call and pay for the parking (and in the middle of doing so someone called me which interrupted the process).

The ticket was placed on my car after (see the 5th image above) I paid for parking ...

May I seek your advice on how best to challenge the PCN, with the aim of getting Wandsworth to drop this PCN without going to adjudication ... I am not he Registered Keeper (but my wife is!).

This post has been edited by Irksome: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 09:42
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 35)
Advertisement
post Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 00:51
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 20:38
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,222
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



The London Council's map is only rough - Camden for example has some Band B roads in the north of the borough.

The map does clearly show two bands in Wandsworth though and Comwyn Road is north of the A3.

I think it's up to the councils to decide what roads are the ones most in demand for parking and band accordingly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 21:08
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,582
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



OP, pl stop cherry-picking photos, it won't pursuade anyone, neither would an argument based on the sign on the machine isn't as big as some others and (possibly) placed in a different position ( to which I would add a better position because it brings all instructions together in one place).

You've posted the key photo i.e. the absolutely clear PBP location on 'the face of the meter, that I completely failed to look at!'

Your choice to make informal reps, but on the basis of what've you've said and shown us I suggest an apologetic letter, not an aggressive one because this would definitely leave you with adjudication (on the basis of no argument at all, just annoyance) with the full, and correct, penalty in play.

And the code is correct. You permit was never valid for this location (unless you can establish the contrary) and therefore 19 was not an option.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 22:45
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,222
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



It's not as bad as HCA makes out. I think you have a good case - the council should display the location clearly, and the idea of having it on the side of the machines is so you can see the location without traipsing all the way to the machine, and in any case Wandsworth has scrimped on signage and just put those small posters on the posts, which have become unreadable in the one you show. You were in the vicinity and eager to pay.

The correct signage should be like this one - which is opposite my house in Hackney:


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irksome
post Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 23:08
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
From: sw11
Member No.: 38,303



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 21:08) *
OP, pl stop cherry-picking photos, it won't pursuade anyone, neither would an argument based on the sign on the machine isn't as big as some others and (possibly) placed in a different position ( to which I would add a better position because it brings all instructions together in one place).

You've posted the key photo i.e. the absolutely clear PBP location on 'the face of the meter, that I completely failed to look at!'

Your choice to make informal reps, but on the basis of what've you've said and shown us I suggest an apologetic letter, not an aggressive one because this would definitely leave you with adjudication (on the basis of no argument at all, just annoyance) with the full, and correct, penalty in play.

And the code is correct. You permit was never valid for this location (unless you can establish the contrary) and therefore 19 was not an option.


Dear HCA, I'm not cherry picking photo's - there were more that I could have uploaded to emphasise my point, but the forum software would not allow me to include further images. Yes you are 100% correct that the key photo is on the machine as I posted, and yes I felt like an idiot not seeing it, but truthfully, it was the CEO who pointed to me where the information I was seeking was situated - it was just not where I expected (legitimate expectation) the information to be based on my regular use of the wandsworth system - I am a daily visitor to this site, and take great interest in the subjects discussed here, offering my advice where I can (although its often removed!), but this was simply me missing the blindingly obvious because I did not expect the signage to be there when everywhere else it has in my experience been placed on the side of the machine or on a nearby lamp-post. I also was trying to pay by phone as I always do (giving me a receipt for expense claim which is straightforward for my team to claim for me).

If my permit was invalid, then surely it was invalid ... how would an adjudicator consider the appropriateness of the contravention code - based on the codes and descriptions listed on the Wandsworth site, there are at least 3, if not 4 that are valid descriptions of my alleged contravention!


Stamfordman, where's the technical argument there however. Yes I agree, its easier in Westminster, for example, where the location code is on the sign. I suppose what you are saying is that the roadside signage doesn't even show that pay by phone/app is possible ... in fact it requires examination at the payment machine to discover that you can pay by phone/app in this particular location.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 23:41
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,222
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



QUOTE (Irksome @ Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 23:08) *
Stamfordman, where's the technical argument there however. Yes I agree, its easier in Westminster, for example, where the location code is on the sign. I suppose what you are saying is that the roadside signage doesn't even show that pay by phone/app is possible ... in fact it requires examination at the payment machine to discover that you can pay by phone/app in this particular location.


Er, you were looking for the location code, I thought. You knew you could pay by phone.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irksome
post Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 00:51
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
From: sw11
Member No.: 38,303



Yes, but as is most applicable to this location (being near Clapham Junction) is what the 'man on the Clapham Omnibus' would understand to be the instructions conveyed by the signage?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
disgrunt
post Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 06:42
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 184
Joined: 8 Dec 2012
Member No.: 58,778



Isn't your informal challenge as simple as I parked up, walked to the nearest machine, the pay by phone code wasn't on the side, checked each machine in the parking area in turn before I realised the code for this area was situated on the phone of the machine. I paid by phone so I was surprised to find a PCN on my return to the vehicle.

The council will surely think it was a case of the CEO checking for your reg on him/her machine and either miss typing or checking before the system had been updated.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 08:32
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,582
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



The signs are clear but wrong, but they are clear. No-one could think other than I must go to the machine to get my ticket.

And on the machine are clear instructions on how to pay and, lo and behold, info on PBP, all in the same place on the machine.

And the OP admits the PBP info is clear and that they simply missed it, by inference because the didn't even look at that side.

The OP needs to come clean with the authority, no fudging or dodging around facts, because I think this could only strengthen their case, not that this would necessarily win.

I have a permit for zone ** in which shared use parking places allow PBP, although not stated on the traffic signs. In my zone, the PBP locations are, in my experience, placed either on the side of the P&D machine or on every lampost in the vicinity. In this case I parked in a shared use bay in zone ** and saw a similar traffic sign which, although referring only to P&D, I thought would allow PBP. As I am a registered and regular PBP user (you would have evidence to support this) I walked to the machine, which was on my route to the shops in any event, and looked at the facing side, the back and the further side but couldn't see a location number. I carried on walking because I was confident that I would see a sign on a lamp column. As it turned out, I couldn't find one (OP, this is where you should be clear IMO). I did not turn into Northcote Road, but instead crossed Cormyn and made my way back on the opposite side looking for the elusive location on a lamp column etc..... It was while conducting these perambulations that I saw the CEO by my car etc....
On this occasion I would ask the authority to exercise discretion and cancel the PCN and also enquire when the council intend to erect correct traffic signs (I've included an example which I've seen in another area) which refer to PBP and include the location number within the sign itself.

This puts all the facts in place as far as I'm aware. They may or may not cancel and you could then decide whether to continue but at least you would have their reasoning.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 09:21
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,222
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



QUOTE (Irksome @ Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 00:51) *
Yes, but as is most applicable to this location (being near Clapham Junction) is what the 'man on the Clapham Omnibus' would understand to be the instructions conveyed by the signage?


What? If you go down that route then you could not have been looking for a location number as I presume you mean someone who knows nothing about Wandsworth. Was that you?

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 08:32) *
The signs are clear but wrong, but they are clear. No-one could think other than I must go to the machine to get my ticket.

In my zone, the PBP locations are, in my experience, placed either on the side of the P&D machine or on every lampost in the vicinity.


However, the OP is a Wandsworth resident who knows that PBP is applicable in all borough P&D bays so is not entering some alien zone where there is life but not as we know it.

And Wandsworth has committed to placing location signage on the side of the machines - this isn't just about the OP's experience.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 21:55
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,582
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



You miss my point.

The OP must construct a compelling argument as to why they did not comply with the instructions on the traffic sign: this is the bottom line.

Their argument is that they adopted exactly the same approach as in their zone - I didn't feel the need to specify that this was also in Wandsworth- which was to give a cursory glance at the traffic sign to show that it was shared use and then simply look for the PBP location where their custom and practice showed that it would be i.e. on a lamp column or side of the machine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irksome
post Fri, 16 Mar 2018 - 23:18
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
From: sw11
Member No.: 38,303



My Wife has only today noticed a reply to her reps from WBC dated 4th March and forwarded it to me this evening ...

QUOTE
I refer to your enquiry received on 08/02/2018 regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice.
The PCN was issued because your vehicle was parked in a resident permit holder’s only bay during prescribed hours without displaying a valid permit or voucher. The hours of restriction are 8:30am to 6:30pm Monday to Saturday.
The photos which prove this contravention are now available on the following link: www.wandsworth.gov.uk/pcnonline by entering the PCN number and the vehicle registration number.
You are contesting this charge on the grounds that you partner could not find the location code on the pay and display machine so therefore went to look for the requisite code on another machine or on other time plate columns but could not find a code.
Whilst this may be the case, as you are now aware, the location code was on the front of the pay and display machine. However in this instance if the location code could not be found, the alternative means of payment could have been used to ensure parking rights were displayed within the 5 minutes grace period given upon parking.
Our records indicate that the PCN was issue at 1:52pm and your parking rights were issued 3 minutes after this. I acknowledge that your partner had a conversation with the officer at this time, however as the PCN was already issued the officer took the right action to place it on the vehicle as it still remained in contravention at the material time.
I would advise that motorists should ensure that they have the wherewithal to pay for valid parking rights before they park. This may mean having adequate change credit/debit card for the length of parking they require, or an operational Smartphone for the Parkmobile service. A motorist should not park if they find that they haven’t the required means of payment.
Given the above, I am satisfied that the PCN was correctly issued and regrettably, you have not established sufficient grounds for cancellation of this penalty charge. As your enquiry was received within the discount period the amount of £65.00, will be accepted if payment is received within 14 days of the date of this letter.
To make a credit or debit card payment please call our 24 hour automated payment line on 0800 021 7763 or pay online by visiting www.wandsworth.gov.uk/pcnonline.
Alternatively, your cheque or postal order should be made payable to “Wandsworth Borough Council”, clearly identified with the Notice number written on the reverse side and sent to: Wandsworth Borough Council (Parking), PO Box No. 4405, London, SW18 2XN.
If payment is not received as detailed, I shall assume that you wish to pursue the matter and shall arrange for a Notice to Owner to be sent to the registered keeper of the vehicle so that formal representations may be made. Should these be rejected, the registered keeper of the vehicle will then be afforded the opportunity to appeal to the Parking Adjudicator.
I should point out that, should you decide to take this course of action, on the expiry of the discount period you will forfeit the right to pay the Penalty Charge at the lower rate and the full charge of £130.00 will be due.
If you are not the registered keeper of the vehicle e.g. the vehicle is a company or lease/hire vehicle, or being used with the owner’s consent, I suggest you advise the keeper that a Notice to Owner (NTO) will be issued.
The options are therefore to pay the PCN or follow the statutory process to submit a formal representation as explained above. Any further information or evidence for the Council's consideration should only be included as part of the formal representation made by the registered keeper. Any additional communication received prior to the issue of the NTO will be filed for information purposes only without a response, although it may be considered if formal representations are received.
This concludes the Council’s dealings in this matter at this stage.


I will dig out the reps my wife sent and update this thread shortly. Due to the delay in our communication, the full £130 is in play so we'll take this to adjudication if WBC cannot be convinced to cancel the PCN first ... I like the last line of their statement!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 16 Mar 2018 - 23:47
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,584
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



See what others think, but I think there's at least one PI ground of appeal. The rejection says "Any additional communication received prior to the issue of the NTO will be filed for information purposes only without a response, although it may be considered if formal representations are received."; however under regulation 3(2)(b) of the appeal regs, they must consider any informal reps they receive, even if they don't respond.

I also take issue with "the alternative means of payment could have been used to ensure parking rights were displayed within the 5 minutes grace period given upon parking."; there is no "grace period" granted by the council out of the goodness of their hearts. It's a matter of law (as found in countless adjudications) that motorists are allowed a short but reasonable time to find out what the restrictions / charges are, and make appropriate payment. Whether the circumstances of the case mean the amount of time taken to find the location code goes beyond the reasonable amount of time allowable is a fact dependant question, but the council appear to have applied a wrong understanding of the law on this point.


--------------------
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
Irksome
post Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 17:03
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
From: sw11
Member No.: 38,303



I realise I haven't updated this thread, and of course I now have to make Formal Reps in response to the NTO.

Further reps were made in response to the previous reps submitted, to which the following reply was received (this is the substantial part of the letter excluding pleasantries).

QUOTE
Any continued motorist challeng against liability to pay a PCN should follow the statutory appeals process. As explained in our previous reply, your options were either to pay the discounted amount within the stated timescales, or for the registered keeper of the vehicle to make formal representations on receipt of a NTO document.

The Council will therefore not enter into further correspondance with you (prior to the issue of the NTO). Accordingly your letter has been filed for information purposes only at this stage and will be considered if formal representations are received.


Am I correct in thinking that this a clear case of fettered discretion?

MTIA - Irksome
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 17:10
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,551
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 17 Mar 2018 - 00:47) *
............I also take issue with "the alternative means of payment could have been used to ensure parking rights were displayed within the 5 minutes grace period given upon parking."; there is no "grace period" granted by the council out of the goodness of their hearts. It's a matter of law (as found in countless adjudications) that motorists are allowed a short but reasonable time to find out what the restrictions / charges are, and make appropriate payment. Whether the circumstances of the case mean the amount of time taken to find the location code goes beyond the reasonable amount of time allowable is a fact dependant question, but the council appear to have applied a wrong understanding of the law on this point.


Yup
Reasonable time not a fixed period... but not one second more.
That 5 minutes was exceeded is only a reason for the PCN to be served, presumably council guidance to CEOs but cannot be used to overturn reasonable time.
The time taken will need to be justified.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 22:22
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,582
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



What NTO?

Pl post it all less personal info.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irksome
post Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 22:39
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
From: sw11
Member No.: 38,303



Best I can do right now

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: Friday, 16th November 2018 - 08:35
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.