PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

County Court Threat, Will I get the chance to appeal?
Stoic1
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 16:48
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 13 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,425



I appealed to Lambeth Council against a PCN which they rejected.

They said I must pay (£165) within 14 days of the Charge Certificate or they will apply to the County Court to recover £165 plus costs.

I am adamant that this PCN is unfair, but I'm not sure if I'll have another opportunity to appeal.

Will I? If so who will it be to?

They do not mention any further appeal process in the letter. Perhaps the offer to appeal will come when the Charge Certificate is served?

I've attached a copy of the letter.

Much appreciated!
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 17)
Advertisement
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 16:48
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 17:02
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,580
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



What is the sequence of events - what is the date of the PCN and have you made several appeals.

You can't appeal a charge certificate.

This post has been edited by stamfordman: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 17:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 21:23
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,124
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



Please show us the full letter with your name and address and car details redacted. The title of the letter is particularly important. Also post the PCN and tell us what has gone on as 'stamfordman' has requested.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Asif Nazir
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 21:24
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38
Joined: 27 May 2018
Member No.: 98,139



what is the basis of court costs?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 23:42
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,617
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



It sounds like some of the correspondence might have gone missing, there is a mechanism in this scenario to "reset" the process so you can appeal. Upload *everything* you've received form the council, redacting just name / address / number plate


--------------------
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
Stoic1
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 15:26
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 13 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,425



More detail!

The sequence of events are below.

But before that, note my mum is the registered owner. Some of the letters are addressed to mum at her address (I call this “address 1”) and some are sent to me at a different address I was staying at (called “address 2”). Not sure if this is of any significance?

1. 28.7.17 - Date of contravention
- Ticket placed on car – fee due of £55
- I did an online challenge within a few days using Lambeth website

2. 2.8.17 – Letter received rejecting online challenge (attached)
- Addressed to me at address 2
- Letter was not seen as I was away

3. 11.1.18 – Order for Recovery (to address 1) (attached)
- A TE7 & TE9 on 17/1/18 sent


4. 5.3.18 – Notice to Owner received (at address 1) (Not attached)
- My mum was away and did not see the letter for a long time. She past it to me and I sent in a long objection with pictures and diagram was sent on 7.4.18
- We assert the Traffic Order was invalid: There was no valid signage as you enter the road (it was pointing in the wrong direction) and no markings/signage where the car was parked

5. 10.4.18 – A Charge Certificate is received (at address 1) (not attached)

6. 5.6.18 – Letter from Lambeth received (at address 1) (attached)
- Lambeth considered the objection sent on 7.4.18 but they have decided not to cancel the PCN. They state there is 14 days to pay from the Charge Certificate


All your advice much appreciated!

People are continuously getting tickets at the location the car was parked. Since my pcn lambeth have improved the signage as you enter the road, but it remains a trap!



Attached File(s)
Attached File  11.1.18_redacted.compressed.pdf ( 252.65K ) Number of downloads: 11
Attached File  5.6.18_redacted.compressed.pdf ( 73.8K ) Number of downloads: 14
Attached File  2.8.17___redacted.compressed.pdf ( 183.96K ) Number of downloads: 13
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 15:49
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,617
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



This is really, really confusing. Not because of the addresses (that's frankly of little importance), but because the sequence of events is really unclear. I suspect there's a procedural impropriety somewhere which can provide a winning appeal, but you need to help us out a bit. This is what I recommend:

Upload *all* the correspondence, starting with the PCN, and including everything that you sent to the council, and everything that the council sent to you. Use imgur.com to host the images. Make a new post in chronological order and use the BB codes (under Share links) to embed the images on here.


--------------------
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
stamfordman
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 17:06
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,580
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Looks to me like you were too late in replying to the NTO.

5.3.18 – Notice to Owner received (at address 1) (Not attached)
I sent in a long objection with pictures and diagram was sent on 7.4.18
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 17:33
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,267
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 18:06) *
Looks to me like you were too late in replying to the NTO.

5.3.18 – Notice to Owner received (at address 1) (Not attached)
I sent in a long objection with pictures and diagram was sent on 7.4.18

He was but their letter shows they 'considered' it, effectively that should keep him in the process and they've failed
to advise his right to appeal to LT.

Second one we've seen recently.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 18:10
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,617
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



I would write back to the council in the following terms:
-----------------------------
The Notice to Owner was received on 5 March 2018, formal representations were sent on 7 April 2018. This was outside of the 28 day period, so the council was entitled to disregard the representations. However the letter of 5 June 2018 says "We have carefully considered what you say...", therefore the authority has considered the representations and it follows that they were not disregarded. Under regulation 9 of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, when the council chooses to consider representations even though they were received outside of the 28 day period, it must serve a Notice of Rejection and specifically that

"that notice shall—

(a)inform the person on whom it is served of his right to appeal to an adjudicator under regulation 10;
(b)indicate the nature of an adjudicator’s power to award costs; and
©describe in general terms the form and manner in which such an appeal is required to be made.
"

As the notice of 5 June 2018 does not comply with regulation 9, the council has committed a procedural impropriety which means that the Penalty Charge Notice must now be cancelled. If you disagree, I now invite you to forward an appeal form to me so that I may appeal to the tribunal.
---------------------------

At the same time, I would write to the Tribunal in the following terms:
------------------------------
Dear Sir or Madam,

I made formal representations against Notice to Owner XXXX outside the 28 day period, the enforcement authority was therefore entitled to disregard my representations. The authority however did not disregard my representations, instead it gave the representations careful consideration, as you can see from the enclosed Notice of Rejection. Unfortunately, the notice was not accompanied by an Appeal Form or a web verification code, so I have been unable to register an appeal. I note that under regulation 10 of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, my right to appeal to the tribunal arises where the council has considered my representations and rejected them, the council's failure to provide an appeal form or a web verification code cannot therefore prevent me from registering an appeal. I therefore now request to register an appeal against Notice to Owner XXXX.
------------------------------

See what they come back with.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 - 17:15


--------------------
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
Stoic1
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 12:25
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 13 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,425



Thanks all - advice hugely appreciated.

I'm going ahead with cp8759's advice.

I'll update here.

biggrin.gif biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Stoic1
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 12:36
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 13 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,425



A quick question - can letter's be addressed from me?

Or do they need to be from the registered keeper? My mum
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 15:14
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,506
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Stoic1 @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 13:36) *
A quick question - can letter's be addressed from me?

Or do they need to be from the registered keeper? My mum



Get mum to sign a note authorising you to act on her behalf then include a copy with anything sent
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
spaceman
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 16:32
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 591
Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,319



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 19:10) *
However the letter of 5 June 2018 says "We have carefully considered what you say...", therefore the authority has considered the representations and it follows that they were not disregarded. Under regulation 9 of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, when the council to consider representations even though they were received outside of the 28 day period, it must serve a Notice of Rejection and specifically that


The regulations do not say this.
The authority may disregard after consideration in accordance with 9(1).
Since under law hierachy regulations take precedence over common law where does it specificially say in them that, once an authority has begun to consider representations submitted outside the required period, they are obliged to issue a NoR if they reject them?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 16:46
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,267
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (spaceman @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 17:32) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 19:10) *
However the letter of 5 June 2018 says "We have carefully considered what you say...", therefore the authority has considered the representations and it follows that they were not disregarded. Under regulation 9 of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, when the council to consider representations even though they were received outside of the 28 day period, it must serve a Notice of Rejection and specifically that


The regulations do not say this.
The authority may disregard after consideration in accordance with 9(1).
Since under law hierachy regulations take precedence over common law where does it specificially say in them that, once an authority has begun to consider representations submitted outside the required period, they are obliged to issue a NoR if they reject them?

You're both talking about the wrong Reg. albeit same effect. It's Reg 5.

And I would say it does:

5.—(1) The enforcement authority may disregard any representations which are received by it after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the relevant notice to owner was served.

(2) Where representations are made to an enforcement authority by virtue of regulation 4(1) and in accordance with regulation 4(2), it shall subject to paragraph (1) be the duty of the enforcement authority—

'subject to para (1)'.
Ergo, if they don't employ (1) the duty falls on them to serve NoR.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 17:20
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,617
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Neil B @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 17:46) *
QUOTE (spaceman @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 17:32) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 19:10) *
However the letter of 5 June 2018 says "We have carefully considered what you say...", therefore the authority has considered the representations and it follows that they were not disregarded. Under regulation 9 of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, when the council to consider representations even though they were received outside of the 28 day period, it must serve a Notice of Rejection and specifically that


The regulations do not say this.
The authority may disregard after consideration in accordance with 9(1).
Since under law hierachy regulations take precedence over common law where does it specificially say in them that, once an authority has begun to consider representations submitted outside the required period, they are obliged to issue a NoR if they reject them?

You're both talking about the wrong Reg. albeit same effect. It's Reg 5.

And I would say it does:

5.—(1) The enforcement authority may disregard any representations which are received by it after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the relevant notice to owner was served.

(2) Where representations are made to an enforcement authority by virtue of regulation 4(1) and in accordance with regulation 4(2), it shall subject to paragraph (1) be the duty of the enforcement authority—

'subject to para (1)'.
Ergo, if they don't employ (1) the duty falls on them to serve NoR.

Sort of. Strictly speaking regulation 5 says they must consider representations received in the 28 day period, and they may disregard representations that are received late. It is not in dispute that in this case they considered the representations even though they were late, as the rejection letter says "We have carefully considered...", so they cannot now turn around and say they disregarded the representations under reg 5(1). Where representations are considered (the letter says "We have carefully considered...") but not accepted (the letter says "...we have decided not to cancel your Penalty Charge Notice"), the duty to serve a NoR which includes information about appeal rights arises under regulation 9, which applies as a consequence of regulation 5. The council's procedural impropriety however is their breach of regulation 9, rather than regulation 5.

Still, with the exception of spaceman we're in agreement about the effect.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 17:24


--------------------
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
hcandersen
post Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 17:22
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,198
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



+ 1, let’s move on.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
spaceman
post Sun, 17 Jun 2018 - 11:52
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 591
Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,319



QUOTE (Neil B @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 17:46) *
QUOTE (spaceman @ Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 17:32) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 19:10) *
However the letter of 5 June 2018 says "We have carefully considered what you say...", therefore the authority has considered the representations and it follows that they were not disregarded. Under regulation 9 of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, when the council to consider representations even though they were received outside of the 28 day period, it must serve a Notice of Rejection and specifically that


The regulations do not say this.
The authority may disregard after consideration in accordance with 9(1).
Since under law hierachy regulations take precedence over common law where does it specificially say in them that, once an authority has begun to consider representations submitted outside the required period, they are obliged to issue a NoR if they reject them?

You're both talking about the wrong Reg. albeit same effect. It's Reg 5.

And I would say it does:

5.—(1) The enforcement authority may disregard any representations which are received by it after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the relevant notice to owner was served.

(2) Where representations are made to an enforcement authority by virtue of regulation 4(1) and in accordance with regulation 4(2), it shall subject to paragraph (1) be the duty of the enforcement authority—

'subject to para (1)'.
Ergo, if they don't employ (1) the duty falls on them to serve NoR.


Sorry, no.
If the person who drafted the regulations had intended this constructuion they would have included it.
They didn't, therefore it doesn't apply.

There is nothing in the regulations which prevents an authority from considering and susequently disregarding representations received after the end of the required period if they choose to do so. 'Consider' and 'disregard' are not mutually exclusive and nor does doing one prevent the authority from doing the other.

An authority does NOT have to issue a NoR in these circumstances because there is nothing in the regulations which requires them to do so. What you have referred to certainly doesn't.

An appellant is not entitled to be issued with a NoR as they have not acquired the right in law to one.




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: Wednesday, 26th September 2018 - 07:52
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.