12 PCNs for parking on DYL |
12 PCNs for parking on DYL |
Mon, 1 Nov 2021 - 22:40
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 30 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,567 |
Hi All,
I accidentally parked my car on DYL late at night on the 17th August after driving my car back from holiday. I was very tired and had not being paying much attention as I parked my car. This street is unmarked and has no restrictions so I use it to park my car for extended periods of time. However, at the end of the street the DYL for the next street begin. This time my car overlapped these DYL. Over the next few weeks, unbeknownst to me PCNs had been issued many times and it wasn't till several weeks later that I had discovered this was the case. I had recently purchased the car, and had yet to transfer ownership to myself, so these letters were being issued to the previous owner, who informed me of the case. Once informed I immediately wrote to the DVLA and the PCNs were transferred to me. Although it was too late and now I am sitting with 12 PCNs. I am shocked by the number of PCNs issued and I was surprised they hadn't just towed the car away. The PCNs total an eye watering £840. I have paid off the first two NTOs that arrived through the post (ref. 6 & 10). The PCNs are tabled here, please refer to the picture reference when viewing photos: Pic Ref. | Date of Contravention | Time | Offence | Status | Original PCN 1 | 18/08/2021 | 12:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | NTO – Unpaid | Missing from vehicle 2 | 23/08/2021 | 13:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | NTO – Unpaid | Missing from vehicle 3 | 25/08/2021 | 11:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | NTO – Unpaid | Missing from vehicle 4 | 28/08/2021 | 14:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | NTO – Unpaid | Missing from vehicle 5 | 02/09/2021 | 13:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | PCN Issued | Attached 6 | 09/09/2021 | 10:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | NTO – Paid | Missing from vehicle 7 | 11/09/2021 | 12:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | PCN Issued | Attached 8 | 17/09/2021 | 12:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | PCN Issued | Attached 9 | 18/09/2021 | 17:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | PCN Issued | Attached 10 | 21/09/2021 | 16:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | NTO – Paid | Missing from vehicle 11 | 23/09/2021 | 16:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | NTO – Unpaid | Missing from vehicle 12 | 24/09/2021 | 13:XX | 01 - Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours | PCN Issued | Attached When I found my car, many of the above PCNs were missing (those that have NTOs) Here are links to the original PCNs: ORIGINAL PCNS Ref. Image Link 5 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/4328/Pydfjd.jpg 7 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/3313/ARmhjf.jpg 8 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1010/TcGIht.jpg 9 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/2470/24gN5C.jpg 12 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1957/dQvnKg.jpg ORIGINAL NTOS Ref. Image Link 1 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/7803/07jdA0.jpg 2 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/1376/Zc6IeM.jpg 3 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/7558/78pV8k.jpg 4 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/6063/Cyrwam.jpg 6 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/688/hwtKj6.jpg 10 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/4277/GlAoxx.jpg I have attached photos of the online viewable PCNs: ONLINE PCNS Ref. Image Link 1 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/7205/ot1qZ3.jpg 2 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/2210/8AQP6d.jpg 3 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/2654/TcDL2u.jpg 4 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/9751/kCDOzl.jpg 5 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/5473/LE5JvZ.jpg 6 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/3782/PMqopT.jpg 7 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/4448/TDuSEV.jpg 8 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/4848/vOzRpR.jpg 9 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/1074/sgq0WS.jpg 10 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/9750/qmSFxL.jpg 11 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/9520/vQxbuS.jpg 12 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/1576/rdgdt1.jpg I have attached pictures of the rear and front tyres, showing that the vehicle had not moved for the entire duration: REAR TYRE Ref. Image Link 1 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/3574/FJaO45.jpg 2 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/5154/2iZAm4.jpg 3 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/2653/ut8FKP.jpg 4 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/3706/uqWEu9.jpg 5 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/6356/EDXsUc.jpg 6 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/3749/SfTlnJ.jpg 7 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/6100/odueFy.jpg 8 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/2416/DbWLMs.jpg 9 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1598/8Qv097.jpg 10 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1651/XHJVPH.jpg 11 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/826/nOEDec.jpg 12 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/7425/RCn7ta.jpg FRONT TYRE (FRONT VIEW) Ref. Image Link 1 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/9407/qoGPwm.jpg 2 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/9266/Z41pCr.jpg 3 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/4420/IBAMpH.jpg 4 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/855/bsLPOR.jpg 5 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/8201/vA9vnI.jpg 6 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/1954/kpZgB2.jpg 7 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/9093/uq8aXs.jpg 8 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/9176/QIDO1L.jpg 9 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/7503/AAvvA3.jpg 10 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1055/py2jpi.jpg 11 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/852/3kkgki.jpg 12 https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1060/rV2lyA.jpg STREET VIEW https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/6638/Qi7qcY.jpg I wish to appeal as I've read that multiple PCNs cannot be enforced for a continuous contravention. Many thanks in advance for any help and advice. It is a very stressful situation to find myself in as I face redundancy from my job. This post has been edited by seaofcymbals: Mon, 1 Nov 2021 - 22:50 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 1 Nov 2021 - 22:40
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 18 Nov 2021 - 12:18
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 21,018 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Make sure every PCN is linked in your reps to the others, because it is a continuous contravention. If the car was an obstruction they could have always towed it at any time. This is a sneaky way to make more money than a tow nets them.
|
|
|
Sat, 27 Nov 2021 - 19:21
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 30 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,567 |
I agree there is only one contravention and this isn’t a bad one. I would suggest you ask your local councillor to have a word on your behalf as you have already paid twice what you owe. You also need to make representations against the Notices to Owner on time. All you have to say is that there was only one contravention and you have paid for two. Did you (Shall you) contact your local councilor - it is a tiny contravention? If the law is only one PCN is valid you have been put to an enormous lot of trouble and stress unreasonably. Yes, I contacted my local councilor and they had this response: "Hi, I’ve had a response from Parking Services. They’ve checked their records and gone through the photos for each PCN. Apparently, only one wheel needs to be on the yellow line for a contravention to have occurred - they’ve said that on each occasion your vehicle was parked with the back wheel over the double yellow lines. They’ve checked the date and times of each PCN and they all fall within the correct time limits, i.e. none of them were issued within 24 hours of each other. So, it doesn’t look like they will delete any of the PCNs. I’m sorry this isn’t the outcome you would have wanted. However, it might still be worth you appealing: www.sheffield.gov.uk/home/parking/appeal-against-parking-bus-lane-fine Best wishes." Again, they seem to make the argument about the 24 hour rule. |
|
|
Sat, 27 Nov 2021 - 19:27
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Again, they seem to make the argument about the 24 hour rule. Well lots of councils rely on this rule, the problem is that no court or tribunal in the land has ever upheld that such a rule exists. So if you carry on to the tribunal, we can give them a bit of an education. Have you received NTOs for all of the PCNs, and have you challenged all of them? This post has been edited by cp8759: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 - 19:28 -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sat, 27 Nov 2021 - 19:44
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 30 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,567 |
None of them have the discount available anymore, so I'll wait for NTOs to come through for the rest and reply to those with the same appeal. Should I expect the same response to the NTOs then? They might cancel some at the NTO stage, it's hard to say. Let us know if you get a Notice of Rejection for any of them. Hi, I have received Notices of Rejection on the 5 NTOs, each has 4 pages and are pretty much identical. https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/2929/zIOOHo.jpg https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1562/5AkyLn.jpg https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/1607/gADe2Z.jpg https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/2006/rLhbzX.jpg Interesting how they state that DYL apply 24/7 and note my comment about the same contravention, but they don't seem to argue against this point directly, instead stating that PCNs can be issued on different days whilst the car has not moved. Still no reference to a law which allows this. |
|
|
Sat, 27 Nov 2021 - 20:01
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
Councils have this fond belief that there is a magic witching hour, presumably at midnight, that somehow resets the clock and changes the law.
As others have said, they are simply wrong. They had the option to remove the vehicle, they don't have the option to penalise you repeatedly for the same offence. |
|
|
Sat, 27 Nov 2021 - 20:09
Post
#26
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 30 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,567 |
Again, they seem to make the argument about the 24 hour rule. Well lots of councils rely on this rule, the problem is that no court or tribunal in the land has ever upheld that such a rule exists. So if you carry on to the tribunal, we can give them a bit of an education. Have you received NTOs for all of the PCNs, and have you challenged all of them? Appalling really that they can get away this. Current status: PCNs received: 12/12 NTOs received: 8/12 NTOs appealed: 6/12 NTOs paid: 2/12 NORs received: 5/12 So still waiting on some 4 more NTOs (Rejected challenged PCNs) to arrive and will appeal them too. |
|
|
Sat, 27 Nov 2021 - 22:22
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,023 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 Member No.: 59,932 |
I would be taking this story, if it was me, to the Sheffield Star
-------------------- All advice given by me on PePiPoo is on a pro bono basis (i.e. free). PePiPoo relies on Donations so do donate if you can. Sometimes I will, in addition, personally offer to represent you at London Tribunals (i.e. within greater London only) & if you wish me to I will ask you to make a voluntary donation, if the Appeal is won, directly to the North London Hospice.
|
|
|
Mon, 29 Nov 2021 - 15:15
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 30 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,567 |
Shall I wait for all the Notices of Rejection to arrive before appealing to the independent adjudicator? Shall I use the same wording for the appeal as I have done previously (arguing the continuous contravention and quoting all PCNs in each appeal)?
|
|
|
Tue, 30 Nov 2021 - 11:37
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Shall I wait for all the Notices of Rejection to arrive before appealing to the independent adjudicator? Shall I use the same wording for the appeal as I have done previously (arguing the continuous contravention and quoting all PCNs in each appeal)? Before you appeal anything, would you like me to represent you at the tribunal (no fees involved)? -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Wed, 1 Dec 2021 - 21:59
Post
#30
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 30 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,567 |
Yes that would be a great help. Thank you for offering that, I really appreciate it.
|
|
|
Fri, 3 Dec 2021 - 11:28
Post
#31
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I'll send you a PM.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 2 May 2022 - 20:08
Post
#32
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
So once more we have a split between LT and TPT: apparently outside of London a council can issue and enforce as many PCNs as they wish: https://bit.ly/3KCeJve
seaofcymbals, whether you want to take this further is a matter for you, I would however say that you have an arguable case. I also think you'd be able to crowdsource the funds for a judicial review without too much difficulty. This post has been edited by cp8759: Mon, 2 May 2022 - 20:12 -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 2 May 2022 - 20:52
Post
#33
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 720 Joined: 19 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,615 |
I also think you'd be able to crowdsource the funds for a judicial review without too much difficulty. If needed, I would definitely chip in for this. Article 14 (4) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (which the UK is signatory to) states: "No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again for an offence for which he has already been finally convicted or acquitted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of each country." The TPT does not have the authority to overrule this. |
|
|
Tue, 3 May 2022 - 08:53
Post
#34
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I think the High Court would overrule the tribunal based on good old fashioned double-jeopardy.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 3 May 2022 - 09:00
Post
#35
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 21,018 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Just wondering what would have happened under the old, criminal law, system.
|
|
|
Tue, 3 May 2022 - 12:52
Post
#36
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,161 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
The adjudicator's reasoning is very detailed. Specifically, their statement that there is no statutory bar or High Court decision that prevents an authority issuing more than a single PCN.
This thread seems to involve two issues now: the circumstances of the case and the principle of continuous contravention. Taking the first, the decision has brought to light the clearest set of circumstances since post #1. What leaps out at me are: ..and had not being paying much attention as I parked my car. This street is unmarked and has no restrictions so I use it to park my car for extended periods of time. and, ..they left their vehicle approximately 11 minutes' walk from their house.. And this very pertinent comment: '..why should wrongful behaviour on day one trigger an immunity at the time of the next patrol on another date? Add to this that the restriction is '..allowing a vehicle to remain at rest' (the adjudicator's words) and '..no person shall cause or permit any vehicle to wait in any road...' (the provisions of the TRO). Not simply 'cause' but 'cause or permit'. And, '..Mr .. did not offer any factual account to the council or during his appeal to this tribunal about the circumstances..' IMO, any JR (which would be a review of this decision) would necessarily look at this case on its merits, not the matter of principle in isolation. However, if it was found that, as a matter of legal interpretation, only the first penalty is payable for causing or permitting a vehicle to wait in circumstances where the waiting and the restriction are continuous then this case would naturally succeed. As far as the specific substantive merits of this case are concerned, sadly I wouldn't bet my money on even getting past the permission stage. |
|
|
Tue, 3 May 2022 - 14:28
Post
#37
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
It's a rotten decision with lack of duty to consider the multiple PCNs for a trivial contravention - if it had been more blatant paradoxically the car may have been towed and the OP alerted sooner.
However without looking back at the thread maybe more could have been made of the triviality and duty to consider. Maybe the lesson here is that all arguments need to be deployed even in the face of a seemingly slam dunk case. In the ruling I don't get the reliance on operational guidance, which is not regulation. I think that's a cop out. As for: For removal to happen on the second day of parking on double yellow lines in place of issue of a second PCN, might well be regarded as a disproportionate response. Not something we see from most London boroughs. This post has been edited by stamfordman: Tue, 3 May 2022 - 14:34 |
|
|
Tue, 3 May 2022 - 14:49
Post
#38
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,161 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
However without looking back at the thread maybe more could have been made of the triviality and duty to consider The decision is shouting this loud and clear IMO. Had the OP even tried to explain (and by extension try to justify) to the authority in the first instance why they mistakenly parked with a third of their car on DYL, did not return to check after their holiday tiredness had worn off and continued to ignore their car for an extended period, despite this being out of sight and some distance from their house, then the adjudicator could have used their compelling reasons power and scrutinised the authority's actions under the heading of proportionality. But they didn't. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Wednesday, 17th April 2024 - 20:28 |