PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Updated! - Code 83 - ERYC - Rejection of formal representation - Failure to clearly display a valid pay & Display parking ticket
Furai_85
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 16:00
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 12 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,927



I have updated posts below with all the info you guys asked for.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=&...t&p=1347246

This post has been edited by Furai_85: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 - 13:03
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 14)
Advertisement
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 16:00
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 16:09
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,205
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



What does their policy say?

Best to clean up the dash in my view.*

* Is that pic not your car? What pics if any on their website?



This post has been edited by stamfordman: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 16:17
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 16:29
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,018
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



we have seen one document. It is a fairly comprehensive rejection of a request for mitigation. But is that the thrust of your challenge and reps. IF so do not take it to adjudication. Adjudicators cannot rule on discretion.

What we need to see is everything

PCN ALL pages ALL council photos

Your challenge

their rejection

Your supplementary challenge

Any response to that

We might be able to find something you can appeal on. For example the council use the term from date of service when telling you the time by which you should act

Legal convention has it that this is the day after service The law says beginning with date of service (one day earlier) They cannot do this and the high court have ruled as such

So us the docs ( leave in all dates and times) and we can try to help
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 17:42
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,321
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



Clearly the person who wrote that long missive doesn't have enough to do ! However, we haven't seen your representations so please post them. It is correct that adjudicators cannot apply discretion, but they must have regard to the Statutory Guidance. Fluttering tickets have long been a problem with P&D car parks so can I suggest you look on the Traffic Penalty Tribunal list of cases under particular subjects. Also look at the Statutory Guidance on Parking 2015. Until we see your reps it is difficult to give final advice. Did you go in "heavy" with your reps ? If you did, maybe they decided to play hard ball whereas a lighter approach may have seen them cancelling the PCN.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 18:34
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,759
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



If they talk about the "balance of probabilities" it must cast doubt on their decision--I always thought the benefit of the doubt was to be given to an appellant.

Look at Art 52 of the ERYC Order:-

https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/T...kshire/YE20.pdf

No ticket displayed means the charge has not been paid. Ergo the contravention must be Code 11 "Parked without payment of the parking charge".

The other stupidity of this system is that pay by phone drivers display nowt so we have a prejudicial situation where some drivers are penalised and others are not. The display aspect in that regard shows that the Councils discretionary logic is not proportionate.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 18:56
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,018
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Mad Mick V @ Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 18:34) *
If they talk about the "balance of probabilities" it must cast doubt on their decision--I always thought the benefit of the doubt was to be given to an appellant.

Look at Art 52 of the ERYC Order:-

https://tro.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/T...kshire/YE20.pdf

No ticket displayed means the charge has not been paid. Ergo the contravention must be Code 11 "Parked without payment of the parking charge".

The other stupidity of this system is that pay by phone drivers display nowt so we have a prejudicial situation where some drivers are penalised and others are not. The display aspect in that regard shows that the Councils discretionary logic is not proportionate.

Mick


Think that wants exploring a bit Mick,

Op if you have it post the council discretion policy as well as the other docs
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 22:20
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,555
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



IMO, the elephant is the failure to notify the OP correctly of their rights of appeal and the power of the authority to issue a CC, contrary to law.

Can we park the ticket and focus on the NOR.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 22:28
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,018
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



Op is there another page to the rejection and please re instate the dates and other info you have redacted. They can be important
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Furai_85
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 23:23
Post #9


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 12 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,927



I have all the other letters and my appeals. I shall take photos and upload them in the morning.

As far as that letter goes, and a couple of the other questions - that is the only photographic evidence they have. It was not available on their website when I submitted my challenges, it has only appeared in their rejection letter. Its is also 100% not my car. It looks like a dark blue van windscreen, my car is silver. The date in the bottom of the picture is also over a month out from the date of the contravention.

I thought their evidence alone would be enough to get them laughed out of the room, so to speak.

For my informal representation, I went in light hearted. Foolishly I admitted the ticket had been blown out of view on what was a particularly windy day. In my formal representation I found similar cases on this website and used advice given out to construct my letter.

More to follow!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 08:54
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,626
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (Furai_85 @ Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 23:23) *
Its is also 100% not my car. It looks like a dark blue van windscreen, my car is silver. The date in the bottom of the picture is also over a month out from the date of the contravention.

I thought their evidence alone would be enough to get them laughed out of the room, so to speak.

Well yeah but you could have told us that in the first place! rolleyes.gif

and ditto Incandescent; that rejection is appalling: Three pages replacing six sentences.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Furai_85
post Mon, 15 Jan 2018 - 13:05
Post #11


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 12 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,927



Hi there. I have updated this post to have all the info the below comments have asked for.

I am looking for help on how best to word my appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. I have been browsing old threads up to this point, but I have not found a failure to properly display a parking ticket actually reach the stage of going to tribunal, so I thought I would start my own thread.

I have attached all correspondence I have received from the council, including envelopes when I can. I have also included any correspondence I sent to the council, however this was done on their online portal so most of it is from memory. However the councils letters do details some of the information I have sent as well.

I think I have a good chance of overturning this, as their photo evidence is a load of rubbish (literally) on what could be any cars windscreen, (definitely not my car), with many, many errors on the photo including the wrong date, but I don't want to come across in the wrong way or highlighting the wrong things in my letter to the tribunal.

Original parking ticket for the car park - Note, it is just a piece of paper, not one of the ones you can actually stick to the window.



PCN issued by council



I appealed using the online forum. I attached a photo of my ticket (the above is a scan), apologised for the inconvenience and politely asked for the PCN be cancelled based on the fact I had actually purchased the ticket and that adverse weather conditions contributed to the ticket being blown from view. There is space on their online portal for their photo evidence to be attached. At no point was there ever anything uploaded photo wise from their side.

Envelope containing notice of informal appeal being rejected - note Date letter posted is the same as the date on the letter. I thought they had to allow a 3 day grace period?



Letter from the council - Any blank pages have been removed






I'm afraid I got annoyed at their response, believing it to be unreasonable. I wrote them a letter, which is below. I regret sending this letter a little now, but I used it as the base for my formal representation






**I cant add any more pictures. Links below for the rest of them, unless anyone knows of a work around**

They sent the letter back to me, along with their own letter.

http://i65.tinypic.com/vmvzap.jpg

So I waited for the NTO, then re submitted my above letter, but with the angry second paragraph removed and reworded slightly.

Envelope containing NTO - again posted on the same day the letter has been dated.
http://i67.tinypic.com/rwngol.jpg
NTO

http://i64.tinypic.com/kd92ww.jpg
http://i65.tinypic.com/2jdkyyu.jpg
http://i67.tinypic.com/156a8hk.jpg
http://i63.tinypic.com/2u603no.jpg
http://i68.tinypic.com/9i8y08.jpg

As part of my formal representation, i highlighted to the council that I was moving house in a couple of days. A few weeks later, I received this letter asking me to re submit my formal representations.

Envelope containing re-issued NTO - posted on the same day as the letter has been dated.
http://i67.tinypic.com/nb91xf.jpg

Re issued NTO - Only first 2 pages attached, as the rest of the info is the same as the original NTO
http://i64.tinypic.com/2uj0f9i.jpg
http://i67.tinypic.com/fel1dc.jpg

Their Rejection of my formal representation - Annoyingly I lost the envelope, but as usual it was posted on the same day as the letter is dated. This is where their photo evidence suddenly appeared. For the record, that is not my car, i take pride in keeping mine clean. It also seems to be a blue van, but my car is Silver.
http://i66.tinypic.com/s5fzgx.jpg
http://i63.tinypic.com/18d409.jpg
http://i66.tinypic.com/wi2dza.jpg
http://i68.tinypic.com/25p337t.jpg
http://i68.tinypic.com/2hoa8hi.jpg

Sorry its a long post, and sorry I didnt attach it all to start with. Looking forward to seeing your opinions!
Cheers


This post has been edited by Furai_85: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 - 13:08
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Mon, 15 Jan 2018 - 13:40
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,626
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Amongst other things, for the purposes of appeal to TPT refer to Mick's post #5.


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Mon, 15 Jan 2018 - 14:35
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,759
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



Plus their letter of 24th October is complete bollix. Not only have they fettered their discretion with the only one challenge point (where does it say this in the legislation?) but they have committed a procedural impropriety.

They cannot say they will not consider reps submitted within the 28 day period. The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 says (my bold):-

3(2)(b)

---that, if representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified for the purpose before a notice to owner is served—

(i) those representations will be considered;


Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Furai_85
post Mon, 15 Jan 2018 - 15:53
Post #14


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 12 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,927



Thank you.

Do you also agree that the points I made in my appeal and representations are valid and I should re use them when writing to the tribunal? Or should I not bother with those points?

Thanks for the help so far.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Furai_85
post Mon, 29 Jan 2018 - 12:04
Post #15


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 12 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,927



Just though I would let you know, the council decided not to contest my appeal to tribunal. They refuse to concede any ground on the contravention, but because they used the wrong evidence in my final rejection letter, they apparently had no option but to not contest the appeal.

Thanks for the help from those who posted smile.gif
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: Tuesday, 13th November 2018 - 23:20
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.