Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

FightBack Forums _ Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices _ Camden Mobile Payment? Already paid by machine but PCN?! Help 2 appeal

Posted by: pimlico35 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 - 22:50
Post #1340085

Hi folks,

I received a surprise PCN this week for parking in a bay (where I previously paid for parking there using the parking machine; cash) - the PCN says its because its mobile phone payment only.

Im a bit shocked for these reasons:

Ive parked here or nearby bays since July 2017 and never received any PCNs - I paid for parking using the machine (I always use).
I dont always have my mobile with me.
There are a few areas around here where you can use the machine to pay for parking, why I should be disadvantaged by not using mobile phone does not seem right.

I am going to appeal, as they will see that I have paid for parking, that I use this or a machine close by to park in the public parking bays.

On another note, now having checked and photographed the machine & signage plus another area where I regularly park - it is quite misleading; for example in another bay I use each week there is a parking machine where i pay for parking using cash, the sign close to that states mobile payments but does not mention the option to pay by machine which is a couple of feet from it. It seems deliberately misleading plus the signs are high up so not very user friendly.

anyone with any advice or similar experience please let me know as I want to appeal in the next couple of days.

Many thanks

Posted by: DancingDad Fri, 15 Dec 2017 - 22:59
Post #1340087

Post up the PCN please
And a location (streetview) and any photos you have of the signs.

Posted by: pimlico35 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 - 23:50
Post #1340094

Pics:




Other signs & parking meter used:




Streetview: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Mansfield+Rd,+London+NW3+2JE/@51.5514681,-0.1580558,17z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x48761af70c170c77:0xf3e27e63fdb7aa38!8m2!3d51.5539998!4d-0.1545582

Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 00:57
Post #1340100

This seems to be where the white van is shown in your pics, not sure about the VW position.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5533879,-0.1570866,3a,90y,195.94h,74.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seFFC7Op26LvnFA4hnVVg8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Certainly seems like mixed messages, restriction sign is clear enough "Pay by Phone" but then to have a payment machine right alongside in same bay ?

I wonder if they have updated their Traffic Orders to reflect only paying by phone ?

Posted by: Mad Mick V Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 09:00
Post #1340116

Traffic Orders here:-

https://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/transport-and-streets/parking/traffic-order-library-folder/controlled-parking-zone-traffic-orders/twocolumn/ca-l-west-kentish-town/

I would take this to adjudication just on the juxtaposition of sign and ticket machine--totally confusing.

I cannot see that the traffic orders impose an exclusive pay by phone situation but maybe I am misreading.

The other issue, of course, is whether any UK Council can impose this sort of condition. I can see how special bays for doctors or businesses have credence but giving phone users priority in a bog standard parking bay must breach the equality legislation and the ECHR.

Mick

Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 09:51
Post #1340121

Ooooh, so used to London Councils not having traffic orders readily available, didn't look.
Thanks MMV smile.gif

Article 12, specifically 12.4 to 12.5 refers to how the charge can be paid.
I cannot see anything that restricts to only PBP, cash is a valid alternative.

I assume that the P&D ticket was displayed and visible ?

Can't read the PCN either, What is the exact wording on the contravention please ?
All I can make out is summat about mobile phone payment.

Posted by: pimlico35 Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 12:18
Post #1340146

Hi,

Many thanks; just to answer questions:

1. No P&D ticket as the machine "assures" that payment has been made & no receipt necessary.
2. Where the car was parked Southampton Road; its on the junction with Mansfield Road. The pole displaying Mobile Payments only is on Southampton Rd (Im not sure if this is a new sign but previously I paid at the machine on mansfield road as it was the closest machine).
3. where the van is parked is Mansfield Rd & has the ticket machine beside it. [ the notice on the pole is very high up so anyone small in stature has a job trying to read the details!)

I cant see in the TMO where it can ONLY be a mobile payment; seems unreasonable. I see some other motorist got a ticket the other day at the same bay; presumably they had been using the machine as they had before.

I would appeal on the grounds that signage and machines are misleading in that vicinity and also that a precedent had been set as I had continued to use this method of payment for almost 1 year. their records will show from the machines that I had paid twice each week for parking since May/June so it wasnt that I didnt want to pay.

any thoughts? Ive uploaded slightly clearer images.

thanks


Posted by: Mad Mick V Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 14:07
Post #1340158

OP---did you have to input your VRM when you paid?

Mick

Posted by: pimlico35 Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 17:35
Post #1340208

Hi Mick,

Yes - input VRM each time - so records go back to May 2017. So theres proof that I had paid.
thanks

Posted by: hcandersen Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 22:48
Post #1340302

The sign does not require the display of a ticket, therefore the ONLY issue, and it is the only issue, in the context of the alleged contravention is whether the parking charge was paid.

So, what evidence do you have?

None of a physical nature, your case rests wholly on your claim to have paid the correct parking charge in to the machine.

Can we focus on this please. For example, did you have to enter your reg no? If not, how can you prove you paid the charge?

Posted by: Bogsy Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:06
Post #1340307

The full contravention description stated on the PCN seems to be unauthorised.

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/download/file/fid/20848

Could be used a leverage.

Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:25
Post #1340312

I've been bouncing back and forth in the Traffic Order (Schedules seem very light to me but putting that to one side)
The contravention stated is non payment of the parking charge.
The order takes display of ticket or display on CEO handheld as evidence of payment
We know there would be no ticket but that VRM is input.
Which comes down to CEO handheld did not show the payment for some reason
Or wrong VRM?

Apart from computer glitch, the only reason I can see that could mean the handheld did not show payment is possibly on location.
The signs in Mansfield where paid and in Southampton where parked seem to show different locations for PBP payment.
Whether this would create the no show, no idea.

Differing locations could mean different payment amount required. Which is why I was looking in schedules.
Looks to be same across wide areas so should not be a problem, just cannot confirm at moment.

Cannot discount wrong VRM

To me this comes down to a challenge that you did pay, ask (demand) that they check their records for your VRM or one similar at relevant time (One digit or letter adrift)
See what comes back.

QUOTE (Bogsy @ Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:06) *
The full contravention description stated on the PCN seems to be unauthorised.

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/download/file/fid/20848

Could be used a leverage.


I was wondering on that but came down on substantially compliant with the mobile phone bit after the hyphen, which adds an explanation without changing the contravention wording.
Obviously not strictly compliant but ??

Posted by: Bogsy Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:31
Post #1340315

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:25) *
I was wondering on that but came down on substantially compliant with the mobile phone bit after the hyphen, which adds an explanation without changing the contravention wording.
Obviously not strictly compliant but ??


I don't disagree but worth throwing in to the mix as it gives a sympathetic adjudicator something to latch on to. Neither of the suffixes directly refer to moblie phone parking so this bit is the council's own invention.

Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:41
Post #1340317

QUOTE (Bogsy @ Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:31) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:25) *
I was wondering on that but came down on substantially compliant with the mobile phone bit after the hyphen, which adds an explanation without changing the contravention wording.
Obviously not strictly compliant but ??


I don't disagree but worth throwing in to the mix as it gives a sympathetic adjudicator something to latch on to. Neither of the suffixes directly refer to moblie phone parking so this bit is the council's own invention.


Certainly agree to toss it into the mix should it progress to next stage and beyond.
Wouldn't at moment as I hope council will find a payment and I'd rather try a gentle challenge then pee them off.

Posted by: pimlico35 Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:41
Post #1340318

Thanks folks,

Yes I had to enter the reg no at the ticket machine - and have done so twice every week since May/June so there is definite proof that I have been making regular payments since then - without EVER getting a PCN.

This includes parking on Southampton Road and paying at the machine in Mansfield Road. The machines dont give receipts or tickets to display; which is why I assumed that paying at the machine would suffice.

Many thanks for responses, I will make my appeal on the grounds that payment was made - should I say anything about confusion of signs at this stage ... ??

smile.gif


Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:56
Post #1340325

QUOTE (pimlico35 @ Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:41) *
........- should I say anything about confusion of signs at this stage ... ??

smile.gif


Personally I wouldn't. Opinion only but I reckon keep it simple and sweet at this stage.
We can add items later and counter (if possible) whatever comes back.
But at the moment, we want them to do you a favour and actually check the records for a payment.

Dear Sirs
Ref PCN ???
I simply do not understand why I got a PCN.
I parked in my usual spot and made payment at the machine on ???? reference number ??? as I have done on numerous occasions.
Obviously without a payment ticket I am reliant on the machine correctly identifying the payment to my vehicle registration number and can only assume something went wrong with the system on this occasion.
Your records will show a payment against my registration number ???? made at approximately ??? time on ???date
Would you kindly review your records to find the payment.
I know I paid, I always do so hopefully, even if you find a minor error, perhaps I missed a digit on the registration number or the machine hiccupped, ask that you use your discretion to cancel this PCN.
Should you decide not to, please enclose a copy of the records for that time period and machine so I may check and consider my options on further action.
Hugs and kisses.

My take on it, once they come back, we will know what they are actually rejecting for and can use sign confusion, legitimate expectation etc but at the moment are firing in the dark for a response.

Posted by: pimlico35 Sun, 17 Dec 2017 - 00:01
Post #1340326

tongue.gif tongue.gif tongue.gif tongue.gif tongue.gif tongue.gif tongue.gif

Wonderful! Thank you for this - I hope they get the laughs I did reading this!!!

Lets see.. !!!

Posted by: Bogsy Sun, 17 Dec 2017 - 00:01
Post #1340328

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 16 Dec 2017 - 23:41) *
Certainly agree to toss it into the mix should it progress to next stage and beyond.
Wouldn't at moment as I hope council will find a payment and I'd rather try a gentle challenge then pee them off.


I find these difficult to call. Personally I prefer to mention all points at all stages so that if a case goes to adjudication an adjudicator can see that there has been consistency throughout. They prefer this to extra things being tagged on at each stage. Experience has also shown me that the more awkward points get ignored by councils and this can work in a persons favour at adjudication where improper consideration can be used to allow an appeal that has no other compelling strengths.

I don't think a gentle enquiry should pee a council off. I'd simply end by saying that I notice that the contravention description used is not prescribed by London Councils and perhaps the council is unaware of this and is this grounds for cancelling the PCN?

Draw them gently into either ignoring or bullshitting. Either strengthens the OP's hand should he proceed.

Posted by: DancingDad Sun, 17 Dec 2017 - 00:05
Post #1340330

QUOTE (Bogsy @ Sun, 17 Dec 2017 - 00:01) *
.......I don't think a gentle enquiry should pee a council off. I'd simply end by saying that I notice that the contravention description used is not prescribed by London Councils and perhaps the council is unaware of this and is this grounds for cancelling the PCN?

Draw them gently into either ignoring or bullshitting. Either strengthens the OP's hand should he proceed.


In that respect, agreed.

It is a fishing expedition after all. smile.gif

Posted by: Mad Mick V Sun, 17 Dec 2017 - 10:17
Post #1340357

Another issue which should be explored is whether the pay by phone parking fee is different from the ticket parking fee. Not too concerned about minor add ons to use PBP but the core fee.

The TMO quotes the fee but this is a new situation where there could be differentials.

Mick

Posted by: hcandersen Sun, 17 Dec 2017 - 13:56
Post #1340405

IMO, this would be for the authority to put in their response e.g. the CEO had record of a payment, but an incorrect and underpayment, or no record at all, or one for a nearly VRM, or one for this VRM but at a different location etc... all for the authority to deal with in theeir consideration based upon the OP's assertion.

Posted by: DancingDad Sun, 17 Dec 2017 - 14:26
Post #1340409

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 17 Dec 2017 - 13:56) *
IMO, this would be for the authority to put in their response e.g. the CEO had record of a payment, but an incorrect and underpayment, or no record at all, or one for a nearly VRM, or one for this VRM but at a different location etc... all for the authority to deal with in theeir consideration based upon the OP's assertion.


That's my thinking.
At the moment we have a PCN which could be due to many things, including CEO or driver error.
Until the authority gives a reason, we can only speculate.

Posted by: pimlico35 Fri, 22 Dec 2017 - 15:43
Post #1341807

Hi Folks,

Thanks for all your help with this - just putting in appeal against PCN and went back to area and looked at sign again. there is a sign (turned away from main park by mobile sign) and it appears that there are details about paying at a machine - they specifiy a particular machine which is further away than one I paid in - Im wondering now if that will be used against me......???

Posted by: DancingDad Fri, 22 Dec 2017 - 17:18
Post #1341818

You missed that you got photos of the sign and any other that may be relevant ?

Re the sign and machine, could be the reason for the PCN but makes no change to the basic challenge.
I parked
I paid at machine, inputting my PCN as required etc

Posted by: vicelessone Fri, 22 Dec 2017 - 17:59
Post #1341825

Ignore me if you like - I'm not an expert, just someone who has been helped by this forum in the past.

This thread actually reminds me of phone-in votes to reality TV. Didn't the TV stations get a right bollocking when it was found that people could still vote (and pay extortionate amounts for these phone calls) even though the vote wasn't counted? They now have to put ENORMOUS warnings about voting late.

How DARE Camden leave machines in a condition where you think you have paid for your parking, but in fact you haven't. OK. so it seems that they may have put an ADDITIONAL sign up to the effect that only one pay machine worked. How many notices are we poor motorists supposed to search for?

Just thoughts, that might spark one of you experts into a new way of thinking. smile.gif

Posted by: pimlico35 Fri, 22 Dec 2017 - 21:00
Post #1341847

Thanks - I happened to be there again this week and just to be absolutely certain I had all the facts; I walked to parking sign and then saw the smaller sign re using a ticket machine; how very naughty of them to have the text relating to where the nearest ticket machine in fainter type.....

Will put the challenge in and keep you posted - thanks for all the help though it really helps get a bit of reassurance happy.gif

Posted by: pimlico35 Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 16:14
Post #1345917

SUCCESS!!!

Received a response today:
After investigating the case, and taking into consideration the points you have raised, I have
decided to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
Our paid for parking records confirm that a cashless parking session had been activated for
your vehicle between 11:08 - 12:11 on Tuesday 12/12/2017 for Southampton Road. However,
in this instance the PCN issued at 11:37 as at the time of checking, the database had yet to be
updated with your valid payment when the Civil Enforcement Officer searched your vehicle
registration. There sometimes can be a slight delay in the system updating once payment had
been made.



Thank you everyone!!!
cool.gif cool.gif cool.gif cool.gif cool.gif

Posted by: DancingDad Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 19:48
Post #1345979

Excellent.
But a bit dumbfounded, in fact gobsmacked with a rather putrid herring that records may not be updated for best part of 30 minutes (or longer).
And this led to the PCN.

How can this be a robust system that is unlikely to lead to errors.

Posted by: mickR Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 20:53
Post #1345999

30 mins delay ??? WTF!! complete bowlacs

Posted by: stamfordman Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 21:31
Post #1346014

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 19:48) *
Excellent.
But a bit dumbfounded, in fact gobsmacked with a rather putrid herring that records may not be updated for best part of 30 minutes (or longer).
And this led to the PCN.

How can this be a robust system that is unlikely to lead to errors.



Add a big dose of codswollop to your herring. They are making this up.

Posted by: DancingDad Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 22:15
Post #1346026

QUOTE (stamfordman @ Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 21:31) *
........Add a big dose of codswollop to your herring. They are making this up.


Wot? One of our exemplary and totally unbiased council parking bods would make this up?

Said with a healthy pinch of salt smile.gif

Posted by: PASTMYBEST Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 22:21
Post #1346028

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 22:15) *
QUOTE (stamfordman @ Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 21:31) *
........Add a big dose of codswollop to your herring. They are making this up.


Wot? One of our exemplary and totally unbiased council parking bods would make this up?

Said with a healthy pinch of salt smile.gif


I wonder what a letter to the head of parking and to the local press will do. How many PCN's have been issued and paid wrongly whilst they wait for the system to update

Posted by: Longtime Lurker Wed, 10 Jan 2018 - 23:08
Post #1346043

Could you post a copy of the letter here? I have a feeling that a written admission that their payment machines are not fit for purpose might prove useful in future...

Posted by: hcandersen Thu, 11 Jan 2018 - 08:53
Post #1346091

OP, pl post the letter. From what you say, it's dynamite.


Posted by: pimlico35 Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 23:11
Post #1346649

Hi Folks,

Please see response letter - Ive taken out personal details.

many thanks again



Posted by: PASTMYBEST Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 23:22
Post #1346653

QUOTE (pimlico35 @ Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 23:11) *
Hi Folks,

Please see response letter - Ive taken out personal details.

many thanks again



As per HCA dynamite

Posted by: stamfordman Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 23:26
Post #1346655

Does anyone know who operates the ticketless machine system? I take it it is a separate system from a pay by phone such as Ringgo.

Also the letter refers to 'mobile phone parking' - it wasn't though.

Posted by: pimlico35 Thu, 25 Jan 2018 - 20:09
Post #1350655

Hi,

Its operated by PARKEON


Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)