PCN Not the owner out of time... Options

[nimson]

Don’t all tell me what I already know.... Foolish and stupid! I received a PCN for driving in a bus lane. Issued by Waltham Forest. I sold the car a month previous and sent the V5 after trading it for my new car. When I got the ticket I thought it had been sent in error and would of been reissued. How foolish and stupid I was for ignoring it. It turns out after I received two more tickets that the DVLA didn’t receive the V5 and the car was still registered in my name. Anyway... I contacted all the ticket issuers. Still waiting on 1. One accepted the bill of sale as proof the other I’m waiting to hear back from. Both council issuers both sent appeal details in the time frame required. Received notification from Waltham Forest that they are satisfied that the contravention occurred and that it was issued correctly. It says I have no statutory rights to appeal or have representation considered by the council. Went on to say I hadn’t done it in the timeframe given. I’m guessing I have to pay it now right? Terrible lesson to learn.... looked up to see if I could throw myself at their mercy but didn’t look like they are very merciful! A last ditch attempt I thought I’d step in here. Any advice.... apart from the bit about not being stupid enough to ignore these things again.....

[Advertisement]

[Incandescent]

We need to know what stage you are at in the process, so please post up the documents you have received.

Saying you ignored these PCNs is worrying as you could well have ruled yourself out of any chance of appealing to the adjudicators.

Assuming these are bus lane PCNs you should have received the following after the original PCNs: -

- Enforcement Notice (on the London legislation, but not outside London)
- Charge Certificate
- Order for Recovery

after that bailiffs are instructed.

[nimson]

I think this is what you mean? I can’t find the original enforcement notice but I’m guessing it is standard re rights of appeal including the info re notifying re not the owner. I think your right to say it’s worrying. I think the best thing to do is to pay it. Note to self don’t ignore anything!

This post has been edited by nimson: Thu, 24 May 2018 - 22:15

[DancingDad]

Hmmmm.

Liability is strictly with the owner.
London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 Section 4(5)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/section/4/enacted
"Subject to subsection (6) below, for the purposes of this section, a penalty charge is payable with respect to a motor vehicle by the owner of the vehicle if the person driving or propelling the vehicle—..." (My bold)

So while they are strictly correct in that they made the presumption of ownership from DVLA records (plonker BTW, always update and check...you know why now) and that you missed your chance to challenge the presumption (Plonker twice), the law is also strict on that you as the ex owner has no liability.
Unfortunately, there is no legal avenue within the prescribed act to now challenge or reset, we cannot advise lying as this is a criminal offense.

Others may see differently but IMO, pay with a covering letter stating under duress as you were not the owner (include proof)...this stops any escalation.
Then open a formal complaint with council as they have taken a route that is patently unfair by enforcing against you after you presented proof that you were not the owner. This sort of action is enforcement because they can, not because they should. Restitution against the complaint required is full repayment of the payment.

[Neil B]

The only alternative I can think of (or in parallel) is to ask the adjudicator if they will hear your case, in
the circumstances.

[nimson]

I’m going to take your advice and not be a plonker. I’m going to pay and throw myself at the mercy of the council and put in a formal complaint. To be a rebel at this point is fruitless... very bad move on my part to think it would all go away and “right itself” without appealing. Spent a few weeks trying to negotiate with the DVLA proof of ownership issues. Maybe “Maloney” the dorector will see favourably in my favour. Hopefully a lesson to those that read it that avoidance isn’t the way forward!!

[DancingDad]

If you need any help drafting something shout up.

You are by no means alone in being caught out by not having updated DVLA, it has to be one of the common causes for escalated penalties we see.
You are lucky in that none have got to bailiffs stage. Costs can be eye watering then.
Which is main reason for paying now so worst case is the £195.
Ignoring notices is another common reason and really does stuff people.

No guarantees on the letter of complaint working, likely to hit a wall and will need to persevere.
But underpinning your complaint is that they are penalising you against a presumption of ownership which you have shown is incorrect.
To do so is failing their statutory duty to act fairly in law.

[Neil B]

Hang on.

Where WF say -

I have no statutory rights to appeal or have representation considered by the council. Went on to say I hadn’t done it in the timeframe given.

Would be correct but only if they don't also say

Received notification from Waltham Forest that they are satisfied that the contravention occurred and that it was issued correctly.

If they have looked at the issues and as they also say "considered all the evidence", which must include your
bill of sale, then it could be argued that they haven't disregarded representations but have, in effect, just rejected them.

It can't be both.

I still suggest you ask the adjudication service to allow an appeal to be made.

Dad?

----



When and what exactly did you write to them?

Show it please.

I calculate that you weren't drastically late.

[DancingDad]

That is a good point Neil.
And opens that they have considered and therefore should have served a Notice of Rejection.

Not sure that adjudicators would accept anything without an NOR but a request would do no harm. Worst they can do is say no and at least they would do that speedily so not risking escalation.
Needs wording carefully.

OP, on that letter should be some sort of deadline for payment? What is it?
And have you had any Order for Recovery yet?


With that in mind, I would also be writing back to WF (pre official complaint) demanding an NOR based on that they did not disregard as evidenced by their letter.
Dear Sirs
Ref PCN ??? Your letter dated 21st May 2018
I note in your letter that you state you have considered all the evidence.
This is in contrast to the next statement that I have no Statutory Right to challenge.
While the latter may be correct, this is at the discretion of the enforcement authority.
By considering all evidence you have obviously chosen to exercise that discretion.
In doing so, you are now obliged to either accept or reject the challenge and cannot sit back on "too late"
Especially in respect of the evidence I have already supplied which shows that I was not the owner at the time of the contravention.
(Bill of sale and new owner details appended herewith)
To seek to pursue a person who has no liability simply because you wrongly believe that you can fails in your statutory duty to act fairly in law.
If you intend to continue to do so, please issue a proper Notice of Rejection so I can at least appeal to independent adjudicators and present my case and evidence to them.
I would remind you that removing my name from the PCN as the owner does not preclude you enforcing against the new owner.
Hugs and kisses.

This post has been edited by DancingDad: Sat, 26 May 2018 - 10:35

[Neil B]

To seek to pursue a person who has no liability simply because you wrongly believe that you can fails in your statutory duty to act fairly in law.

I might add that the OP should note this applies even if they have already paid.

[DancingDad]

To seek to pursue a person who has no liability simply because you wrongly believe that you can fails in your statutory duty to act fairly in law.

Edited, thanks.

[spaceman]

The only alternative I can think of (or in parallel) is to ask the adjudicator if they will hear your case, in
the circumstances.

The adjudicator cannot presently consider this case as the OP has not acquired the right of appeal.
An appeal to the adjudicator is against the issue of a NoR and this does not appear to have been issued.

[Neil B]

The only alternative I can think of (or in parallel) is to ask the adjudicator if they will hear your case, in
the circumstances.

The adjudicator cannot presently consider this case as the OP has not acquired the right of appeal.
An appeal to the adjudicator is against the issue of a NoR and this does not appear to have been issued.

Yes, you are correct that a NoR should have been issued.

Which leaves the other option.