PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN - continuous contravention again.
rosturra
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 11:32
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 683
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,086



Hi all;

I have a valid parking permit for Greenwich. In January I found I had two PCNs; which puzzled me. Then realised that the permit was obscured by a National Trust parking permit sticker - which had slipped into the pass holder.

Bang to rights. But I was obviously annoyed with myself that I got two PCNs - when I had a valid permit! (It was bad enough last year - when I let the permit lapse! But that's another story).
The second PCN was a day later - but within 24 hours of first one. The car had not moved in the interim.

I immediately informally appealed; hoping for discretion only.
On the basis that I had a valid permit. It was an unforeseen circumstance. I thought the permit was displayed correctly when I left the car.
No benefit was gained (by not paying for parking). Apologies for inconvenience. I fully intend to be more careful in the future. yada yada.

For the second one I repeated the same reps. but added the gvt advice that I shouldn't get two tickets for the same contravention within 24 hours.

Some thoughts.


I have seen other cases where the council give discretion when someone has failed to display an otherwise valid ticket correctly. Usually for car-parking tickets; and first time error only.
However I can't find any notes on discretion for my error.

Last year the council were very tardy in responding to my informal appeal. and it was this very tardiness which led to my success at tribunal, rather than my reps (which were dismissed).
So it's definitely worth an appeal in the hope of similar inefficiency!

Now in my previous tribunal, it was ruled that I could not use continuous contravention as a grounds for appeal. As the two parking restricted periods (09:00-05:00) were separated - so two distinct contraventions.

In this instance - the two PCNs are on different days - but within 24 hours.

I believe the advice is that councils should not pursue the second PCN if within 24 hours of another ticket for the same contravention.

Now this seems a little ambiguous to me and gives me hope.

The contravention is code 12.

Could I argue that the "same contravention" refers generically to the code 12 contravention. So I have grounds for appeal (I had two tickets for the same type of contravention within 24 hours) .

Or would it be argued that a "same contravention" could only be with another PCN in the same contravention period. Contravention A is for day 1 09:00-17:00. Contravention B is for day 2 09:00-17:00.


I will post up PCN - for your perusal - in the next post.

Thanks all























I had an almost exact same issue last year.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 11:32
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 11:40
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



To be honest we've had adjudications go either way. My view is that, at common law, a person may only be punished once for a given wrongdoing. However given the amounts involved, I don't see this ever going to the High Court for a biding decision. Have a read of 2110166557.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rosturra
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 12:00
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 683
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,086



Hi This is one of the two PCNs.

One is dated 18/01/2018 11:51 the other 19/01/18 11:31 - otherwise identical.

PCN

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 1 May 2018 - 12:40) *
To be honest we've had adjudications go either way. My view is that, at common law, a person may only be punished once for a given wrongdoing. However given the amounts involved, I don't see this ever going to the High Court for a biding decision. Have a read of 2110166557.



I quoted this very precedent in my reps and at tribunal for a previous transgression.
It was dismissed as being wrong in law.

So cannot rely on this defence, except maybe to befuddle council employees in informal appeals!

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 12:08
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Ask Greenwich for its parking enforcement policy - I've always failed to find one online. CP - you could maybe do an FoI.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 12:37
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Tue, 1 May 2018 - 13:08) *
Ask Greenwich for its parking enforcement policy - I've always failed to find one online. CP - you could maybe do an FoI.

Done.

QUOTE (rosturra @ Tue, 1 May 2018 - 13:00) *
So cannot rely on this defence, except maybe to befuddle council employees in informal appeals!

You can still try, another adjudicator is entitled to find that decision is correct in law.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 12:54
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



I'm confused as to where you are in the process.

You posted: 'I immediately informally appealed; hoping for discretion only.'

So, what happened or is happening?

The PCNs pl, GSV, any photos and copies of your challenges pl.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Tue, 1 May 2018 - 12:55
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rosturra
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 13:16
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 683
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,086



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 1 May 2018 - 13:54) *
I'm confused as to where you are in the process.

You posted: 'I immediately informally appealed; hoping for discretion only.'

So, what happened or is happening?

The PCNs pl, GSV, any photos and copies of your challenges pl.



I appealed in January - I've not heard anything back since.

I'm just getting my ducks in a line for when I get the rejection letter!

PCN was posted in my second post.

But linking here again: PCN

I can't find the text of my reps - I'll have a dig around.

This post has been edited by rosturra: Tue, 1 May 2018 - 13:44
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rosturra
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 13:34
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 683
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,086



Found them.


Informal Rep: First Contravention.

---------------------

I have a fully valid Greenwich residents permit.

This permit was displayed on my screen correctly.

I also have a car parking permit from the national trust,
this was positioned above the residents permit, and not obscuring it.

Unfortunately it seems that the national trust pass slipped into the permit pass holder
which did obscure the pass.

Hopefully your officer will have photographed the pass when generating ticket; this will support my explanation.

I accept I should not have left the nation trust permit, in a position where it could slip.
But I had not foreseen this eventuality.

I hope you can use your discretion to allow this this one, as I was actually entitled to park in the bay, I have paid the parking permit, and the ticket was displayed when I left the car.

-----------------------------------------

Informal Rep: Second Contravention.

-----------------------------------------

I have a fully valid Greenwich residents permit.
This permit was displayed on my screen correctly.

I also have a car parking permit from the national trust, this was positioned above the residents permit, and not obscuring it.

Unfortunately it seems that the national trust pass slipped into the permit pass holder which did obscure the pass.

Hopefully your officer will have photographed the pass when generating ticket; this will support my explanation.

I accept I should not have left the nation trust permit, in a position where it could slip.
But I had not foreseen this eventuality.

This PCN was the second PCN to be issued.
I received an identical one - GR0XXXXXXXX - less than 24 hours before.

It seems unfair that I be ticketed twice for the same contravention; within 24 hours.
I had no opportunity to correct my error; as I was not in Greenwich in the interim.
I believe this is called a "continuous contravention" - I erred once not twice. The car had not moved between the two tickets being issued. .

I hope you can use your discretion to allow this this one as:
I was actually entitled to park in the bay,
I had paid the parking permit,
the ticket was displayed when I left the car,
I had been ticketed already for the same contravention less than 24 hours before.

-----------------------------------

I provided photos of my existing permit - to show that I had a current valid permit.

I also provided a photo of how the pass had obscured the pass. Note this was a re-creation - and NOT taken at time of transgression.
So it was an illustration of what happened rather than a record.




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 13:38
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



A lot of councils will cancel for an obscured valid permit and some state this in their enforcement policies (which is why CP is getting Greenwich's).

Hopefully this is academic in your case.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 2 May 2018 - 14:55
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



FOI response:

Our response is as follows:

The Council do not have a specific Parking Enforcement policy, but enforcement is covered within the Parking Strategy. This can be viewed online at the link below:

http://www.royalgreenwich.gov.uk/downloads...opted_july_2014


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Wed, 2 May 2018 - 21:20
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



Made reps in January and not heard since.

This is improbable, so...

Who is the registered keeper and, if you, are you living at the address in your V5C and is this the same as in January?

As regards continuous or discontinuous restrictions, if, as is mostly the case, the restriction is not to PERMIT or CAUSE to be ...., then what is so sacrosanct about 24 hours. It's just received wisdom. Book 'em every 30 minutes, why not, there's no specific law against this. So we have to look elsewhere for the answer, not parking regs. (and even the Operational Guidance has been withdrawn, so no help there).

Here's a story.. in the 1980s officers of RBKC used to queue ( very polite in those days) by ice-cream vans unlawfully plying their trade outside the museums and when they got to the front they'd issue an illegal street trading ticket. And then join the same or another queue. Good game, good game.

There is nothing concrete about 24 hours any more than 24 minutes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rosturra
post Wed, 2 May 2018 - 23:07
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 683
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,086



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 2 May 2018 - 22:20) *
Made reps in January and not heard since.

This is improbable...


Let me expand. As stated I made reps in January [ Possibly first week in Feb ] and I have not heard back yet. I phoned council in March to confirm they had received the reps.
Far from being improbable this seems par for the course. I have already stated in this thread that Greenwich are tardy with these things, last year it took Greenwich 5 months to respond to my informal reps.

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 2 May 2018 - 22:20) *
Who is the registered keeper and, if you, are you living at the address in your V5C and is this the same as in January?


That would be me. Living in the same address as the V5C, which has been unchanged for the duration.

QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 2 May 2018 - 22:20) *
As regards continuous or discontinuous restrictions, if, as is mostly the case, the restriction is not to PERMIT or CAUSE to be ...., then what is so sacrosanct about 24 hours. It's just received wisdom. Book 'em every 30 minutes, why not, there's no specific law against this. So we have to look elsewhere for the answer, not parking regs. (and even the Operational Guidance has been withdrawn, so no help there).


I assume you mean this, which I was relying on.

Operational Guidance to Local Authorities: Parking Policy and Enforcement Traffic Management Act 2004
8.46 If two or more PCNs are issued within 24 hours for the same contravention,
that is, to a vehicle that has not been moved, it is current practice to cancel
the second PCN.
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 2 May 2018 - 22:20) *
There is nothing concrete about 24 hours any more than 24 minutes.


Not with the withdrawal of Operational Guidance! Is there no equivalent guidance?

This post has been edited by rosturra: Wed, 2 May 2018 - 23:15
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Thu, 3 May 2018 - 07:04
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...and-enforcement

At present all you can do is wait, there's nothing else. According to you, you might have made reps outside the 14-day period therefore the penalty would be at the full level and checking their website wouldn't reveal much.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Thu, 3 May 2018 - 07:10
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rosturra
post Thu, 3 May 2018 - 08:36
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 683
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,086



Yes. I did miss the 14 day discount period.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rosturra
post Thu, 3 May 2018 - 09:39
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 683
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,086



I note that "Setting and enforcing parking policies" was withdrawn on 28 March 2018.

Given that my transgression was previous to this date - should this still be the reference bible when it come to reviewing cases [prior to 28 March] ?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rosturra
post Thu, 24 May 2018 - 16:30
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 683
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,086



I received communication from the council on 16 May 2018.

Basically a 'dear John' letter "We have carefully considered but..."

I have been re-offered the discount again. Even though I thought I was a little late with my informal appeals.

A reminder that I got two PCNs for parking without displaying a residents permit. Within 24 hours - but across two parking periods.
The response to both PCNs is identical, to the letter.

So it seems to me that I have got a standard rejection letter - and the particulars of my case have not been considered.
PCN 1 - asking for discretion on the grounds that I had a displayed a valid permit - but it had got obscured.
PCN 2 - as above but additional continuous contravention. This seems not to have been considered.

I am minded to pay the first PCN. AS I could only appeal to their discretion; not on a point of law.

I need to make a decision of whether it is worth challenging the second one on basis of continuous contravention.

I should point out that I had a tribunal earlier this year, where the adjudicator ruled that two successive PCNS (for the same contravention in same location) were valid as there was a period between the two when parking was permitted.

The only difference in this case is that the two PCNs are within 24 hours.



Is it worth fighting the second one?








Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Fri, 25 May 2018 - 07:41
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



I can't believe Greenwich doesn't have an internal policy manual for dealing with PCNs.

I would be pretty angry about this - an honest slip with a valid res permit should be considered under fairness guidance and other London councils play fair.

Making you pay twice is dreadful. I would be thinking about continuing with this on grounds of non-consideration and would also copy to a senior council official and councillors.

Post the rejection letter(s).



This post has been edited by stamfordman: Fri, 25 May 2018 - 07:56
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Fri, 25 May 2018 - 09:21
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



You posted:

I missed the 14-day discount.....

and in your reps stated:

Hopefully your officer will have photographed the pass when generating ticket

So, didn't you check their photos in the 14 days, or aren't there any? We've not seen any. Neither have we seen GSV, but there's a great deal of discussion on common law and appeal decisions.

Can we get back to the basics pl.

GSV; photos; their replies.

And, subject to their replies, if it were me I'd go for the lip service they pay to the SoS's Stat Guidance, paras. 10.7 and 10.8 in particular, in their so-called Parking Strategy.

Put it to them. This delay is unacceptable and it is for THEM to justify. It is not within their discretion whether to have clear policies to guide officers within the enforcement authority on the exercise of the council's power of discretion - they must.


This post has been edited by hcandersen: Fri, 25 May 2018 - 09:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rosturra
post Fri, 25 May 2018 - 09:35
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 683
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,086



Here are the rejection letters:

PCN 18 Jan 2018 page 1
PCN 18 Jan 2018 page 2

PCN 19 Jan 2018 page 1
PCN 19 Jan 2018 page 1

On a second read - they are not 'identical', but very close.

One says my permit "... was not correctly displayed" The other "...was not displayed" .


The Greenwich Parking Strategy - linked by CP above says:

yada yada... these arrangements will be:

Fair, consistently applied, robust and transparent -
Designed to be responsive to the needs and expectations of customers.

I can try appealing to fairness?

There is no advice on the council website about discretion etc.

I recall from my previous dealings with Greenwich - that they have a 7 day grace period for expired permits.
This grace period must be documented for CEO's to refer to, or for training.
Ergo There must be a handbook.

Is this available to Joe Public?

I'll phone up and ask.

This post has been edited by rosturra: Fri, 25 May 2018 - 09:36
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Fri, 25 May 2018 - 09:47
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



The letters say the council has policies for PCN mitigation - we must see these. CP may have to issue an FOI request citing these letters.

The letters also say the PCNs were correctly issued - we know that. They fail to consider your mitigation despite acknowledging a valid permit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 06:19
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here