PCN contravention code:33 J Old Church Rise Romford Options

[@luther]

Hi,

Please help with appealing this PCN

The PCN is similar to this one:

The PCN claims that the driver used a route restricted to certain vehicles. The video used as evidence shows the car entering the restricted zone, but it does not cover the point of entry. The driver, approached from Rom Valley way and she is adamant that there were no signs on approaching that the zone was restricted. The GSV of the road is here

Would the next steps be to take pictures of the driver's view as evidence of the lack of signage or will the google street view image be enough?

Thank you

[Advertisement]

[cp8759]

Jaffer Husseyin v Royal Borough of Greenwich (case reference 2170256432) is the case you want to cover the lack of consideration:

"The Rejection Notice has every appearance of a pro-forma letter and does not deal at all with the representations made. The response required was a very simple one, namely words to the effect that that whilst we accept that you had a permit on display you were not parked in the road to which it applied – see terms of permit. Motorists are entitled to have their representations properly considered and an explanation, even if brief, why they are rejected. I am unable to be satisfied that in issuing this rejection notice the Council had properly performed its statutory duty to consider representations and this amounts to procedural impropriety. The Appeal is therefore allowed."

As they have completely ignored most of your representations, they cannot show that these have been properly considered. In particular the authority has given no consideration whatsoever to your representations that the PCN wording is flawed. They only assert they have considered mitigating circumstances, they do not state they have considered the statutory grounds of appeal you have put forward, and their letter looks like a pro-forma rejection.

[@luther]

@cp8759 Thank you again. I have sent off my appeal to the tribunal. I will update this thread with the outcome.

Thank you to everyone that has helped.

[Fizz1cat]

Dear @luther, have you been given a date for the appeal hearing yet? I have just received a rejection letter back from Havering council which also failed to consider the same argument that I put forward. Just wondered how long it will take.

[@luther]

@Fizz1cat my appeal hearing was on 01 November. Unfortunately my appeal was refused. They adjudicator only agreed with one of my points which was that Havering Council incorrectly stated when the penalty notice and the reduced amounts must be paid by.

Hope you have better luck than I did.

[Mad Mick V]

@luther

Would you post up the adjudicators comments please? Was your appeal rejected or did you win on the issue/service point?--like this one:-

2180385238

Authority London Borough of Havering

Oldchurch Rise

Contravention Using a route restricted to certain vehicles

Adjudicator John Lane
Appeal decision Appeal refused
Direction Full penalty charge notice amount stated to be paid within 28 days.
Reasons The penalty notice in this case was issued under Section 6 of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. The local authority is entitled to issue the penalty notice to the person appearing to them to be the owner of the vehicle concerned.
Section 4(8) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London act 2003 says that the penalty notice must state:
1 the grounds on which the council or, as the case may be, Transport for London believe that the penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle;
2 the amount of the penalty charge which is payable;
3 that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice;
4 that if the penalty charge is paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the notice, the amount of the penalty charge will be reduced by the specified proportion;
5 that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable;
6 the amount of the increased charge;
7 the address to which the penalty charge must be sent;
8 that the person on whom the penalty notice is served may be entitled to make representations under paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Act; and
9 specify the form in which such representations are made.
the penalty notice in this case states that the penalty and reduced penalty amounts must be paid not later than 28 days and 14 days from the date of service of the penalty notice. As stated by the appellant, this is incorrect.
In the case of Hackney Drivers Association Limited v The Parking Adjudicator and Lancashire County Council CO/7565/2012 on 31st October 2012 Mr. Justice Raynor when considering a penalty notice asked at paragraph 11 of his judgment, "what was fairly conveyed by the penalty notice, read as a whole?" The recipient requires certainty.
I will therefore allow the appeal on this point only.

______
Mick

[Incandescent]

@Fizz1cat my appeal hearing was on 01 November. Unfortunately my appeal was refused. They adjudicator only agreed with one of my points which was that Havering Council incorrectly stated when the penalty notice and the reduced amounts must be paid by.

Hope you have better luck than I did.

Please post the case reference number, as you could have grounds for a review.

[@luther]

@Mad Mick V That is my appeal. Am I wrong in assuming that I lost?

@luther

Would you post up the adjudicators comments please? Was your appeal rejected or did you win on the issue/service point?--like this one:-

2180385238

Authority London Borough of Havering

Oldchurch Rise

Contravention Using a route restricted to certain vehicles

Adjudicator John Lane
Appeal decision Appeal refused
Direction Full penalty charge notice amount stated to be paid within 28 days.
Reasons The penalty notice in this case was issued under Section 6 of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. The local authority is entitled to issue the penalty notice to the person appearing to them to be the owner of the vehicle concerned.
Section 4(8) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London act 2003 says that the penalty notice must state:
1 the grounds on which the council or, as the case may be, Transport for London believe that the penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle;
2 the amount of the penalty charge which is payable;
3 that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice;
4 that if the penalty charge is paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the notice, the amount of the penalty charge will be reduced by the specified proportion;
5 that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable;
6 the amount of the increased charge;
7 the address to which the penalty charge must be sent;
8 that the person on whom the penalty notice is served may be entitled to make representations under paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Act; and
9 specify the form in which such representations are made.
the penalty notice in this case states that the penalty and reduced penalty amounts must be paid not later than 28 days and 14 days from the date of service of the penalty notice. As stated by the appellant, this is incorrect.
In the case of Hackney Drivers Association Limited v The Parking Adjudicator and Lancashire County Council CO/7565/2012 on 31st October 2012 Mr. Justice Raynor when considering a penalty notice asked at paragraph 11 of his judgment, "what was fairly conveyed by the penalty notice, read as a whole?" The recipient requires certainty.
I will therefore allow the appeal on this point only.

______
Mick

@ Incandescent my case reference number: 2180385238.

@Fizz1cat my appeal hearing was on 01 November. Unfortunately my appeal was refused. They adjudicator only agreed with one of my points which was that Havering Council incorrectly stated when the penalty notice and the reduced amounts must be paid by.

Hope you have better luck than I did.

Please post the case reference number, as you could have grounds for a review.

[Mad Mick V]

OP----Mr. Lane did not respond to any of the other issues that were raised so, to me, the Decision is defective in that regard.

Given his last statement, that the appeal is allowed on one point only, I would get in touch with the ETA Secretariat and ask for clarification---have you lost or not?

If you have lost come back to us and we can draft up a Review request for you.

Mick

[PASTMYBEST]

OP----Mr. Lane did not respond to any of the other issues that were raised so, to me, the Decision is defective in that regard.

Given his last statement, that the appeal is allowed on one point only, I would get in touch with the ETA Secretariat and ask for clarification---have you lost or not?

If you have lost come back to us and we can draft up a Review request for you.

Mick

+1 we see these mistakes fairly often

[cp8759]

I've had this before, it looks like a clerical error. If you call up the tribunal and ask them to check with the adjudicator, they should be able to correct this under the "slip rule".

[Neil B]

I'm reading that as a win too.

I actually read last Friday and didn't notice as I was looking for another case.

Let's hope the lurker starts his own thread for help.

Dear @luther, have you been given a date for the appeal hearing yet? I have just received a rejection letter back from Havering council which also failed to consider the same argument that I put forward. Just wondered how long it will take.

[@luther]

Hi all,

I called up the tribunal and have asked them to check the decision because it contradicts point 9 on the adjudicator's comments. The lady I spoke to agreed that the letter is contradictory and is having it referred. I will update the thread when I hear back from them.

Luckily I have not yet paid the charge.

Thanks again for the help. Much appreciated.

[@luther]

I received a revised notification today and my appeal was accepted.

Thank you all for your help, especially getting me to check with the tribunal when I thought I had lost.

[PASTMYBEST]

I received a revised notification today and my appeal was accepted.

Thank you all for your help, especially getting me to check with the tribunal when I thought I had lost.

good, its been amended in the register already