Merseyflow - PCN |
Merseyflow - PCN |
Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 11:05
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 74 Joined: 4 Apr 2014 Member No.: 69,875 |
Hi folks,
Last week I first learnt of the new bridge opened at Runcorn when our driver rang up and told me that I needed to pay for the crossing which I promptly did. The following day I recieved a PCN for a different vehicle that had crossed on the 19th October northbound. When I went online to pay the PCN I seen that there was a southbound still outstanding for the £8. I tried to pay it but payment period had already lapsed and their website hasn't been working correctly anyway. I have since set up an account with the service. So today I received the second PCN for the same vehicle making the southbound journey on the 19th October. Is there some exemption that a similar PCN cannot be charged in the same day? Regardless I think it's quite unfair, I think the either Dartford tunnel or the LEZ gives you a warning letter on your first offence which you can pay the normal fee. [attachment=51832:mersey.jpg] [attachment=51833:mersey__01_.jpg] |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 11:05
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 11:42
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
The last day for making representations as communicated is wrong'
The penalty amount is wrong either for the 14/28 day period or the period after when a CC is issued The ground for appeal of PI is mis-described it sys it is a failure on the part of the SoS rather than them as the chatting authority. But try a phone call first they might be amenable to just paying the charge at this early stage -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 12:24
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,915 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Statutory Appeal Ground 'F' is not stated fully and therefore is potentially prejudicial because the missing text is crucial to this particular statutory appeal ground. The words "in the circumstances of the case" have been omitted.
A PCN can be issued for each failure to pay the charge. This is nothing like parking where one can argue "continuing contravention" in certain circumstances. Forum experience is that The DART Charge people have proved to be very good in accepting informal reps by phone for users crossing the first time, but so far, we have had nothing back about Merseyflow. If you have now set up an account, one would expect them to show some forbearance. This post has been edited by Incandescent: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 12:25 |
|
|
Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 13:06
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 74 Joined: 4 Apr 2014 Member No.: 69,875 |
I rang up and was informed that it is completely out of the call centres hands in regards to cancelling the PCN and advised that I should make a representation.
From reading google reviews it seems that there is no or a lack of adequate signage indicating that why/how the toll must be paid. |
|
|
Mon, 13 Nov 2017 - 15:51
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Closed Posts: 9,710 Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Member No.: 11,355 |
Try the payment glitch approach as in this one:-
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...p;#entry1327637 Seems obvious the system is not yet fit for purpose. Mick |
|
|
Sun, 26 Nov 2017 - 21:27
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 73 Joined: 8 Jan 2010 Member No.: 34,807 |
Statutory Appeal Ground 'F' is not stated fully and therefore is potentially prejudicial because the missing text is crucial to this particular statutory appeal ground. The words "in the circumstances of the case" have been omitted. Sorry to hijack this thread, but my missus received the exact same PCN for this too; apparently wasn't even aware there was a toll. Incandescent, are you saying that the PCN is technically invalid due to Procedural Impropriety by the charging authority? If so, I may try and appeal on those grounds. |
|
|
Sun, 26 Nov 2017 - 21:53
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,915 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Statutory Appeal Ground 'F' is not stated fully and therefore is potentially prejudicial because the missing text is crucial to this particular statutory appeal ground. The words "in the circumstances of the case" have been omitted. Sorry to hijack this thread, but my missus received the exact same PCN for this too; apparently wasn't even aware there was a toll. Incandescent, are you saying that the PCN is technically invalid due to Procedural Impropriety by the charging authority? If so, I may try and appeal on those grounds. Start your own thread please. However be aware there is no statutory grounds of "procedural impropriety" in the appeal regs for these tolls. Anyway, the Mersey Gateway are unlikely to agree with your proposes appeal, so you'd have to go to the adjudicators and risk the full PCN amount. Did your missus not see the huge toll signs ? The toll managers have already issued 50,000 PCNs BTW ! This post has been edited by Incandescent: Sun, 26 Nov 2017 - 21:54 |
|
|
Tue, 28 Nov 2017 - 12:06
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 74 Joined: 4 Apr 2014 Member No.: 69,875 |
I tried my hand at the Statutory Appeal Ground 'F', on both PCN's (the NB that I have already paid), I got two letters back this morning. The paid NB with a notice of acceptance stating that an administrative error occurred and they payment has been made which is not what I was contesting and the SB letter stating unable to establish grounds and more information is required within 28 days.
|
|
|
Tue, 28 Nov 2017 - 22:27
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 73 Joined: 8 Jan 2010 Member No.: 34,807 |
Statutory Appeal Ground 'F' is not stated fully and therefore is potentially prejudicial because the missing text is crucial to this particular statutory appeal ground. The words "in the circumstances of the case" have been omitted. Sorry to hijack this thread, but my missus received the exact same PCN for this too; apparently wasn't even aware there was a toll. Incandescent, are you saying that the PCN is technically invalid due to Procedural Impropriety by the charging authority? If so, I may try and appeal on those grounds. Start your own thread please. However be aware there is no statutory grounds of "procedural impropriety" in the appeal regs for these tolls. Anyway, the Mersey Gateway are unlikely to agree with your proposes appeal, so you'd have to go to the adjudicators and risk the full PCN amount. Did your missus not see the huge toll signs ? The toll managers have already issued 50,000 PCNs BTW ! I can only speculate if I'm honest, it's so new there isn't even any Google Street view for me to (in)validate her story. Without streetview images and having never been on/near this bridge I have no idea on the level of signage either. May have to take the brunt and just cough up; part of me feels that considering they have issued over 50,000 PCNs that the signage must not be sufficient for the general public? Subjective, I guess! Thanks anyway, no more hijacking of Angry Mob's thread; hope the appeal goes well! |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 17:02 |