PCN for wrongly scratched visitor parking permit |
PCN for wrongly scratched visitor parking permit |
Mon, 3 Jan 2011 - 17:25
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 3 Jan 2011 Member No.: 43,182 |
Hi, I've received a PCN contravention code 16 from Edinburgh Council for a wrongly scratched visitors parking permit in a residents parking bay. I arrived at 14.00 so scratched off the 2 for the hour but overlooked that I also had to scratch off 0 minutes (twice over since used two permits, each gives 1.5 hours) - happy to admit that I made a mistake (too focused on working out day/date in that between Xmas and NY blur!) but it seems a bit over-zealous. PCN was issed at 14.10 so would seem reasonable to assume I had parked at 14.00 (which would have given me to 17.00).
I'm guessing I will probably have to chalk up to experience but feel a bit aggrieved at paying up when my intentions were honest. Am I wasting my time appealing? Thanks for any advive Andy |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 3 Jan 2011 - 17:25
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Mon, 3 Jan 2011 - 17:35
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 11,094 Joined: 24 Aug 2007 From: Home alone Member No.: 13,324 |
Appeal as "de minimus".
|
|
|
Mon, 3 Jan 2011 - 17:38
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,931 Joined: 29 Nov 2005 Member No.: 4,323 |
"de minimis"
-------------------- Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.
Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader. |
|
|
Mon, 3 Jan 2011 - 21:25
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 22,678 Joined: 23 Mar 2009 Member No.: 27,239 |
If you were ticketed at 14.10 you were clearly within the 1.5 hr limit.
Expect the council to reject the informal representation and even the NTO appeal but drop out of adjudication where you would be quite reasonably claiming costs for their vexatious behaviour. |
|
|
Tue, 4 Jan 2011 - 12:14
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12,878 Joined: 7 Jan 2008 From: London Member No.: 16,454 |
And show us your PCN.
-------------------- Dave-o 3-0 LB Waltham Forest.
Goalscorers: B. Alighting 08', G. Fettered 34', I. Markings 42' Dave-o 2-0 LB Islington Goalscorers: V. Locus 82', I. Dates, 87' Dave-o 1-0 LB Redbridge Goalscorer: I. Markings 79' Dave-o 1-0 LB sCamden Goalscorer: I. Dates, 86' Dave-o 1-0 LB Hammersmith & Fulham Goalscorer: T. Signage, 19' |
|
|
Wed, 5 Jan 2011 - 20:20
Post
#6
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 3 Jan 2011 Member No.: 43,182 |
|
|
|
Wed, 5 Jan 2011 - 20:33
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 22,678 Joined: 23 Mar 2009 Member No.: 27,239 |
That is absolutely imbecile and definitely one to inform the council that you will be taking it to adjudication if not cancelled.
|
|
|
Wed, 5 Jan 2011 - 22:00
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,931 Joined: 29 Nov 2005 Member No.: 4,323 |
and they say they WILL send an NTO.
naughty, its a discretion and they must not fetter it like this. this is bias and unreasonable. You have a legitimate expectation as they are a statutory creature that they will not fail in the mandatory duty to not fetter their discretion. that duty gives them the responsibility not to do so. -------------------- Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.
Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader. |
|
|
Wed, 19 Jan 2011 - 11:04
Post
#9
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 3 Jan 2011 Member No.: 43,182 |
Hi all
Just heard that my PCN has been withdrawn and cancelled by Edinburgh City Council. Relevant sections of my letter and the response are below. Thanks for all the advice! Cheers Andy MY LETTER: I am writing to appeal against the above referenced PCN, issued at xxx on xxxxxx. The vehicle was parked at 14.00 in a Residents Bay with two Visitor Parking Permits being displayed. The silver box for “2” hours was removed but the “0” minutes box was not scratched off on either of the displayed permits. As a first time visitor by car to Edinburgh, I was unfamiliar with the need to scratch off minutes given my arrival time of 14.00. I believe that this genuine and trivial mistake should be considered de minimis and did not invalidate the permit. Given the combination of correct information given, the voucher was valid at the time the PCN was issued and could not have been used on any other day. Previous adjudication from The Joint Report of the Parking Adjudicators for England and Wales April 2008 to March 2009 (case BH05920B) supports the opinion that very minor deviation from the precise requirements may be held not to constitute a contravention of the TRO. I request that this PCN should be cancelled. If not, I will have no hesitation in taking my appeal to the independent adjudicator if necessary. RESPONSE: The Parking Attendant reports that there was no valid visitors permit displayed on the above vehicle. Legislation requires that a visitor's permit must be completed correctly and clearly displayed on the windscreen or front near-side window of a vehicle, and the onus is on the driver to ensure the permit is completed correctly and is securely affixed prior to leaving the vehicle. In this case all windows of the vehicle were checked prior to issuing the parking ticket and the permits were not completed correctly. We regret that the subsequent production of a permit covering the period in question does not constitute a reason to cancel the ticket. Please be advised that all sections of the permits, including the minutes must be scratched out. However, as a courtesy the parking ticket will be withdrawn and cancelled on this occasion. In future to avoid the possibility of further tickets being issued in similar circumstances, which may not be given the same consideration, please ensure a valid permit is completed correctly and clearly displayed. In view of the circumstances of the case, as stated above, the parking ticket has been withdrawn and cancelled. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 13:32 |