Croydon Council. Wrong wording, BUT>>>, Appealed with same wording before, now rejected..... |
Croydon Council. Wrong wording, BUT>>>, Appealed with same wording before, now rejected..... |
Fri, 31 Aug 2012 - 14:32
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 272 Joined: 13 Sep 2011 From: Croydon, Surrey Member No.: 49,608 |
OK. Several drivers have been getting PCN's for a new pedestrian zone in Surrey Street market. The PCN's aren't the same as the normal 3 page ones received from LB Croydon, but rather a 2 page one.
I have sucessfully appealed a PCN before with LB Croydon for a driver. See here. I have appealled all the tickets with the same wording as the original appeal, yet these have come back as rejected. Have I missed something, done something wrong, or are the council just chancing their arm?? Here is the chain from one of the tickets: Original PCN: ----------------------------------------------------- This is the wording used in the appeal: Dear Sir/Madam I am appealing against the PCN No CR81919304 as I feel it is not a valid issue. There has been a procedural impropriety by the council in the issue of this PCN: 1) Nowhere on the PCN do you state how a person may view any still images or video footage of the alleged contravention. 2) You state that you _will_ issue a Charge Certificate if before the end of a period beginning 28 days from the date of issue of the PCN if you have received no monies. 3) You state a reason of the vehicle being stolen in Grounds for Representations: It is not legal to limit to just theft as a reason for representations, as there are times when a relative or friend who is insured to drive the car, with access to the keys may have driven it without the owner’s permission. I refer to PCN IS2284987A/ Patas case 2110212199 on this matter. 4) You, as the issuing authority are required by law to consider the submission of late representations in EVERY case submitted to you. Failing to state this/do this is against the law, and invalidates the issue of this PCN. 5) You do not state in the valid reasons for representations the fact that a procedural impropriety has occurred. This in itself is a procedural impropriety. 6) You have previously cancelled a CCTV PCN (81778337) under these exact same conditions. The wording in these 5 points fetter any discretion you may extend in the course of this PCN, and invalidate its issue. Failing to state this/do this is against the law, and invalidates the issue of this PCN. I expect this PCN to be cancelled. I look forward to hearing from you. Yours faithfully --------------------------------------------- This is the NOR recieved: Many thanks for all your advice (in advance) -------------------- -----------------------------------
A little bit strange: Has a love for the Rover 800 2 door Coupé I have 2! Both a little special and rare. And 2 other Rover 800's!!! Phil B :) |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 13:36 |