Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Wrongful PCN in courtesy car
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
JaneR
I was legally parked in a road in Hackney whilst in possession of a courtesy car provided by the garage where my car was being repaired when I received a PCN. I actually saw the parking attendant and pointed out that I wasn't contravening any parking restrictions and he just said, "Appeal it. Appeal it." As the ticket was on the windscreen I immediately wrote to the address given, pointing out that a ticket shouldn't have been issued and provided photographic evidence. Despite this, the council (or whoever it is that is in charge of the PCNs) wrote back saying they will not be cancelling. I again wrote back, again pointing out that I was clearly not in contravention and at the same time I wrote to the Citroen garage, telling them that if they are contacted by Hackney with regard to a PCN, they are not to pay the fine as I did nothing wrong and I intended challenging it. Hackney again wrote back saying they were not cancelling the notice and advised that if the fine wasn't paid within 2 weeks, they would be sending out a Notice to Owner, which will obviously go to Citroen. I'm worried that Citroen - despite me writing to them and telling them not to pay the fine - will pay the fine and then take the money from my debit card (they have the details from when I purchased the vehicle over a year ago). What can I do? Any help appreciated.
DancingDad
Post up the PCN, photos and your correspondence.

At the moment, we cannot advise any more as we know little that is relevant.
JaneR
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 12:28) *
Post up the PCN, photos and your correspondence.

At the moment, we cannot advise any more as we know little that is relevant.


I've just added some attachments to my original post. Thanks.
southpaw82
Liability for the PCN rests with the owner. If Citroen decide to pay it, I'm afraid there's little you can do and it then becomes a contractual matter between you and them as to whether they can take the money from you.
JaneR
Thanks for your reply. Even though I clearly was not in contravention of the parking restriction, it appears Hackney Council will end up getting some money then... It just doesn't seem right that this can happen. As I have told Citroen that I shouldn't have got the PCN and that I will not be paying it, will this hold any water? And can Citroen just take the money - plus an admin fee - from my debit card as I understand companies can hold on to debit card details?

Out of interest, it says on the Courtesy Vehicle Agreement that "I will take full responsibility for any penalties for traffic violations that are incurred whilst the vehicle is in my possession." As no traffic violation actually occurred, if Citroen do pay it, I guess this could be a defence...?
PASTMYBEST
The yellow sign you photographed is not an authorised sign, it is merely an information sign, there needs to be no waiting signs.

The TTRO as posted states it is only applicable during the works there is no evidence of works going on in any photo

The Citroen garage are the only ones the council can hold liable. It may be that the contract you signed for the courtesy car will allow them to transfer liability to you, but not sure I would go and see them,
and ask that the foreword the NTO to you you may have to commit to making payment if you lose .

Get a letter of them authorising you to challenge this up to appeal if required. Then get on to the council, we need to see their photos
Mad Mick V
OP continue to fight this. if you can get Citroen to agree. The AWS and the Notice clearly determine that No. 32 is not within the restricted area.

This is a prohibition derived from a temporary traffic order that's why you have been given the contravention. I would argue that the Code is incorrect it should be Code 02 "Parked or loading / unloading in a restricted street where waiting and loading / unloading restrictions are in force". This fits with the terms of the TTRO/Notice.

Second and probably more important, there should be yellow suspension signs to reinforce the notice. The AWS doesn't cut it. If not they haven't signed it correctly.

Mick
JaneR
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:42) *
The yellow sign you photographed is not an authorised sign, it is merely an information sign, there needs to be no waiting signs.

The TTRO as posted states it is only applicable during the works there is no evidence of works going on in any photo

The Citroen garage are the only ones the council can hold liable. It may be that the contract you signed for the courtesy car will allow them to transfer liability to you, but not sure I would go and see them,
and ask that the foreword the NTO to you you may have to commit to making payment if you lose .

Get a letter of them authorising you to challenge this up to appeal if required. Then get on to the council, we need to see their photos


Thanks for your reply. As advised, I think I shall have to take the matter up with Citroen.

The council's photos are exactly the same as mine - the notice attached to the lamp post and the vehicle outside No.32. They seem to think the boundary started at No.32, rather than the boundary between Nos.32 and 34. There isn't enough upload space for me to put on any more attachments, but they're just the same. As you can see from their letters, they are agreeing I am outside No.32....
DancingDad
Talk nicely to the dealers.
They have at least one option, possibly two.
The first is simply to sign a short note giving you permission to act on their behalf and for you to give them a note promising to deal with the PCN and cover any costs arising from it should you default. You may need to give them a card number so they can claim in need.... details you and them can work out.
Also will need to work it out so you get the NTO. Once you have authority, you can give your address to the council requiring them to use it.

The second is that they challenge the PCN on the Hire Vehicle ground and put your name into the frame so you get an NTO in your own name which you can challenge and would be liable for.
Depends on the terms of the agreement you have if it comes under the definition of a hire car.

Using what is needed from both of the above, no reason you need to pay. Or Citroen.

Full agreement BTW. Even without the Order on the lamp post, the sign is from 34 to corner and as long as 32 is before 34, no contravention occurred.
baroudeur
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:42) *
The TTRO as posted states it is only applicable during the works there is no evidence of works going on in any photo



The "works" refers to the restricted period posted not to actual physical work taking place and applies 24/7 unless otherwise specified.
JaneR
Thanks for your help. Yes, I think I'm going to have to get permission from Citroen to allow me to fight this. I was just fearful that they would immediately pay the fine when they receive the NtO, despite me telling them not to. I notice in their Courtesy Vehicle Agreement, it states, "You will pay the following charges: All fines and court costs for parking, traffic or other offences. You must pay the appropriate authority any fines and costs if and when the authority demands this payment. If you do not, you will be responsible to pay our reasonable administration charges, which arise when we deal with these matters." So I guess that I may be liable for administrative fees involved which I understand are usually £80-odd ... It might be cheaper for me just to pay the £65 in the next 14 days and be done with it, rather than have all this aggravation. I'll see what Citroen say first, but if they're unhelpful I think I'm going to have to end up paying, which is really annoying as it is so transparent that I didn't contravene any parking restriction.
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (baroudeur @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 14:06) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:42) *
The TTRO as posted states it is only applicable during the works there is no evidence of works going on in any photo



The "works" refers to the restricted period posted not to actual physical work taking place and applies 24/7 unless otherwise specified.


I wouldn't get into a big argument about this, however the dates of the restriction are clear, so why have a proviso re the works, if it went to adjudication
I would be making the point
JaneR
Out of interest - I wrote to Hackney Council regarding the PCN the day it was put on my windscreen. They therefore have my name and address and know that it was me driving the vehicle that day. Will they still send the NtO to the owner rather than myself?
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (JaneR @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:15) *
Out of interest - I wrote to Hackney Council regarding the PCN the day it was put on my windscreen. They therefore have my name and address and know that it was me driving the vehicle that day. Will they still send the NtO to the owner rather than myself?


Yes the owner is legally liable for the penalty
JaneR
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:18) *
QUOTE (JaneR @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:15) *
Out of interest - I wrote to Hackney Council regarding the PCN the day it was put on my windscreen. They therefore have my name and address and know that it was me driving the vehicle that day. Will they still send the NtO to the owner rather than myself?


Yes the owner is legally liable for the penalty


Thanks for your help.
101A
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:25) *
Liability for the PCN rests with the owner. If Citroen decide to pay it, I'm afraid there's little you can do and it then becomes a contractual matter between you and them as to whether they can take the money from you.



Wrong. If a statement of liability has been signed then the hirer is liable


(d)that the recipient is a vehicle-hire firm and—

(i)the vehicle in question was at the material time hired from that firm under a hiring agreement; and

(ii)the person hiring it had signed a statement of liability acknowledging his liability in respect of any penalty charge notice served in respect of any parking contravention involving the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement;
JaneR
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:25) *
Liability for the PCN rests with the owner. If Citroen decide to pay it, I'm afraid there's little you can do and it then becomes a contractual matter between you and them as to whether they can take the money from you.



Wrong. If a statement of liability has been signed then the hirer is liable


(d)that the recipient is a vehicle-hire firm and—

(i)the vehicle in question was at the material time hired from that firm under a hiring agreement; and

(ii)the person hiring it had signed a statement of liability acknowledging his liability in respect of any penalty charge notice served in respect of any parking contravention involving the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement;


I'm now confused... I'm assuming the NtO will definitely go to Citroen. Are you saying that they will then re-direct the council to myself to deal with the matter? I hope so.
DancingDad
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:25) *
Liability for the PCN rests with the owner. If Citroen decide to pay it, I'm afraid there's little you can do and it then becomes a contractual matter between you and them as to whether they can take the money from you.



Wrong. If a statement of liability has been signed then the hirer is liable.......


Not quite.
They get the first NTO and can decide what to do with it.
They may challenge on Hire Company Ground but do not have to.
It is their choice and nowt the hirer can do about it within the parking law system.
southpaw82
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:25) *
Liability for the PCN rests with the owner. If Citroen decide to pay it, I'm afraid there's little you can do and it then becomes a contractual matter between you and them as to whether they can take the money from you.



Wrong. If a statement of liability has been signed then the hirer is liable


(d)that the recipient is a vehicle-hire firm and—

(i)the vehicle in question was at the material time hired from that firm under a hiring agreement; and

(ii)the person hiring it had signed a statement of liability acknowledging his liability in respect of any penalty charge notice served in respect of any parking contravention involving the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement;

Careful who you're saying is wrong when you're not in possession of all the facts. It won't end well.

QUOTE (JaneR @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 16:49) *
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:25) *
Liability for the PCN rests with the owner. If Citroen decide to pay it, I'm afraid there's little you can do and it then becomes a contractual matter between you and them as to whether they can take the money from you.



Wrong. If a statement of liability has been signed then the hirer is liable


(d)that the recipient is a vehicle-hire firm and—

(i)the vehicle in question was at the material time hired from that firm under a hiring agreement; and

(ii)the person hiring it had signed a statement of liability acknowledging his liability in respect of any penalty charge notice served in respect of any parking contravention involving the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement;


I'm now confused... I'm assuming the NtO will definitely go to Citroen. Are you saying that they will then re-direct the council to myself to deal with the matter? I hope so.


Does your agreement with Citroen include such clauses? It seems unlikely if they're also saying they can debit your card to settle any amount they pay under a PCN. A courtesy vehicle is not normally "hired", either.
PASTMYBEST
Jane Dancing Dad states the options in post 9. Do as suggested by him
JaneR
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 17:08) *
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:25) *
Liability for the PCN rests with the owner. If Citroen decide to pay it, I'm afraid there's little you can do and it then becomes a contractual matter between you and them as to whether they can take the money from you.



Wrong. If a statement of liability has been signed then the hirer is liable


(d)that the recipient is a vehicle-hire firm and—

(i)the vehicle in question was at the material time hired from that firm under a hiring agreement; and

(ii)the person hiring it had signed a statement of liability acknowledging his liability in respect of any penalty charge notice served in respect of any parking contravention involving the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement;

Careful who you're saying is wrong when you're not in possession of all the facts. It won't end well.

QUOTE (JaneR @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 16:49) *
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:25) *
Liability for the PCN rests with the owner. If Citroen decide to pay it, I'm afraid there's little you can do and it then becomes a contractual matter between you and them as to whether they can take the money from you.



Wrong. If a statement of liability has been signed then the hirer is liable


(d)that the recipient is a vehicle-hire firm and—

(i)the vehicle in question was at the material time hired from that firm under a hiring agreement; and

(ii)the person hiring it had signed a statement of liability acknowledging his liability in respect of any penalty charge notice served in respect of any parking contravention involving the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement;


I'm now confused... I'm assuming the NtO will definitely go to Citroen. Are you saying that they will then re-direct the council to myself to deal with the matter? I hope so.


Does your agreement with Citroen include such clauses? It seems unlikely if they're also saying they can debit your card to settle any amount they pay under a PCN. A courtesy vehicle is not normally "hired", either.


I haven't said that Citroen are saying they can debit my card, but I wondered if they could just go ahead and do this without my permission. The agreement is not a hire agreement, its a courtesy vehicle agreement. I'm going to speak to Citroen and ask what their procedure is and, if they say they will pay up and ask me to reimburse, I may as well just pay it, despite not contravening any restriction. If they allow me to challenge it, then I will do so.

Thanks for all your help.
101A
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 17:08) *
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:25) *
Liability for the PCN rests with the owner. If Citroen decide to pay it, I'm afraid there's little you can do and it then becomes a contractual matter between you and them as to whether they can take the money from you.



Wrong. If a statement of liability has been signed then the hirer is liable


(d)that the recipient is a vehicle-hire firm and—

(i)the vehicle in question was at the material time hired from that firm under a hiring agreement; and

(ii)the person hiring it had signed a statement of liability acknowledging his liability in respect of any penalty charge notice served in respect of any parking contravention involving the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement;

Careful who you're saying is wrong when you're not in possession of all the facts. It won't end well.

QUOTE (JaneR @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 16:49) *
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 13:25) *
Liability for the PCN rests with the owner. If Citroen decide to pay it, I'm afraid there's little you can do and it then becomes a contractual matter between you and them as to whether they can take the money from you.



Wrong. If a statement of liability has been signed then the hirer is liable


(d)that the recipient is a vehicle-hire firm and—

(i)the vehicle in question was at the material time hired from that firm under a hiring agreement; and

(ii)the person hiring it had signed a statement of liability acknowledging his liability in respect of any penalty charge notice served in respect of any parking contravention involving the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement;


I'm now confused... I'm assuming the NtO will definitely go to Citroen. Are you saying that they will then re-direct the council to myself to deal with the matter? I hope so.


Does your agreement with Citroen include such clauses? It seems unlikely if they're also saying they can debit your card to settle any amount they pay under a PCN. A courtesy vehicle is not normally "hired", either.



facts do not affect the law. Read the appeal regulations.
Neil B
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 18:32) *
facts do not affect the law. Read the appeal regulations.

You seem to have forgotten a word in your earlier statement; the one challenged.
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 15:58) *
If

101A
all you need to do is write to the council and say that you were the owner on the day and responsible for all pcns and ask them to serve the nto on you. Tell the debit/credit card company not to allow the hire firm to debit your account.
silverfox60017
OP

1) What house number were you parked outside

2) The junction with Cazenove Road does it run

a) from junction to ....32,34....36 etc OR
b) from Junction to 36,34,32....2

To clarify is it at the lower or higher end of the house numbering?
DancingDad
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 19:09) *
all you need to do is write to the council and say that you were the owner on the day and responsible for all pcns and ask them to serve the nto on you. Tell the debit/credit card company not to allow the hire firm to debit your account.


If it were only that simple.
Council do not have to accept third party statements on ownership.
Even if a copy of the hire agreement is enclosed, council can ignore (as they do on many solid grounds)
If they ignore and send the NTO to the hire company, only the hire company (or someone acting for them) can challenge.
OP may not get a look in.
OP cannot take it to appeal as they are not in the enforcement chain until or unless the hire company put them there.
Neil B
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 19:09) *
all you need to do is write to the council and say that you were the owner on the day and responsible for all pcns and ask them to serve the nto on you.

She has no authority to do such a thing.
You can't just bandy about with who can be owner when it's clearly defined in statute and the Council may not serve an NtO on anyone other, unless specific
circumstances apply, as you've already mentioned.
southpaw82
QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 18:32) *
facts do not affect the law. Read the appeal regulations.



QUOTE (101A @ Wed, 15 Jun 2016 - 19:09) *
all you need to do is write to the council and say that you were the owner on the day and responsible for all pcns and ask them to serve the nto on you. Tell the debit/credit card company not to allow the hire firm to debit your account.


That didn't take as long as I thought it would, I have to admit.
hcandersen
OP, for goodness sake can we have evidence rather than even more narrative.

As far as I can tell, we're short of:
The PCN, leave all dates in; you tell us that you didn't commit the contravention but as yet we don't know what this is!
Your correspondence;
Their photos;
Your courtesy agreement.

We're nearly at post 30 and yet we don't know the above. That might be a record.

Stop drip-feeding us snippets and let's have some evidence pl.

At present I don't know where your car was located. The restriction, even assuming it was signed as required, terminates at the property boundary of 32/34. 32 or 34 is excluded from the restricted area, but I don't know which because I don't know the location of the start point and the house numbering pattern.

You cannot require the provider of the courtesy car to do anything other than provided for in your agreement.
You cannot require the authority to treat you as owner. I cannot see that the suggestion that you lie to the authority as regards ownership is wise.

Or we can just talk and talk......
silverfox60017
hcanderson

That is exactly what i am trying to discover,and as you say until we know, we might as well spit into the wind!!
Was it


A

Cazenove Road Junction 2,4,6,8..............32( car parked) 34 36 38....N+1 (Ooops)

B

Cazenove Road Juction 2,4,6,8............32,34( cqr parked) 36,38,....N+1 (OK)

C

Cazenove Rd Jnctn N-1 .......38,36,34 ( Car parked) 32,30 ............2 (OK)


D

Cazenove Rd Jnctn N-1...........38,36,34,32(car parked ) 30 28 26......2 (Ooops)


I think that covers all possibilities, but until we know...........
DancingDad
For inquiring minds
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5664048,-...3312!8i6656
32, 34, 36 etc Cazenove Road.

If OP outside of 32 as all seem to agree, they are outside of any suspended area
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Thu, 16 Jun 2016 - 20:24) *
For inquiring minds
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5664048,-...3312!8i6656
32, 34, 36 etc Cazenove Road.

If OP outside of 32 as all seem to agree, they are outside of any suspended area



The photo in post one shows the van outside the boundary of 30/32 so no way in contravention, I hope Citroen play ball

Jane I would suggest that this has a very high chance of winning, if it helps show the thread to the garage it will be a travesty if you pay without a chance to fight
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.