Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Council Car Park
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
crashdetective
Evening all,

A quick question...or two

If one drives away before a ticket is issued:

1. How long do the sharks get to post a PCN?

2. Since the TMA 2004 - does this apply to all councils (that a vda can be served by post)?

3. Is there a place to look up PPOs online?

Thanking you all in anticipation.
hcandersen
In simple terms:

1. A postal (Reg 10) PCN must be served (not posted) no later than 28 days beginning with the date of contravention. Service is 2 working days after posting;

2. What's vda? All councils that have CPE status may serve Reg 10 PCNs;

3. For enforcement authorities outside London:
The Traffic Penalty Tribunal web site: http://tro.parking-adjudication.gov.uk/login.aspx

Some London councils also have traffic orders available, but I don't know which ones.

I assume there's an underlying purpose to these questions?

HCA
crashdetective
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Fri, 24 Jun 2011 - 19:01) *
In simple terms:

1. A postal (Reg 10) PCN must be served (not posted) no later than 28 days beginning with the date of contravention. Service is 2 working days after posting;

2. What's vda? All councils that have CPE status may serve Reg 10 PCNs;

3. For enforcement authorities outside London:
The Traffic Penalty Tribunal web site: http://tro.parking-adjudication.gov.uk/login.aspx

Some London councils also have traffic orders available, but I don't know which ones.

I assume there's an underlying purpose to these questions?

HCA


Thanks HCA,

VDA - vehicle driven away

So I deduce that because my council is a small rural council, they may not have "CPE status". Therefore they may not be able to issue a PCN by post if the vehicle was driven away before it was served?

Underlying purpose is I am expecting to do battle with my local clowncil.

qafqa

QUOTE
So I deduce that because my council is a small rural council, they may not have "CPE status".


Another official body concerned with parking and bus lane enforcement is PATROL, this is copied from their main page,
the council may be in the participating council list:

Welcome to the PATROL website

http://www.patrol-uk.info/site/index.php

This website provides information about the enforcement
of parking tickets as well as parking and bus lane regulations for councils in England (outside London) and Wales that are in the Civil Enforcement Scheme.

It also includes direct links to local information via council websites as well as other relevant links.

To see if your council operates civil enforcement you can search using the 'participating councils' tab above.

Please note, we do not cover tickets issued by private companies or by the police. Please use the 'quick links' to find out what else we do not cover and where you can go.

crashdetective
QUOTE (qafqa @ Fri, 24 Jun 2011 - 19:25) *
QUOTE
So I deduce that because my council is a small rural council, they may not have "CPE status".


Another official body concerned with parking and bus lane enforcement is PATROL, this is copied from their main page,
the council may be in the participating council list:

Welcome to the PATROL website

http://www.patrol-uk.info/site/index.php

This website provides information about the enforcement
of parking tickets as well as parking and bus lane regulations for councils in England (outside London) and Wales that are in the Civil Enforcement Scheme.

It also includes direct links to local information via council websites as well as other relevant links.

To see if your council operates civil enforcement you can search using the 'participating councils' tab above.

Please note, we do not cover tickets issued by private companies or by the police. Please use the 'quick links' to find out what else we do not cover and where you can go.


Useful link..thank you
crashdetective
Am I correct in thinking that when (not if) a PCN drops through my letterbox, I should pay immediately for the discounted rate then appeal.

Frankly I am banged to rights and I have no real grounds for appeal, but I am sure it won't stop me finding something. Perhaps just to annoy them. ( I loath my council).

Just before I do - and if I manage to get a hearing at the TPT (I will request a personal hearing) can the council claim costs against me?

Gan
Once you've paid the matter is closed and you've lost your chance to appeal.

Appeals tend to be won on paperwork and procedure errors - whether you actually "did it" isn't very important.

If/when something arrives, post it up, all pages, with your personal so the experts can look at it and advise.

You won't be responsible for the council's costs unless your claim is completely without merit
crashdetective
QUOTE (Gan @ Fri, 24 Jun 2011 - 20:41) *
Once you've paid the matter is closed and you've lost your chance to appeal.

Appeals tend to be won on paperwork and procedure errors - whether you actually "did it" isn't very important.

If/when something arrives, post it up, all pages, with your personal so the experts can look at it and advise.

You won't be responsible for the council's costs unless your claim is completely without merit


Gan,

Without merit (morally) would be true, but procedural issues - well that's another story icon_hang.gif

Interestingly I have just looked here http://www.patrol-uk.info/site/index.php

"Appeal Allowed (successful)
Adjudicator decides in favour of
appellant. Appellant has no liability
to pay. A refund of any sums paid
is directed"

That PDF seems to suggest that if you pay, and win, your are entitled to a refund.

I'd love to learn that is misleading!
Gan
Didn't dive into the site deep enough to find examples like yours. It would apply if the car had been towed and the driver had to pay both the tow charge AND the PCN to get his car back.

There have been a few threads regarding the issue of having to pay these PCNs before 28 days are up.
crashdetective
QUOTE (Gan @ Fri, 24 Jun 2011 - 21:30) *
Didn't dive into the site deep enough to find examples like yours. It would apply if the car had been towed and the driver had to pay both the tow charge AND the PCN to get his car back.

There have been a few threads regarding the issue of having to pay these PCNs before 28 days are up.


Much obliged Gan
qafqa
QUOTE
Just before I do - and if I manage to get a hearing at the TPT (I will request a personal hearing) can the council claim costs against me?


Frequently asked questions
http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/s.../faqs_index.php

Q: If I win, am I able to claim costs?
Answer:
The grounds on which costs may be awarded are few and such instances are rare. You may apply
for and be awarded costs if an Adjudicator considers that the council has been "frivolous, vexatious
or wholly unreasonable" in its conduct of the matter.
If awarded, costs relate only to reasonable expenses incurred in preparing the appeal. There is no
element of compensation for inconvenience or distress, or to punish the council.

Q: If they win, are the council able to claim costs against me?
Answer:
The answer is much the same as for the appellant. The council would have to make an application
and the Adjudicator would have to decide that the appellant had been "frivolous, vexatious or wholly
unreasonable" in bringing the appeal. Such instances are very rare.

In that process map pdf Step 6 is in Traffic Penalty Tribunal territory and the above is what they say
about awarding costs so should be given more credibility than the PATROL version.

crashdetective
QUOTE (qafqa @ Fri, 24 Jun 2011 - 21:56) *
QUOTE
Just before I do - and if I manage to get a hearing at the TPT (I will request a personal hearing) can the council claim costs against me?


Frequently asked questions
http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/s.../faqs_index.php

Q: If I win, am I able to claim costs?
Answer:
The grounds on which costs may be awarded are few and such instances are rare. You may apply
for and be awarded costs if an Adjudicator considers that the council has been "frivolous, vexatious
or wholly unreasonable" in its conduct of the matter.
If awarded, costs relate only to reasonable expenses incurred in preparing the appeal. There is no
element of compensation for inconvenience or distress, or to punish the council.

Q: If they win, are the council able to claim costs against me?
Answer:
The answer is much the same as for the appellant. The council would have to make an application
and the Adjudicator would have to decide that the appellant had been "frivolous, vexatious or wholly
unreasonable" in bringing the appeal. Such instances are very rare.

In that process map pdf Step 6 is in Traffic Penalty Tribunal territory and the above is what they say
about awarding costs so should be given more credibility than the PATROL version.


Oh what the hell, stuff the risk. I'll give em a run for their money anyway!

Thanks
Bogsy
Which council are you concened about?
crashdetective
QUOTE (Bogsy @ Fri, 24 Jun 2011 - 23:54) *
Which council are you concened about?


Lancashire seem to operate for my district council
hcandersen
But they're not the enforcement authority.

Why not elaborate - how about a PCN/NTO etc?


HCA

crashdetective
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 3 Jul 2011 - 08:09) *
But they're not the enforcement authority.

Why not elaborate - how about a PCN/NTO etc?


HCA


HCA

I haven't got a PCN yet, but as sure as ducks like water, it's coming.
Neil B
QUOTE (crashdetective @ Sun, 3 Jul 2011 - 22:41) *
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 3 Jul 2011 - 08:09) *
But they're not the enforcement authority.

Why not elaborate - how about a PCN/NTO etc?


HCA


HCA

I haven't got a PCN yet, but as sure as ducks like water, it's coming.


I doubt it. You are making assumptions. Since you've finally got around to mentioning 'some' of the details of which Council then at least we know all the other posts weren't wasted - cos it is now likely they are CPE.

very few councils actually issue Reg 10 PCNs for DA. Some that try get the wording wrong. Many cheat and issue a Notice to Owner instead.
crashdetective
QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 4 Jul 2011 - 14:56) *
QUOTE (crashdetective @ Sun, 3 Jul 2011 - 22:41) *
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 3 Jul 2011 - 08:09) *
But they're not the enforcement authority.

Why not elaborate - how about a PCN/NTO etc?


HCA


HCA

I haven't got a PCN yet, but as sure as ducks like water, it's coming.


I doubt it. You are making assumptions. Since you've finally got around to mentioning 'some' of the details of which Council then at least we know all the other posts weren't wasted - cos it is now likely they are CPE.

very few councils actually issue Reg 10 PCNs for DA. Some that try get the wording wrong. Many cheat and issue a Notice to Owner instead.


Thanks Neil B.

I was wondering if they might just do that.

it's about day 17 now and nothing.


Neil B
IF they are going to try an NtO (not allowed) it will be a minmum of 28 days from the event.
crashdetective
QUOTE (Neil B @ Fri, 8 Jul 2011 - 23:45) *
IF they are going to try an NtO (not allowed) it will be a minmum of 28 days from the event.


Well, I was beginning to think they may try the illicit route - direct to NTO, but to my suprise, here is a postal PCN.



I am looking for anything and everything that may give me a procedural impropriety (or other).

I am hoping some wise members here are willing to assist me?

I am just in the midst of scanning all other docs they sent...

*Edited for further scrubbing
bama
Show us the rest of it please.

As its a reg 10 PCN it also serves as the NTO so the response to this will be 'formal representations'
crashdetective
The others...











That's everything.

Much obliged! biggrin.gif
Bogsy
I can't see that it provides the name of the enfocement authority as required. It provides the names of both Wye BC and Lancashire CC but it does not tell you which one of these councils is the enforcement authority.
crashdetective
QUOTE (Bogsy @ Sun, 10 Jul 2011 - 19:28) *
I can't see that it provides the name of the enfocement authority as required. It provides the names of both Wye BC and Lancashire CC but it does not tell you which one of these councils is the enforcement authority.


Thanks Bogsy, point duly noted.
hcandersen
PI as regards the authority's authority to serve the postal PCN.

The relevant alternatives provided at Reg 10 of the General Regs are:

QUOTE
Penalty charge notices — service by post

10.—(1) An enforcement authority may serve a penalty charge notice by post where—

(b)a civil enforcement officer attempted to serve a penalty charge notice in accordance with regulation 9 but was prevented from doing so by some person; or

©a civil enforcement officer had begun to prepare a penalty charge notice for service in accordance with regulation 9, but the vehicle concerned was driven away from the place in which it was stationary before the civil enforcement officer had finished preparing the penalty charge notice or had served it in accordance with regulation 9,


These are the reasons why a postal PCN may be served. However, they cannot both be the reason why it was served: they're mutually exclusive. Once an authority has determined which applies it must state this - it can't hedge its bets, as in this case, and state that the PCN was served on the basis of (b) or ©.

The reasons for this are that they provide different potential lines of defence.

Qu 1 - had the PCN been completed but not served? If this is was case then the CEO's notes and the progress log would show that a PCN had been completed.

Qu 2 - was the CEO in the process of, but hadn't finished, preparing the CEO? In which case the notes/log would show this.

The driver's recollections would be different in either case as would the evidence they could provide to challenge the basis of service of the Reg 10.

Totally agree regarding Enf Auth, with a tweak.

Either the name of the Enforcement Authority is not stated or, if the name of an EA is stated i.e. lancashire.gov.uk (which is the unique email address of Lancashire County Council), it's not the EA for the location cited i.e. an off-street car park for which Wyre BC is the EA.

HCA
crashdetective
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Sun, 10 Jul 2011 - 20:34) *
PI as regards the authority's authority to serve the postal PCN.

The relevant alternatives provided at Reg 10 of the General Regs are:

QUOTE
Penalty charge notices — service by post

10.—(1) An enforcement authority may serve a penalty charge notice by post where—

(b)a civil enforcement officer attempted to serve a penalty charge notice in accordance with regulation 9 but was prevented from doing so by some person; or

©a civil enforcement officer had begun to prepare a penalty charge notice for service in accordance with regulation 9, but the vehicle concerned was driven away from the place in which it was stationary before the civil enforcement officer had finished preparing the penalty charge notice or had served it in accordance with regulation 9,


These are the reasons why a postal PCN may be served. However, they cannot both be the reason why it was served: they're mutually exclusive. Once an authority has determined which applies it must state this - it can't hedge its bets, as in this case, and state that the PCN was served on the basis of (b) or ©.

The reasons for this are that they provide different potential lines of defence.

Qu 1 - had the PCN been completed but not served? If this is was case then the CEO's notes and the progress log would show that a PCN had been completed.

Qu 2 - was the CEO in the process of, but hadn't finished, preparing the CEO? In which case the notes/log would show this.

The driver's recollections would be different in either case as would the evidence they could provide to challenge the basis of service of the Reg 10.

Totally agree regarding Enf Auth, with a tweak.

Either the name of the Enforcement Authority is not stated or, if the name of an EA is stated i.e. lancashire.gov.uk (which is the unique email address of Lancashire County Council), it's not the EA for the location cited i.e. an off-street car park for which Wyre BC is the EA.

HCA


Many thanks for your input!

Am I right in thinking that neither of these are likely to good appeal points though? (not really being prejudicial)

The problem I have is that I am banged to rights as far as the contravention is concerned (assuming the PPO etc. holds water). I don't really want to reveal on a public board what the contravention was because it would easily ID my case; but if any longstanding member is curious - I will happily reveal what it was by PM. Suffice to say here that the contravention was minor.






hcandersen
The contravention is clear -

(d)an offence under section 35A(1), 47(1) or 53(5) or (6) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (offences in connection with parking places);

the detailed offence being - parked without clearly displaying etc.

Is what you're referring to the circumstances, not the contravention?

I, and others I'm sure, wouldn't have wasted my/their time or yours if I/we didn't believe that these are procedural improprieties, life's too short.

But you're right to be concerned regarding process as EAs rarely accept reps based on PIs as these goes to the heart of their competence. You're normally looking at adjudication to get your point across.

And who's to review the traffic order, you? Are you competent in this area?

HCA
crashdetective
[b]The contravention is clear -

the detailed offence being - parked without clearly displaying etc.
[/b]

That is the resultant contravention, but not per se the 'offence'

Is what you're referring to the circumstances, not the contravention?

Technically yes. I have sent you a pm



I, and others I'm sure, wouldn't have wasted my/their time or yours if I/we didn't believe that these are procedural improprieties, life's too short.

Yes, I appreciate that. Many thanks to the responders.

But you're right to be concerned regarding process as EAs rarely accept reps based on PIs as these goes to the heart of their competence. You're normally looking at adjudication to get your point across.

I wasn't doubting they are PIs, but I was merely questioning whether this would be likely to hold water with the adjudicator... I was thinking they may just opt for 'de minimus' possibly stating that there would be no prejudice?

And who's to review the traffic order, you? Are you competent in this area?

No I am not competent in this area. I am hoping you good fellows would assist me with that when I have gotten hold of a copy.
hcandersen
The offence is as I stated. The process is that contraventions under the TMA exist in this case when an offence has been committed under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. AIUI, these don't cease to be offences merely because of the TMA. The specifics are failure to display etc.

It seems clear you were not displaying as we understand in plain English, but we'll see whether this constitutes an offence once we've seen the Order (none is posted on the TPT web site so you'll need to get from Wyre).

Wyre are the Enforcement Authority, Lancashire Parking Services is an administrative org set up by councils in Lancashire and has no legal standing as regards the TMA.

Prejudice is irrelevant and doesn't need to be shown. Where the law requires the EA to do or write or communicate info, that's what it must do. PI occurs when they have failed to comply with such a requirement imposed under the TMA.

HCA
crashdetective
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 11 Jul 2011 - 09:42) *
The offence is as I stated. The process is that contraventions under the TMA exist in this case when an offence has been committed under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. AIUI, these don't cease to be offences merely because of the TMA. The specifics are failure to display etc.

It seems clear you were not displaying as we understand in plain English, but we'll see whether this constitutes an offence once we've seen the Order (none is posted on the TPT web site so you'll need to get from Wyre).

Wyre are the Enforcement Authority, Lancashire Parking Services is an administrative org set up by councils in Lancashire and has no legal standing as regards the TMA.

Prejudice is irrelevant and doesn't need to be shown. Where the law requires the EA to do or write or communicate info, that's what it must do. PI occurs when they have failed to comply with such a requirement imposed under the TMA.

HCA


Ok, thanks HCA.

I will obtain a copy of the PPO from Wyre.

It will be interesting to see what comes out in the wash here!

I didn't know that prejudice wouldn't have to be demonstrated...I guess that makes things a bit easier.

I was wondering about the part where Wyre state (words to the effect of) ' If there is a procedural impropriety shown then the ticket WILL be cancelled'. If PI was shown and they didn't cancel the ticket upon formal reps, then would that per se be another PI?

Thanks for your help!
hcandersen
PI is a statutory ground of representation and as with any ground, if it is accepted, then the penalty charge is cancelled. That's the law.

But the council accepting that a ground is proved is another thing. And while they remain judges in their own cause, their word counts. But once the adj gets involved you should get an independent review and decision.

But remember, you've only got the 28 day period (from whatever was the date of the PCN/NTO - you've deleted this) in which to pay or make reps.

HCA


crashdetective
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Mon, 11 Jul 2011 - 16:49) *
PI is a statutory ground of representation and as with any ground, if it is accepted, then the penalty charge is cancelled. That's the law.

But the council accepting that a ground is proved is another thing. And while they remain judges in their own cause, their word counts. But once the adj gets involved you should get an independent review and decision.

But remember, you've only got the 28 day period (from whatever was the date of the PCN/NTO - you've deleted this) in which to pay or make reps.

HCA

Thanks once again HCA, I've got about 2 weeks left to get them in.
crashdetective
I am now looking to appeal on the grounds of PI only (possibly other grounds when I have obtained the PPO).

Can anyone advise me what I should request when I submit my formal reps to the NTO/Reg10 PCN? I thought the following would be essential:

PPO for starters

Photos (they have stated 'no data' on the PCN but I saw the CEO taking at least one photo)

Copy of pocketbook notes

Anything else?

Much appreciated!
hcandersen
Don't confuse making reps with requesting info.

You haven't posted the date of the PCN, so I don't know when your reps period expires.

IMO you cannot make reps and ask questions and/or for info - it confuses issues.

With the time you've got I think you've only got time to make reps under PI but add that if they reject your reps you require them to provide you with A,B, C etc., with their rejection in order for you to be able to consider issues arising within your appeal.

As regards the PI, I would state what it does state, not just what it doesn't e.g. PCN includes the words Lancashire CC, Wyre BC, LancashireVDAPCN postTMA Jul 10, lancashire.gov.uk/parking, Lancashire Parking Services, the Enforcement Authority ....


HCA
crashdetective
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 13 Jul 2011 - 08:38) *
Don't confuse making reps with requesting info.

You haven't posted the date of the PCN, so I don't know when your reps period expires.

IMO you cannot make reps and ask questions and/or for info - it confuses issues.

With the time you've got I think you've only got time to make reps under PI but add that if they reject your reps you require them to provide you with A,B, C etc., with their rejection in order for you to be able to consider issues arising within your appeal.

As regards the PI, I would state what it does state, not just what it doesn't e.g. PCN includes the words Lancashire CC, Wyre BC, LancashireVDAPCN postTMA Jul 10, lancashire.gov.uk/parking, Lancashire Parking Services, the Enforcement Authority ....


HCA


thanks HCA (again)
crashdetective
I am looking for some guidance in what to write for my formal reps.

I have mentioned that they have stated ii & iii as a PI and quoted the relevant regs but can't find a TPT case to back this up. Does anyone know of a case(s)?

I am unsure of what to put for the enforcement authority not being clear (the ticket was issued in the district of Wyre) and LCC issued the NTO.

Anyone help?
crashdetective
QUOTE (crashdetective @ Fri, 15 Jul 2011 - 21:31) *
I am looking for some guidance in what to write for my formal reps.

I have mentioned that they have stated ii & iii as a PI and quoted the relevant regs but can't find a TPT case to back this up. Does anyone know of a case(s)?

I am unsure of what to put for the enforcement authority not being clear (the ticket was issued in the district of Wyre) and LCC issued the NTO.

Anyone help?


Oh and has anybody fought this 'dualist' authority issue successfully that is known of?
southpaw82
Have you obtained the Order yet? It's likely to be an important point in your representations.
crashdetective
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 18 Jul 2011 - 18:22) *
Have you obtained the Order yet? It's likely to be an important point in your representations.


No I haven't, and I doubt they will have responded with such by the time the formal reps are due in.

I am just wanting to make skeleton reps to the council and I will consider the order for the TPT.

Thanks Southpaw.
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.