Hi
I would appreciate if you can help me deal with this PCN issued by Hounslow Council. I tried to challenge them and they have rejected my challenge. Here is my initial email to council which explains the situation. I believe the PCN is unjustified.

"Dear Sir or Madam
This is a representation against the above numbered PCN as well as a formal complain against your parking warden number 211 for his actions while he was on duty.
We have moved from Woking Surrey into this area at XXXXXX, Isleworth just a week ago. Today I drove to the town centre with my wife. I stopped my car on School road in the resident parking bay and went to see where the branch of my bank was located on the high street. I asked my wife to stay in the car in case she needed to move it.

Soon a parking warden appeared in front of her and told her that he was going to issue a parking charge notice unless she moved the car. My wife followed his advice and started to move the car. As you might be aware only a few yards of School road are two way after which it's a no entry road. This means the only way my wife could move her car was to make a U turn (3 point turn) in the road. Although my wife was trying to move the car, she had to give way to oncoming traffic. While she was moving the car, the the parking warden issued a PCN. My wife explained to him that she is moving the car as soon as the road is clear but the warden was so rude to her and stuck the PCN to the moving car.
When she tried to explained to him that he didn't need to issue the PCN because she was moving the car immediately after his advice, he was so rude and misbehaved to my wife that she was very in tears and extremely upset. I arrived back at the car within 1 minute of the time PCN was issued but the warden had disappeared immediately after issuing the PCN. I tried to find him to talk to him but he was not around.
I must say I am extremely astonished the way the whole incident took place. I mean I know my right and also a bit about the parking laws. I don't think he should have issued a ticket on a moving car. I would like to challenge the charge and would like to see the photographic evidence. I hope you will deal with this case appropriately.
Please feel free to contact me should you need to discuss anything mentioned above.

I have attached a copy of PCN and 4 correspondence letters from the council as a reply to my emails and 5 photos for which the web link was provided by the council. As per the rules of the forum, I have removed all personal information from these letters and pictures.
I would appreciate your help with this.
Regards
Anoop

Can you please post all pages of the PCN, the "standard stuff" on the back of the PCN is frequently cocked-up by the council and can you further grounds of appeal.

Also - was your wife sitting in the driver's seat or did she have to get out of the passenger seat? Reason I ask is because the council are claiming the CEO noted your wife said "she does not drive", but this would be hard to believe especially as the photos show one person in the car sitting at the steering wheel...

Does your wife have a driving license?

Please do not attempt to manipulate the image of photos or documents. And do not attach, you will rapidly run out of space. So please re-post the pics.

Create a free basic account on http://www.tinypic.com or similar. Upload the photos, scans etc to tinypic. And then copy and paste the generated links into your posts on here and let the forum software take care of image size.

Hi Dawmdt
Thanks for replying. I have now uploaded the backside of PCN. Re CEO quoting my wife, that is bull ****. the person in the driving seat in the photo is my wife who has a valid driving license and is added on insurance for this particular car.
Thanks
Anoop


Hi Eceladus
Thanks for your reply.
Not only my wife has driving license but she is also added on the insurance for this car. and It is her who is in the driving seat. I had left the keys with her in case she needed to move the car.
Re photos, I have not changed their size. Just saved them from the website on which they were posted by the council.
Regards
Anoop

Dear all
Thanks for your replies so far. Please let me know if you need any more information.
thanks

Unfortunately, you do not have any first-hand recollection of these events other than parking in a parking place without displaying the necessary permit. And that's the starting point which you do not dispute.

The council have given you a clear insight into their position i.e. your wife did speak to the CEO and told him that she did not drive. If this is correct, then IMO it torpedoes the rest of your complaint. But the opposite also applies i.e. if she does have a driving licence, then it casts doubt on the CEO's version of events - and you've now posted that this is the case.

As regards the contravention, there are various elements which have to be proved, including:

Was there a contravention? On the basis of your account and without knowing the provisions of the traffic order, it appears that the answer is yes, unless
Was the PCN served correctly? The council's photos show a PCN which had been served on your car prior to the photo being taken (and not as the council state that your car was stationary when it was served, the photo tells us nothing about when/where/how the PCN was served).
Was the vehicle in contravention when the PCN was served? Who knows? The CEO's notes say yes.

Ultimately, an adjudicator will make a decision based on the balance of probabilities and if your wife does not have a licence then IMO you are unlikely to succeed, and if she does your chances are better but by no means guaranteed.

Your vehicle reg number is still visible on the lower half of the front page of the PCN - you should block this and the PCN number out.

So the CEO is lying. Nothing strange there then ! The photos seem to be taken in a great hurry which ties in with your statement that the PCN was stuck on whilst the car was moving. Seems to me you need to go to adjudication on this one not least to highlight the CEOs lies. I don't think the council will like to have themselves exposed in this way, even if the PCN is enforceable, as you did park in contravention.

This is London you have moved to, and all councils in it are venal and rapacious with PCNs and parking generally despite what their touchy-feely websites may say. Are you sure you've moved to the right place, (only joking !)

Dear all

Thanks a lot for your replies. Here are my comments to your questions/replies:

1. Apologies for not properly removing my personal details. I have re-attached the PCN document with all details deleted.
2. The PCN was served on the car while my wife was trying to move it. Since the car was facing a No entry sign, she had to perform a U-turn and to do that she had to wait for on-coming cars to pass. It is this when CEO issued the PCN. Would this PCN still be valid?
3. CEO is lying about my wife because it is visible in their photo that she is in the driving seat. She has a valid driving license and this is the only car she is insured on.
4. Could I ask a bit more information about your comment "Was there a contravention? On the basis of your account and without knowing the provisions of the traffic order"? How can I find out the provision of traffic order in this case and establish whether there was a contravention?

Many thanks for helping with this.
Anoop

If the sign in the pic was on the same side as where you parked, and for those bays, (and I have no doubt it will be), then you are in contravention, I'm afraid. The TMO is given effect by the signs. Only if TMO and signs differ, is there a possibility of an appeal on this basis. No, what you would appeal on is the disgraceful behaviour of the staff operating CPE here. It would come under the heading of Procedural Impropriety.

what about the fact that these photos show that there is a driver in the car trying to move it only because CEO gave that option. Aren't they suppose to give you a warning or observe you for 5 minutes. The PCN shows the observation time from 1203 to 1206 and ticket issuance/photos timing of 1207

Isn't a driver entitled to rely on the statement of a public servant acting in his official capacity and while following his instructions?

The CEO told her he would issue the PCN if she didn't move the car
The only reasonable interpretation is that he wouldn't issue the PCN if she did move it

She was attempting to move it but "unable to proceed"

Observation time is quite sufficient, bearing in mind your car was there when he approached. I'm afraid you really cannot argue that you were not in contravention. From the time you parked you were in contravention, so this is not really an valid appeal argument, I'm afraid. How Wokingham operate CPE (assuming they do) is not the same as London; maybe Wokingham are not quite so ruthless in minor parking transgressions like this, but you are now in London where councils look upon all motorists as a resource for cash generation !

You must surely have realised you were not parked legally at the time you parked ? The only real appeal here is procedural impropriety in telling untruths in the letters you have received.

Notwithstanding the above, I may be wrong, so wait a bit to see what the others say.

PCN problem page 1.: 2100010686

http://www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/

You need to ramp this up, but do not do so frivolously because you and your wife will be getting into the realms of statements of truth and declarations.

If your wife is adamant regarding her account, then IMO you should respond to the council as follows:

Thank you for your letter dated ***** rejecting my challenge I would advise you that my wife strenuously denies the CEO's account of events and is prepared to give evidence to this effect at adjudication. I therefore suggest you enquire of the CEO, as opposed to referring to their notebook, as to whether they stand by their account. If required, I (as the owner) am prepared to request the adjudicator to call your CEO to give evidence in person.

My wife is in possession of a driver's licence, see enclosed. She did not inform the CEO that she would not move the vehicle when asked, in fact she was situated in the driver's seat; was in possession of a set of keys; and was preparing to drive off when the PCN was served. etc....................

Don't get emotional and don't make threats, just state your version of events and that your wife, who is the only witness in your defence, is prepared to give evidence at adjudication and that you would require the CEO to be in attendance.

+1

Wow. That is a great reply.
I'll do that.
thanks a lot for your help all.

You seem to have completely missed Hippocrates' post about the flawed PCN! Read this thread by a poster who did appeal including the wording as an issue:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=75088

I would use both arguments.

Thanks guys. Should I send an unsolicited email or wait for them to send me a representation letter.

thanks

Just wait now as you have sent the first email. You just need to make sure you don't forget to include all the appeal points at the next stage 'when' they reject!

Hi SchoolRunMum

I am sorry but I am not quite sure what you mean by the last sentence "You just need to make sure you don't forget to include all the appeal points at the next stage 'when' they reject"

I was actually going to mention the two points in when they send me the letter being the representation letter, being owner of the car. Are you saying I shouldn't include my two points of argument at this stage?

Sorry I am a newbee here and I appreciate your help

Yes, you mean you were going to add your other points when you get the Notice to Owner? Yes, that's the formal appeal stage and yes, that's when I meant to ensure you include ALL points. But before that, if you have emailed an informal challenge then you'll get a rejection letter first. Let's see it when it arrives please.

I have already attached the letters received from the council in reply to my email. These letters were emailed to me.
Thanks

Or rather if it arrives? That last email (letter) of the 6th Feb says:
"The Traffic Management Act 2004 specifies the procedure for challenging a parking ticket. As we have already dealt with your informal challenge we are not obliged to respond to this further correspondence or offer the discounted amount again."

Good old Melanie, not the first time we have had the benefit of her wisdom.

So when it comes to formal representations against the Notice to Owner consider asking exactly where the Traffic Management Act 2004 says any such thing. In fact the reverse of the Penalty Charge Notice and the 2004 Act say otherwise.

Well said. That is true!

Hi there
I have recieved the rejection letter from the council and the appeal form. I notice there is a choice of decision by post or attending the hearing in person. Considering the details of my case, does it make any difference which option I select. Also am I ok to just select the procedural impropriety or should explain the whole case again to the adjudicator.

Thanks a lot in advance for all your help

Always choose a personal hearing if you can - we do sometimes see postal decisions which are frustrating when the appellant loses because the adjudicator seems to have missed the point or overlooked an issue that you just know the motorist could have answered if they'd been sitting there! It's only a one-to-one meeting in an office somewhere, not a tribunal or anything.

We normally say tick the box, select personal hearing and put 'full details of appeal to follow', and send it off. When you get your hearing date you'll be able to submit your evidence/appeal and you'll also be sent the Council's own bundle of 'evidence'. So come back here when you get a hearing date, in good time to summarise your case for the adjudicator.

Hi Schoolrunmum

Thank you very much for your help. I really appreciate that.

What I don't understand is how can the council still fight the case when they know that their is procedural impropriety on their part due to the wording printed on the PCN. Do you think there is still a chance that they could win this? i.e. can the adjudicator ignore that impropriety?

Thanks
Anoop

You must post the Notice of Rejection.

Because they can!

Because Councils play this game where they know if they keep rejecting appeals, most people will fold and pay up. A rejection from a Council over a PCN doesn't mean the person doesn't have a case (usually), it's just the next stage of standard 'computer says no' rejection template letter. It works for them.

You could also ask why does this Council keep using this PCN even though they know the wording is not right...? Because they can and because MOST PEOPLE PAY.

An adjudicator cannot IGNORE a point but they could disagree with it. Each adjudication is different - but do you know that I cannot recall the last Hounslow windscreen PCN that we have helped a person to appeal, that actually went to an adjudication hearing when that wording flaw was used as a point of appeal?

Hounslow fold at the last minute and cancel before hearings. That's the game we've seen them play and that's what might happen to you too.






Yep, post it here for us to see please, simple81...

Thanks a lot guys. Sorry for late reply.

here are the link to the rejection letter:

http://s1302.photobucket.com/user/anooppun...?sort=3&o=1
http://s1302.photobucket.com/user/anooppun...?sort=3&o=0

Thanks for your help. Will keep you updated.

A chunk of events seems to have been missed out. We never saw the Notice to Owner did we? And what was your letter that resulted in this latest rejection as I don;t see anything about the flawed PCN wording in their reply - did you raise it?

Oh! I am sorry to have missed that. I don't think I have a copy of Notice to Owner letter that I received from the council. I ticked the procedural impropriety section and also attached following letter to provide additional details:

Representation against the above PCN NJ22389037

Listed below are the factors that render the PCN invalid.
1. The PCN is in breach of Paragraph 1(g) of the Schedule to the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 and therefore invalid.

2. It has been stated in your letter dated 05/02/2013
“The photos show the vehicle was stationary when the Penalty Charge Notice was fixed to the windscreen.”
My wife was waiting in the car on School road when a CEO advised my wife to move the car away in 5 minutes otherwise he would issue a PCN. My wife followed his advice and started to move the car. I have seen the photos. It might look like there is nobody in the car, but if you focus on the second photo, you will see that my wife is in the driving seat trying to move the car. Parking warden advised her to do that within five minutes but he only waited for one minute (please see time on the photos). Further as I mentioned in my original email the car is in the direction facing the "No Entry" end of the road. As there was a lot of oncoming traffic on this single lane road and my wife was trying to perform a U-turn. So it may look like the car is stationary but she was actually waiting for the opportunity to perform a U-turn safely. Therefore I challenge your comments that vehicle was stationary. The fact that one of the photo taken by CEO is completely blurred, confirms that the car was moving and CEO was in a hurry to take the photo.
3. It has been stated in your letter dated 06/02/2013
“I refer to your comment about your wife trying to move the vehicle, the officer noted that the lady states she does not drive.”
I would advise you that my wife strenuously denies the CEO's account of events and is prepared to give evidence to this effect at adjudication. I therefore suggest you enquire of the CEO, as opposed to referring to their notebook, as to whether they stand by their account. If required, I (as the owner) am prepared to request the adjudicator to call your CEO to give evidence in person.
My wife is in possession of a driver's license and the only car she is insured for is this car. She did not inform the CEO that she would not move the vehicle when asked. In fact she was situated in the driver's seat and trying to move the car. The fact that one of the photo taken by CEO is completely blurred, confirms that the car was moving and CEO was in a hurry to take the photo.

I hope this helps.
Regards

Hi folks

Finally I have received the appeal hearing letter from PATAS. Here is the link to the letter:

http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag128/...zpsdd53c183.jpg

I am surprised that the council is still contesting knowing that their PCN was invalid on legal wording ground. I didn't send anything to the PATAS with original form, so probably need to send my arguments. Would appreciate if you can guide me about the course of action from here.

Many thanks

Hi All

Would appreciate a lot if you can help me with this issue.

Regards

Hi folks

Finally I have received the appeal hearing letter from PATAS. Here is the link to the letter:

http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag128/...zpsdd53c183.jpg

I am surprised that the council is still contesting knowing that their PCN was invalid on legal wording ground. I didn't send anything to the PATAS with original form, so probably need to send my arguments. Would appreciate if you can guide me about the course of action from here.

Many thanks

For what its worth, the Notice of Rejection mis-states the 14 day period in which to pay a charge certificate.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/34...ulation/22/made

Hi Hippocrates

Thanks for your reply. I am not sure if I completely understand the legal point but I appreciate your help.

Do you know what should be my next step at this stage as I haven't sent my grounds for appeal to the PATAS yet.

Thanks

Hi there
I attended the hearing. The adjudicator told me that he doesn't agree with previous case precedent and is not required to follow those case decisions. However he allowed my appeal on completely different grounds that he helped me to determine.

Assuming the OP heard correctly in the adjudication room, the sheer arrogance demonstrated here demonstrates beyond parody the abysmal state of the PATAS adjudication service. It is surely not a matter of agreement/disagreement, but whether the current case matches decisions made in accordance with the law at previous adjudications.

Imagine a judge saying "b***er previous judgments, I don't agree with them because I am the Great I Am judge, and Always Right.

Firstly, well done! Justice has prevailed.

Secondly please post up the Adjudicators decision scrubbed of your name & address, PCN number and vehicle reg. Please blank them out with some cut up pieces of Post-It notes if needs be.

The latter for the benefit of anybody following on.

Thanks,