Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Appeal rejected
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Nick Kaye
Click to view attachment

I took an elderly couple home and they invited me in to see their house. The husband said he had a visitors permit for me which he kept in his garage. However I could see it was taking him sometime to climb the stairs, find the keys and then get to the garage so I glanced out of the window and saw a CEO waiting by the car. To be honest I cold have justy driven away but the CEO was actually symapthetic and said he would write a note to say what had happened. Also he waited outside the door whilst the elderly gentleman came out to explain and stick up for my cause. He just told me to appeal and it will be fine. I did so and even backed it up with an email from the owner.

I got the rejection as posted above. Is there a process I can reappeal?
What I am furious by is the fact the CEO did not put a thing in the notes.
boxers64
post the PCN ommiting identifying details,
the 9 mins observation time could corroborate you discussion with the CEO,
like they say "CEO can give pcn straight away they don't have to wait, so why wait 9 mins is an argument.
i don't think this is a NOR as it should have the PATAS appeal form included, is this the case?
Nick Kaye
Not sure it came with PATAS form actually, will check when I get home tonight. Is the best course of action to pay or can I re-appeal?
Mad Mick V
Went to get a permit here is a photo of it with the appropriate time and date indicated, plus a letter from the householder confirming the circumstances.

No!

Mick
Nick Kaye
The householder spoke to the CEO. He said he would put a note to help my appeal. Why say that then not do it. Obviously money hungry council. Surely a moan with that sort of appeal may help. The question I am asking is do I have to pay then appeal?
I am still within the 2 weeks discounted rate.
orford
QUOTE (boxers64 @ Wed, 15 Jan 2014 - 16:02) *
i don't think this is a NOR as it should have the PATAS appeal form included, is this the case?
No, it's a rejection of OP's informal representation, which I've never known Hackney to do. I've had 3 PCN's in the past and each time Hackney's only response to informal reps was the NTO.
Mad Mick V
QUOTE (Nick Kaye @ Wed, 15 Jan 2014 - 16:39) *
The householder spoke to the CEO. He said he would put a note to help my appeal. Why say that then not do it. Obviously money hungry council. Surely a moan with that sort of appeal may help. The question I am asking is do I have to pay then appeal?
I am still within the 2 weeks discounted rate.


You have the choice to pay at the discount rate which means you have admitted liability---game over
You can lose the discount and wait until the NTO then submit a formal appeal to the Council. If this is refused you can take the appeal to PATAS.

Mick
orford
QUOTE (Nick Kaye @ Wed, 15 Jan 2014 - 16:39) *
The question I am asking is do I have to pay then appeal?
I am still within the 2 weeks discounted rate.
No, if you pay, that's it. You're accepting the contravention occurred and therefore cannot appeal further.

To make further representations you have to wait for the Notice to Owner, by which time the discounted penalty is gone and the full penalty is owing. The good news is that when they reject your reps to the NTO, you can appeal to the adjudicator at no further cost.
Nick Kaye
Not sure what to do as I really dont want to pay the full whack. I think its disgusting the way they have handled this and where is his head camera when needing it.

I am not sure what chance I stand if I take it to appeal. I always fight them and am happy to take it all the way but if I do lose it is a hefty fine for something I was confident I would win on appeal in the first instance.
Incandescent
QUOTE (Nick Kaye @ Wed, 15 Jan 2014 - 17:57) *
Not sure what to do as I really dont want to pay the full whack. I think its disgusting the way they have handled this and where is his head camera when needing it.

I am not sure what chance I stand if I take it to appeal. I always fight them and am happy to take it all the way but if I do lose it is a hefty fine for something I was confident I would win on appeal in the first instance.

Never, ever, put any trust in a council parking department doing the right thing, they are almost all venal and rapacious organisations.

You have to stand your ground and not be beguiled by the discount ! If you are prepared to do this, then wait for the Notice to Owner.

Your account is credible, and should result in the PCN being cancelled at PATAS, but first you have to wait for the Notice to Owner, appeal again, get refused, then register an appeal at PATAS. The discount is a really quite wicked device to ensure people don't appeal. It works because less than 1% of PCNs are appealed to the adjudicators. In fact your informal challenge may not even have been seen by a council employee, as councils are allowed to pass challenges out to their parking enforcement contractors, who are heavily incentivised to generate cash.

Time spent getting a temporary resident permit from the resident you are visiting is the same as going to buy a ticket at a P&D machine. Time is allowed to buy a ticket, and the same applies to resident temporary permits. There are successful adjudications on this, your case is not unique.

Can we see the PCN too, please.
hcandersen
Not certain I agree with all that's been said. But before getting to this, you must post the PCN, this is one of the mandatory items of evidence which is required to contain prescribed info and which often yields grounds for appeal, but we've not seen it. It should be posted.

The fact is that you were parked for 9 minutes in a restricted parking place but without displaying the required permit. Your account does not state that the resident appeared with a permit. Did he?

But IMO, the most damning part of the council's position, and not one for which the writer of the letter could necessarily be blamed, is that they state categorically that "..the CEO made no mention of seeing or speaking to the driver"

This is taken from the CEO's notebook which is primary evidence. It is required to contain all relevant matters pertaining to the events, even if these might not support the authority's case.

1. If your account is correct and yet the CEO has failed to record all evidence, then IMO an adj would find this to be a procedural impropriety because on the balance of probabilities this affected the council's decision whether to exercise discretion.

2. If your account is correct and the CEO did record the events fully but the authority stated the opposite, then again this would be a PI because they've failed to give proper consideration to your challenge.

3. Your account is incorrect. Only you know.
Nick Kaye
Click to view attachment

I have attached the PCN. The resident heard the CEO say he would put it in the notes, as did one other person with me. In fact the CEO went out of his way to wait by the front door for the resident to appear. I am so angry that he didnt at least stick to his word.

The resident came out with a permit but it was too late. The PCN was on my car
boxers64
QUOTE (Nick Kaye @ Fri, 17 Jan 2014 - 11:29) *
Click to view attachment

I have attached the PCN. The resident heard the CEO say he would put it in the notes, as did one other person with me. In fact the CEO went out of his way to wait by the front door for the resident to appear. I am so angry that he didnt at least stick to his word.

The resident came out with a permit but it was too late. The PCN was on my car

do you have the permit, as it could be the case that the CEO thought you were stalling and didn't actually use a permit so they gave you a ticket.
Nick Kaye
I do, Its in the car still. As I got outside I could have driven off. he said he had already issued the ticket but hadnt put it on the windscreen. I stood there and explained the situation and he said not to worry he would write on the notes. He then proceeded to place the ticket on the windscreen and asked me what number the house was. I walked him to the front and then went in to get the owner. he came out and explained. The permits were in his garage and he walked out the house and to the garage. The CEO, along with another CEO (there were two for some reason) just left. I took the permit, even though I didnt need it and that was that.
Incandescent
QUOTE (Nick Kaye @ Fri, 17 Jan 2014 - 12:11) *
I do, Its in the car still. As I got outside I could have driven off. he said he had already issued the ticket but hadnt put it on the windscreen. I stood there and explained the situation and he said not to worry he would write on the notes. He then proceeded to place the ticket on the windscreen and asked me what number the house was. I walked him to the front and then went in to get the owner. he came out and explained. The permits were in his garage and he walked out the house and to the garage. The CEO, along with another CEO (there were two for some reason) just left. I took the permit, even though I didnt need it and that was that.

Your account should win this at adjudication. If you are prepared to stand your ground, you wait for the Notice to Owner, and appeal again, pointing out that you have independent witnesses to the CEO and his actions. If they don't cancel it then, I will be very surprised, but if not, you take them to PATAS. You really do need to ignore the discount option because all council rely on people folding and paying-up the discounted amount for their unjust enrichment.
Nick Kaye
Thanks all. Great advice. I think I will take it to appeal. I would feel sick knowing I was lied to by the CEO and still pay.
boxers64
QUOTE (Nick Kaye @ Fri, 17 Jan 2014 - 12:11) *
I do, Its in the car still. As I got outside I could have driven off. he said he had already issued the ticket but hadnt put it on the windscreen. I stood there and explained the situation and he said not to worry he would write on the notes. He then proceeded to place the ticket on the windscreen and asked me what number the house was. I walked him to the front and then went in to get the owner. he came out and explained. The permits were in his garage and he walked out the house and to the garage. The CEO, along with another CEO (there were two for some reason) just left. I took the permit, even though I didnt need it and that was that.

th efollowing is an extract of the adjudicators decision in my appeal under similar circumstances.
"He stated that when he parked he went inside to his Father-in-Law's house to obtain a disability badge.
He said that he had some difficulty locating it but did and when he came out there was no penalty notice on the vehicle.
He showed me a video clip of his vehicle displaying a disability badge and clock and a removal van arrive. The officer looked at the disability badge and drove away.
Mr. Gordon asserted that this was on the day in question.
I find that the delay in finding the badge was probably reasonable in this case.
I reserved judgment to research whether a disability badge is permitted in a Waltham Forest parking bay and I am satisfied that it was.
I will therefore allow the appeal.

iv been categorized as a persistent evader/offender as i have appealed and won all the pcn they have issued

just substitute my badge for you permit and include the conversation with the CEO and witness statments
hcandersen
Would you please post your challenge, we need to know how you presented your argument. But as matters stand you have corroborative evidence as to your account and IMO if the CEO did not record these matters then in addition to you succeeding, whether at appeal or adjudication, that officer should be disciplined.

But one step at a time.
Nick Kaye
The appeal was not as great as it could have been but I really felt confident due to the CEO's notes.

Below is what I wrote and below that is what the owner of the house wrote.

As I explained to the enforcement officer 0466, I had just dropped off an elderly lady and her husband was trying to find me a visitors permit but was struggling to find them. He then remembered he keeps them in the garage and took a long time to fetch the keys from the basement and give one to me. In the meantime I noticed the CEO outside so I ran out. It was too late. He had already been there 5 minutes but he did say he would put a note on the system as he saw the elderly couple at Albion Square. I even have an email from the lady's husband Alexander which I have attached.
.................

I was most upset to hear that you had managed to acquire a parking ticket whilst I was in the process of going to the garage at the rear of our premises to collect a 2-hour visitors' parking permit for you. yesterday. (As you could obviously see, I'm having some trouble walking these days, so it takes me a little while to get to the garage & back!)

Please do feel free to pass on my contact details to LBH Parking Dept. in any correspondence with them regarding this matter.
hcandersen
You've mentioned what you claim the CEO said, which is important. You can expand on this, but the important point is that you will not be introducing this as a new line of argument: adjudicators like consistency.
nimh999
QUOTE (Nick Kaye @ Wed, 15 Jan 2014 - 15:09) *
What I am furious by is the fact the CEO did not put a thing in the notes.


You need to ask for
a copy of the CEO's contemporaneous notes
a copy of the TRO/TMO traffic order

keep all envelopes, staple them to the notice and record the date each notice was received.

The NTO must be posted on the date of the notice otherwise the PC is invalid.

My view no postmark then no proof when it was posted and a win at adjudication but you have to convince the adjudicator

QUOTE (Incandescent @ Wed, 15 Jan 2014 - 19:42) *
In fact your informal challenge may not even have been seen by a council employee, as councils are allowed to pass challenges out to their parking enforcement contractors, who are heavily incentivised to generate cash.

If they do this on formal reps then I think it is Procedural Impropriety. As far as I was aware only the Enforcement Authority can consider formal reps not their contractors.
Nick Kaye
QUOTE (nimh999 @ Fri, 17 Jan 2014 - 22:51) *
QUOTE (Nick Kaye @ Wed, 15 Jan 2014 - 15:09) *
What I am furious by is the fact the CEO did not put a thing in the notes.


You need to ask for
a copy of the CEO's contemporaneous notes
a copy of the TRO/TMO traffic order

keep all envelopes, staple them to the notice and record the date each notice was received.

The NTO must be posted on the date of the notice otherwise the PC is invalid.

My view no postmark then no proof when it was posted and a win at adjudication but you have to convince the adjudicator

QUOTE (Incandescent @ Wed, 15 Jan 2014 - 19:42) *
In fact your informal challenge may not even have been seen by a council employee, as councils are allowed to pass challenges out to their parking enforcement contractors, who are heavily incentivised to generate cash.

If they do this on formal reps then I think it is Procedural Impropriety. As far as I was aware only the Enforcement Authority can consider formal reps not their contractors.



Ok so I now have the notice to owner. I am going to now re appeal online. I am going to write exactly what I appealed before along with the email from the owner of the house. From what you are saying I should then ask for a copy of the CEO notes and copy of the TRO/TMO traffic order and hope they either do not postmark?
The notice to owner came through to my friend whose car it is and stupidly threw the envelope away.
Nick Kaye
Click to view attachment

Well my second appeal did not work. I have attached the letter, which by the way only came when I chased them. It seems I am out of the 28 days. I have spoken to Hackney and apparently I have until the 18th.

What infuriates me is that I clearly spotted the CEO way before he issued the PCN and spoke to him through the window. I then ran outside and he assured me he would put it all in the notes. The fact he didn't is so annoying. Interestingly their first rejection states they do not have to give me any time and now they are now saying I have 5 minutes to get a permit. Surely there is an inconsistency there?

When appealing through PATAS, shall I keep the appeal exactly the same or is there anything I else I can use?
Neil B
QUOTE (Nick Kaye @ Tue, 15 Apr 2014 - 09:13) *
Well my second appeal did not work. I have attached the letter, which by the way only came when I chased them. It seems I am out of the 28 days. I have spoken to Hackney and apparently I have until the 18th.

Explain please. Where does that date come from?

Your deadline for submitting an appeal to patas was yesterday, 14th April. (that is, had you actually received it when first sent -- but you didn't)

That said, the rejection actually miss-states the period and gave you, erroneously, until today, 15th.

--
It gets complicated. By sending a copy, hackney are basically acknowledging that you didn't receive the rejection initially. They can't then apply any old date that suits them. You have, 28 days beginning with the date on which it was actually served -- which I suppose has to be the copy.
All the more reason for explaining where 18th came from.
DancingDad
QUOTE (Neil B @ Tue, 15 Apr 2014 - 12:46) *
QUOTE (Nick Kaye @ Tue, 15 Apr 2014 - 09:13) *
Well my second appeal did not work. I have attached the letter, which by the way only came when I chased them. It seems I am out of the 28 days. I have spoken to Hackney and apparently I have until the 18th.

Explain please. Where does that date come from?

Your deadline for submitting an appeal to patas was yesterday, 14th April. (that is, had you actually received it when first sent -- but you didn't)

That said, the rejection actually miss-states the period and gave you, erroneously, until today, 15th.

--
It gets complicated. By sending a copy, hackney are basically acknowledging that you didn't receive the rejection initially. They can't then apply any old date that suits them. You have, 28 days beginning with the date on which it was actually served -- which I suppose has to be the copy.All the more reason for explaining where 18th came from.


The NOR clearly says date of service (delivered) which in this case is in OPs favour. By sending a copy, presumably without cover notes ??? they seem to have acknowledged the non receipt and the copy is now the NOR with date of service as date of email.
However, OP has written on NOR, Cameron says 18th. What Cameron bases this on, dunno, OP will have to say.
If it was along the lines of, you've actually missed the deadline but I can give you till the 18th (bearing in mind that councils often record calls) I'm not sure that we could legitimately prove acceptance of none service and to be safe should use the 18th as a deadline.
Neil B
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 15 Apr 2014 - 13:03) *
The NOR clearly says date of service (delivered) which in this case is in OPs favour. Where? I didn't see that?

By sending a copy, presumably without cover notes ??? they seem to have acknowledged the non receipt <<<< Yep. and the copy is now the NOR with date of service as date of email.
However, OP has written on NOR, Cameron says 18th. What Cameron bases this on, dunno, OP will have to say.
If it was along the lines of, you've actually missed the deadline but I can give you till the 18th (bearing in mind that councils often record calls)
yep, that's what i'm thinking.

I'm not sure that we could legitimately prove acceptance of none service and to be safe should use the 18th as a deadline.
Not so sure about that; You're contradicting what we just agreed above?
BUT - I also think he should still act promptly. At least register an appeal, preferably yesterday. Shows willingness to resolve and enhances the possible PI of Cameron's '18th'.


- ish.
DancingDad
QUOTE (Neil B @ Tue, 15 Apr 2014 - 13:12) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 15 Apr 2014 - 13:03) *
The NOR clearly says date of service (delivered) which in this case is in OPs favour. Where? I didn't see that? Page 2 of PDF in post 23

By sending a copy, presumably without cover notes ??? they seem to have acknowledged the non receipt <<<< Yep. and the copy is now the NOR with date of service as date of email.
However, OP has written on NOR, Cameron says 18th. What Cameron bases this on, dunno, OP will have to say.
If it was along the lines of, you've actually missed the deadline but I can give you till the 18th (bearing in mind that councils often record calls)
yep, that's what i'm thinking.

I'm not sure that we could legitimately prove acceptance of none service and to be safe should use the 18th as a deadline.
Not so sure about that; You're contradicting what we just agreed above? Didn't agree nothing... many reasons for sending a copy, one assumption is that they are simply being fair
BUT - I also think he should still act promptly. At least register an appeal, preferably yesterday. Shows willingness to resolve and enhances the possible PI of Cameron's '18th'.


- ish.


Fully agree act now if OP is going to and register appeal... only needs to tick box contravention did not occur Write full submissions to follow, sign and send it.
But need to read full thread to advise more.
Incandescent
Has their Letter of Refusal of Reps addressed points made in your representation ? If not, then it is a failure to consider, no ifs or buts. From what I see, it is a standard 'boilerplate' letter and contains nothing at all about any points you might have made, but until we see them, this is just conjecture.

So - did they consider your reps or not ?
Nick Kaye
QUOTE (Incandescent @ Tue, 15 Apr 2014 - 14:27) *
Has their Letter of Refusal of Reps addressed points made in your representation ? If not, then it is a failure to consider, no ifs or buts. From what I see, it is a standard 'boilerplate' letter and contains nothing at all about any points you might have made, but until we see them, this is just conjecture.

So - did they consider your reps or not ?


I dont think they did looking back. Below is my second appeal and I believe the one below that is my first appeal which I back up with a letter from the owner to say he is elderley and doensnt move as quick as he used to. He needed to go to the basement level, get a key for the garage and get his permit........

I am very disappointed by the fact you chose not to overturn my PCN and will take this all the way if necessary. What disappoints me the most was the fact that the CEO lied to me.
If you are not going to overturn then I would like a copy of CEO's contemporaneous notes and a copy of the TRO/TMO traffic order.
As you say the CEO can issue PCN's straight away so why did he wait 9 minutes?
This is because he was busy talking to me and convincing me not to drive away and that everything would be alright as he was writing the whole incident in his notes. I have the elderly gentleman that was looking for his permit as a witness who will testify. He repeatedly said he would put something on the notes and even came to the doorstep of the elder gentleman's house to meet him. He was accompanied by another CEO who couldn't wait to get away. Surely one of them must have had a camera to verify my story?
If there are no notes then the CEO was obviously lying to me which is a procedural impropriety. Was this to just gain commission?
If he did record events on the notes then again this a procedural impropriety on your part for not giving proper consideration to my challenge.
Time spent getting a temporary resident permit from the resident I was visiting is the same as going to buy a ticket at a P&D machine. Time is allowed to buy a ticket, so why doesn't the same apply to resident temporary permits. My head was out of the window as soon as the CEO got there and the rest of the time was spent talking to him whilst he took pictures.

First appeal
As I explained to the enforcement officer 0466, I had just dropped off an elderly lady and her husband was trying to find me a visitors permit but was struggling to find them. He then remembered he keeps them in the garage and took a long time to fetch the keys from the basement and give one to me. In the meantime I noticed the CEO outside so I ran out. It was too late. He had already been there 5 minutes but he did say he would put a note on the system as he saw the elderly couple at 22 Albion Square. I even have an email from the lady's husband Alexander which I have attached.





Neil B
Feel free to ignore the crucial questions about a curious but crucial date.

And the bit about submitting appeal pronto.
Nick Kaye
QUOTE (Neil B @ Tue, 15 Apr 2014 - 17:38) *
Feel free to ignore the crucial questions about a curious but crucial date.

And the bit about submitting appeal pronto.


Sorry Neil, To be hinest I only just saw your post. Was looking on my phone and didnt scroll up.

I am not sure where they got those dates from. On the phone I have been told different things by Hackney. He couldnt even explain why the 18th. When I called PATAS they said it should be the strict 28 days and to write to them as to why it is coming in late.

Shall I tick "contravention did not occur"? I will fax it to them now saying I feel my case has not been answered properly and i am getting conflicting replies. The first rejection said the CEO does not have to wait any time whatsoever and the second one says 5 minutes. Also the date of appeal is very confusing
Neil B
Yeah sorry mate, I typed hastily on my phone while out too.

As DD said, you only need to register the appeal. Don't worry about detail at this point.
Hippocrates
Your explanation for being late is the contents of the phone call. Please post up the whole of the NTO. And confirm what has been sent to PATAS.

It really is very important that you keep us up to date with all developments as and when they happen.

I would also e-mail Hackney and tell them you have registered your appeal at PATAS. Do not send them the details, only PATAS.
Nick Kaye
I have faxed the form to PATAS, explaining the delay and the conflicting dates Hackney have given me. I also said I did not feel my representation had been properly considered and answered.
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.