Thread: Does wrong location on PCN mean "not as stated on PCN"?

In October I got a parking ticket for parking with 2 wheels on the kerb. It was a genuine error as I did not realise I was outside of the marked area. Anyway ingnorance is no grounds for appeal.

However the ticket stated that the vehicle was seen at location... "road name, outside 1" when it was infact outside no.3. They have photos to prove this.

I appealed to the council (Haringey) on the grounds that "the contravention did not occur as stated on the pcn" and also that the bays were badly signed. I now think the signs were probably ok!

I lost the appeal and now have the option of appealing to the parking adjudicator.

My question is this....

Would being outside no.3, instead of no.1, amount to "the contravention did not occur as stated on the PCN". Technically it is not correct, but another way to look at it is that the contravention is as described, its just the location that is different. And then only one building away!

Do I have sufficient grounds to win an appeal to the adjudicator??

Any advice welcome - I have to pay or appeal in a couple of days
thanks

Similar Threads:

• Advice please: PCN shows incorrect location. Appeal?
• Does a PCN have to have "date of contravention"
• RE: "PCN" ERROR./ Gross Incompetence.
• Definition of "Parked" when used on a PCN
• Challenge PCN with no amount stated?

If there is a bay outside no. 3 allowing footway parking I would say you have a case if not I would say not.

No, there was no bay outside no.3 or no.1. The bay began outside no.5.
But as the location is incorrect on the ticket, do I have a case on these grounds?

Without sounding pedantic the pcn does not say 'in front of number 1' it says 'outside' so technically it is correct as you where outside number 1 although not directly in front of it. Whether the adjudicator will agree with my opinion or yours who knows?

No, my point is not whether I was 'outside' or 'in front of' my point is I was outside no.3 and not outside no.1 as stated on the pcn.

Does this count as grounds on which to appeal?

I already told you its a matter of opinion if you want to appeal its up to you but I repeat what I said in my original post and that is you were technically outside number one just not directly in front of it, which is not what was stated on the pcn.

I have no knowledge on this but I would like to think the location is incorrectly described. Any vehicle anywhere in the World could be described as "outside No1". One in John O'Groats could fulfill that just as much as one "in front of No5". It is a matter of degree - and, just like most pcn contraventions, there should be nothing imprecise in the behaviour of all parties.

The regulations require very precise behaviour from road users or they will rob them for any indescretion - so why should they be lax and incorrect in their fund raising efforts, by any degree?

Anyway, if you have had your Representation turned down by the Authority you have presumably passed the discounted date. So you have nothing to loose by Appealing to the Adjudicator. Even if he rules against you, it should cost you nothing other than having to pay the full ticket charge. Other than your time and trouble.

Thats my dilemma - they have given me another 14 days to pay the reduced rate of £50.00. If I appeal to the adjudicator and lose that, then I would have to pay the full fee of £100.00. If it wasnt for the £50 risk, I would have a go at appealing, as I do think I have a point, but because of the risk, the more I think about it, the more I am tempted to pay up, before it goes up!!!

Thats the physcology of the system - paying is what it is designed around, far more than fairnness and justice. So make it the easy option. JUST MONEY.

Making £50 attractive, a second time round, they feel they are more likely to get that and quickly, sooner than justify themselves and their methods. Very, very rarely does an Authority turn up to an Adjudication hearing to defend themselves, yet they are paying for it!

I bet the previous documentation never indicated they would extend the discount period beyond the original period and you had to pay within 14 days (or similar) to get the discount. That failed, so the system repeats the offer/threat. Why? JUST MONEY.

Your choice - but I know what I would do.

Originally Posted by searchgenie

If it wasnt for the £50 risk, I would have a go at appealing, as I do think I have a point,

What point?? You got a Penalty charge issued for the contravention of parking on the footway which you admit to or have I missed something? If you are so convinced of your innocence you would not worry about the money and appeal anyway.

Originally Posted by green_and_mean

What point?? You got a Penalty charge issued for the contravention of parking on the footway which you admit to or have I missed something? If you are so convinced of your innocence you would not worry about the money and appeal anyway.

I don't think I am innocent. I have photos showing I AM parked on the footway. But I feel there was an error that could get me off.... had I parked there knowingly, and got a ticket, I would have paid it straight away. However, it was a genuine mistake. I actually got out the car and went out of my way to check where I was parked was ok and I got it wrong.

Hence, when I spotted a (potential) error on the location of my vehicle on the ticket I decided to appeal and felt ok about doing so, because in my heart I know I did it innocently (you may say naively!). I still feel the same way about wanting to appeal - morally, I dont feel I deserve the ticket. But hey, I guess no-one ever does!!

Originally Posted by Tony P

I bet the previous documentation never indicated they would extend the discount period beyond the original period and you had to pay within 14 days (or similar) to get the discount. That failed, so the system repeats the offer/threat. Why? JUST MONEY.

No, the original ticket did say you can appeal and if you lose you would have another chance to pay the discounted rate of £50.00 for 14 days from when they reply. This time however the notes from the adjudicator state that if you lose, you will not be given the chance to pay the discounted fee again. (actually it says "the penalty due will normally be the full, not the reduced penalty, unless the adjudicator directs otherwise" which I understand they rarely, if ever, do.

Can I get this right.
You responded to a NtO and the LA are offering you the discounted rate?
Did you tick the box "The penalty exceeds the relevant amount"?

If you did then my response would be to write to them and thank them for agreeing with one of the statutory grounds for appeal but that in these circumstances the only option the law allows is cancellation of the NtO and they have no option to reserve it.

I've had this happen to me and for this reason always tick that box.

All I have done so far is appeal against the original pcn and have received a Notice of Rejection and been given (another) chance to pay the reduced fee if I pay within 14 days. I didnt tick any boxes, there were no boxes! There is a box on the Appeal to adjudicator form saying "the penalty exceeded the amount applicable" but I dont see how that applies, as the penalty did not exceed the applicable amount in this case, as far as I know. How come you get away with ticking that box?

Do you feel lucky..?

You are in for £50 minimum even if you roll over with your legs in the air.
You are in for £100 if you dither much longer.

I you Appeal-
You are in for £100 if you loose.
You are in for NIL if you win.

It is a balance of how much the second £50 means in the overall scheme of your life (balanced against no payment), against following your instinctive 'gut' feelings about fairnes.

At worst, for the extra £50, you will have given your best shot to someone who is totally impartial but a stickler for exactness of Law and wordings. Can you object to that?

Be assured the LA aint in the least bit concerned about fairness - ONLY MONEY.

Searchgenie,
I may have it all wrong but can you please scan, wash and post all that you have.
It is not clear to me if you have received a Notice to Owner or not. You say that you have received a Notice of Rejection but the law only allows the LA to send these in response to appeals made following rejection of statutory representations made following service of a Notice to Owner.
If the LA have circumvented the statutory process then in my view their case is fatally flawed. But it is not clear from your posts if this is what has happened.

Bernie, I cant scan, but will try to be clearer...

step 1. I got a 'ticket' on my car, officially called the Penalty Charge Notice (pcn). Given 14 days to appeal or pay reduced fee of £50.00

step 2. I challenged the PCN by writing to the LA within 14 days

step 3. Received a letter saying they had received my challenge and were dealing with it

step 4. Received Notice to Owner saying the PCN had not been paid (despite the fact I was waiting to hear from them if they had accepted my challenge).

step 5. I phoned to ask why I had received a NTO and was told it was automatically created and I should just write back and say I have already appealed.

step 6. I responded to the NTO by writing to explain I had already appealed and was waiting to hear from them

step 7. I received a letter called a 'Notice of Rejection' from the LA, stating that they are rejecting my challenge "as I have not made any grounds for cancelling the PCN or the Notice to Owner"

step 8. PAY or appeal to adjudicator....... ?

Hope that explains the situation - I had left out the Notice to Owner as I thought it was sent in error - sorry!!

And am I correct in saying that at step 8 they are offering to accept the reduced amount?

Originally Posted by Bernie_the_Bolt

And am I correct in saying that at step 8 they are offering to accept the reduced amount?

Yes, that is correct. I have been given 14 days from the date of the Notice of Rejection to pay the reduced fee of £50.00. I have until 21st Feb!

OK, so I would write back and say:

I note that you have treated my informal representations as a statutory response to the Notice to Owner. I further note that in response to my representations you are now offering to accept a discounted penalty. One of the statutory grounds for appeal is that the penalty exceeds the relevant amount. By virtue of the fact that you are offering to accept a reduced amount it appears that you have determined that this statutory ground for appeal is made out. This being the case the law does not permit you to substitute the lower penalty, only to cancel the pcn.

Please confirm that you have done so. Failing that I shall make an appropriate and detailed appeal to the independent adjudicator.

When does your time run out for responding to the adjudicator?