On the week-end of 2-3 June 2017, I parked on Cowley Place. One of my friends gave me the visitors pass for MN, but I did not realise it had a different zone than I usually use.(EO).

I did have visitor parking permits, which I displayed and validated.

Clearly there was no intent to evade payment or gain any advantage and I indeed have used/invalidated two visitor passes.

I therefore feel it is unfair to be fined, and lose the use of two visitors passes.

I also question whether the correct contravention code was used on the PCN. (30 - Parked longer than permitted).

Shouldn’t the correct code be 19 - Parked in a residents’ or shared use parking place or zone either displaying an invalid permit or voucher or pay & display ticket, or after the expiry of paid for time.

In my case I was in a shared use zone, displaying an invalid permit. Guidelines say Code 19 is used when a driver has made some attempt to park correctly and is displaying something that could have been used.

Additionally, The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 states that any PCN issued should legally contain the following information :

(3)(2) (b)(ii)but that, if a notice to owner is served notwithstanding those representations, representations against the penalty charge must be made in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner.

I cannot see any clear reference to point 3 (2) (ii) anywhere on the PCN. It is insufficient to say that the owner must follow the instructions on the NtO, it must be outlined on the PCN. This means that the council has not complied with the Regulations made under the Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA) or the relevant regulations.

Am I correct in these 3 points, which make a sucessful appeal likely ??

I therefore feel it is unfair to be fined, and lose the use of two visitors passes.

I've got a visitor's pass valid in Aberdeen, should I be allowed to use that in Oxford?.

I mean, I would be losing the use of that Aberdeen pass......

Of course not. The pass states which zone it is valid in. Outside of that zone it has no validity.

Additionally, The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 states that any PCN issued should legally contain the following information :

 

(3)(2) (b)(ii)but that, if a notice to owner is served notwithstanding those representations, representations against the penalty charge must be made in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner.

 

I cannot see any clear reference to point 3 (2) (ii) anywhere on the PCN. It is insufficient to say that the owner must follow the instructions on the NtO, it must be outlined on the PCN.

http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/keycases/Ruimy%20V%20LB%20Barnet.pdf

suggests that a set of adjudicators found it is the totality of information on the PCN that determines this ground ..... in that case Barnet Council's wording was found sufficient, and the applicant's appeal failed on that ground. Was there any other wording on the PCN (or its reverse) regarding appeals / informal appeals??

I also question whether the correct contravention code was used on the PCN. (30 - Parked longer than permitted).

Shouldn’t the correct code be 19 - Parked in a residents’ or shared use parking place or zone either displaying an invalid permit or voucher or pay & display ticket, or after the expiry of paid for time.

In my case I was in a shared use zone, displaying an invalid permit. Guidelines say Code 19 is used when a driver has made some attempt to park correctly and is displaying something that could have been used.

......

Am I correct in these 3 points, which make a sucessful appeal likely ??

This last ground of appeal seems your best bet.

I agree with what you say, but the purpose of point 1 is to see if I can get some sympathy to use discretion for mitigating circumstances.

Point 2 - lack of appeal info- there is one more vague reference.

It is insufficient to say that the owner must follow the instructions on the NtO, it must be outlined on the PCN. The purpose is to inform the driver that they can make representations before a NtO is issued, and again when a NtO is issued.

Your statement “all challenges before and after NtO is served will be considered” doesn’t make it clear that two challenges can be made. It seems to indicate one challenge with two possible timings of when it is made.

Point 3 wrong code used. Can they argue both codes apply and either can be legally used?

Your statement “all challenges before and after NtO is served will be considered” doesn’t make it clear that two challenges can be made.

Who said “all challenges before and after NtO is served will be considered”?

On the back of the ticket it says " Policy and approach to challenges can be found on "their website"- all challenges received both before and after NtO is served will be considered on their individual circumstances"

Also " If you challenge this PCN but the council issues a NtO anyway, the owner must follow the instructions on the NtO"

So when (in your reply to me, when I'd asked if there was any other wording on the PCN or its reverse) when you said "your statement", you meant "the council's statement on its PCN" rather than "BazzaS's statement"?

Yes, sorry I cut and pasted part of my challenge wording.

Any other advice before I send this...

Dear Sir / Madam,

I often visit friends at Oxford University, who give me visitors permits to park near their house.

On the week-end of 2-3 June 2017, I parked on Cowley Place. One of my friends gave me visitor passes for MN, but I did not realise it had a different zone than I usually use.(EO).

This resulted in PCN OX34001977.

PCN enforcement “ gives priority to people living in residential areas …to discourage parking by motorists who do not possess residents or visitors parking permits. “

I did have visitor parking permits, which I displayed and validated. (see attached photo)

Clearly there was no intent to evade payment or gain any advantage and I indeed have used/invalidated two visitor passes.

I therefore feel it is unfair to be fined, and lose the use of two visitors passes.

I also question whether the correct contravention code was used on the PCN. (30 - Parked longer than permitted).

Shouldn’t the correct code be 19 - Parked in a residents’ or shared use parking place or zone either displaying an invalid permit or voucher or pay & display ticket, or after the expiry of paid for time.

In my case I was in a shared use zone, displaying an invalid permit. Guidelines say Code 19 is used when a driver has made some attempt to park correctly and is displaying something that could have been used.

Additionally, The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 states that any PCN issued should legally contain the following information :

(b)that, if representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified for the purpose before a notice to owner is served—

(i)those representations will be considered;

(ii)but that, if a notice to owner is served notwithstanding those representations, representations against the penalty charge must be made in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner.

I cannot see any clear reference to point 3 (2) (ii) anywhere on the PCN. It is insufficient to say that the owner must follow the instructions on the NtO, it must be outlined on the PCN. The purpose is to inform the driver that they can make representations before a NtO is issued, and again when a NtO is issued.

Your statement “all challenges before and after NtO is served will be considered” doesn’t make it clear that two challenges can be made. It seems to indicate one challenge with two possible timings of when it is made.

This means that the council has not complied with the Regulations made under the Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA) or the relevant regulations.

I understand that I have technically breached the terms by parking in the wrong zone although using a visitors permit, but ask that you give consideration to cancelling the penalty due to the mitigating circumstances and breach of Regulations by your Council.

I am sure you are aware of the government guidance on duty to act fairly and in the public interest, which this case clearly appears to fall into.

An authority has a discretionary power to cancel a PCN at any point throughout the CPE process. It can do this even when an undoubted contravention has occurred if the authority deems it to be appropriate in the circumstances of the case. Under general principles of public law, authorities have a duty to act fairly and proportionately and are encouraged to exercise discretion sensibly and reasonably and with due regard to the public interest.

Kind Regards

I took Havering Council to the parking ombudsman some years back because they failed to follow procedure. They didn't respond to my appeal within the statutory 56 days.

Once they had failed that I changed tack ever so slightly in all further correspondence in that no offence had occurred. Despite the fact I was parked illegally (allegedly....), the fact that they had failed to follow regs nullified the offence.

People more clever than me will come along but if the PCN does not contain statutory information then the PCN is invalid and no offence was committed.....

Simple.

I fail to understand your argument about the wording. Are you able to post a scan of both sides of the PCN (black out the PCN number and vehicle reg)?

If I understand you correctly, you're saying a PCN has to state that if you are issued an NTO after making a representation, you then have to follow the process stated on the NTO.

This is absent from your PCN?

My confusion is that you then state "It is insufficient to say that the owner must follow the instructions on the NtO, it must be outlined on the PCN." - surely it IS sufficient to say that. The regulation you quoted says a PCN must state exactly that?

On the other issue of the contravention code, can you state exactly what sort of parking bay you were in? Was is free for a fixed period if you had no visitor pass?

Hi, for some reason, my photos appear to upload, but then I get a red crosss and they dont go to the site.

On the back of the ticket it says " Policy and approach to challenges can be found on "their website"- all challenges received both before and after NtO is served will be considered on their individual circumstances"

Also " If you challenge this PCN but the council issues a NtO anyway, the owner must follow the instructions on the NtO"

A PCN must say (ii)but that, if a notice to owner is served notwithstanding those representations, representations against the penalty charge must be made in the form and manner and at the time specified in the notice to owner.

So the PCN must say that you can challenge the PCN, and it must also tell you that even if you challenged the PCN, and they then issue a NtO, then you can also make respresentations against the NtO. I dont think that is made clear, and has the nesessary statuary information.

I was in a shared bay, where it was limited to 3hrs, unless a resident/visitors pass is displayed (unfortunately I was in an adjacent zone)

I was in a shared bay, where it was limited to 3hrs, unless a resident/visitors pass is displayed (unfortunately I was in an adjacent zone)

I also question whether the correct contravention code was used on the PCN. (30 - Parked longer than permitted).

 

Shouldn’t the correct code be 19 - Parked in a residents’ or shared use parking place or zone either displaying an invalid permit or voucher or pay & display ticket, or after the expiry of paid for time.

 

In my case I was in a shared use zone, displaying an invalid permit.

Looking initially at the question "how should the language be construed?" : either seems appropriate.

You were allowed to park for 3 hours without a permit, so "parked longer than permitted" if you parked there more than 3 hours.

As you didn't have a (valid for that zone) permit but did have a permit valid for another zone : "displaying an invalid permit or voucher" is correct too!

Guidelines say Code 19 is used when a driver has made some attempt to park correctly and is displaying something that could have been used.

This can work against your argument .... you might say that using the wrong zone's permit was "made some attempt to park correctly", but I think you fall down on "is displaying something that could have been used." : they'll say a zone MN pass could never be used in zone EO.

I doubt "or after the expiry of paid for time" kicks in to save you either : it was "after expiry of allowed time", but not "paid for time", as it was free for 3 hours, so there was no paid for time ....

So, my take is that for a zone MN pass in zone EO, code 30 is correct.

Code 19 would be for a zone EO pass in zone EO, but with e.g. the wrong date (one in the future) scratched off instead of that day's date.