... the bay is right outside my flat, so I'll go and have a look shortly. I'm pretty certain the markings are correct (sadly).

I was told by one of their staff that the calls were recorded, I asked them in my email response to review said recording and they confirmed by letter that they were checking this information. I don't think it would look very good at PATAS if they then said they didn't have that information!

I agree, the permit issue is a red-herring - as you say, I am registered to park so that I can stop in other areas of the borough. I think the argument will be down to what their operator told me and how I was then processed through the automated system. Unlike the case listed previously, I could clearly hear the message, and had it given the VRN of my own car (not the borrowed one), I wouldn't have accepted it!

I don't know if I much of an argument regarding the permit for my car, however, I think there is a case to be made that I was advised by the operator that I was about to make a payment for the vehicle I had just registered. Westminster claim their system gave me a confirmation of the VRN, but I am not aware of such a confirmation.

Thanks. Hmm. Doesn't look too optimistic. I think that it will really depend on my conversation with the operator.

That is what WCC will probably argue. However, I made a payment in the way that I was led to believe was correct for the vehicle concerned. Is there not a case to say that it was the fault of WCC's system that I was led to pay for the wrong vehicle? BTW I didn't need to pay for my own car, as I have a permit for that Zone!

Thanks for the advice. I have had previous WCC tickets (and had them cancelled). I am prepared to take it to PATAS as I don't see what grounds they have under the regulations (my intention was clearly to pay for the vehicle concerned).

Hi I would appreciate anyone's thoughts on this: I swapped cars with a friend for the morning and parked it on a Westminster Pay be Phone/SMS bay. As the vehicle wasn't registered I phoned their payment service and gave the details to an operator who said he had added the vehicle. He told me that he would put me through to the automated system which would take the payment for said car. I made the payment and thought nothing further about it. When I returned to the vehicle there was a PCN on it. After contacting Westminster they confirmed that payment had been made, and that the borrowed vehicle had been added as I stated. However the payment was made for my own car. After further investigation, they claimed that I selected the automated system for my own car and not the one I had borrowed (or registered that day). I asked them to review my conversation with the operator, but they have not done so as yet. I was wondering if anyone thinks that I have grounds for appeal? A couple of thoughts occur to me: If I can show that their system was at fault (very hard to prove)), or that the operator gave me the wrong advice (that I was making a payment for the borrowed car) then I would have a strong case for the PCN to be cancelled. Assuming that I did press the wrong button in the automated system, is there a reasonable case to make that: - I both registered the vehicle and made a payment - Given it was my clear intent (as shown by the conversation with the operator) to make a payment for that vehicle and money was taken by Westminster, there is nothing in the regulations to say that the PCN should stand Any help would be appreciated! thanks

Thanks for all your replies. That appears to be pretty conclusive!

I wonder if you can help. Can a CEO/PA remove the cover of my scooter in order to issue a PCN? In this case, there was damage to the cover caused by that removal. thanks Mark

thanks

Yes he did, but it was only on the basis that he should have been allowed to pay it at the discount stage, and not on the validity of the PCN. As I mentioned previously, I think he has a case to challenge the PCN and was wondering if it is possible to mount a new appeal. thanks, in advance, for any help!

I had two PCNs last year on exactly the same grounds - they claimed to have handed the PCN to me and clearly did not. I paid the first one, but with the second one I made an appeal to PATAS. I presented a statement from my passenger. I asked to appear in person, and that I would also like the PA to appear so I could cross examine him. Unsurprisingly Westminster dropped the case the day before. Do not be concerned about threats regarding false statements. They would need to prove that you did. If you tell the truth then they can't ever prove it!

Hi A friend of mine received a PCN from Islington last year. He sent an appeal letter by recorded delivery 10 days after receiving it. The post office say it was signed for 5 days later (1 day outside the 14 days), and Islington are claiming they signed for it 10 days later. As a result they issued an NTO and the PCN increased to the full amount. Is the discount period based on whether the letter was received within 14 days or sent within the period? Is it reasonable for someone to expect that a first class recorded delivery letter would be received within 4 days and therefore the appeal allowed if the letter is received later? I am also of the opinion that the contravention did not occur, as it was a yellow line and there were no signs showing the hours. He parked there on a Saturday afternoon. Islington have since put signs by the yellow lines, which suggests they knew they were unclear. Would this be reasonable grounds to make a Stat Dec (they have now issued a Charge Certificate) and take it to PATAS? Is it possible to make this appeal even though he appealed to PATAS for this PCN on different grounds previously? many thanks Mark

Hi I wonder if anyone could help with this? I got a ticket from Wandsworth for a Code 27 ... parked adjacent to a dropped footway. The end of my vehicle was at the part where it had started to drop, but not actually on the flat part. As such it would not have presented an obstruction to prams or a wheelchair user. What counts as adjacent? Where does the dropped footway start ... at the flat part of the sloping part? Any information would be much appreciated. Mark

In this case I didn't get the PCN/NTO so my grounds are quite reasonable. At this stage I don't need to get a Stat Dec as Westminster have said they will consider my appeal.

Thanks for the suggestion. I will do that. Mark

The fact is that I was dropping someone off. However the video is too short to show someone exitting the car. There is less than a minute where the video is on my vehicle. That was not enough time to gather her bags and leave. Surely the fact that my car was observed for such a short period of time means that there is insufficient evidence? I would be happy, for example to provide two witness statements from my passengers to say that I was dropping off.

Is it possible to send an NTO too early? Westminster seems to have sent mine within a week of the contravention. Is this allowed?

I've attached a scan of the Charge Certificate (blurred a few bits to project the innocent!) I spoke to Westminster today and they said that they would consider my appeal, which is fair of them, at least. I have downloaded the video from the Westminster website, and observes my vehicle for just over 1 minute, where I was stopped on a yellow line with my indicator on. I was dropping someone off, so my engine was running and I didn't leave the car. As the contravention is for parking, then I presume the PCN is invalid. To have parked there would have meant turning off the engine and leaving the vehicle, for which there is no evidence. Is that a reasonable basis for an appeal? thanks Mark

On a more general issue, I think this represents a real problem for motorists. Bascially I wasn't parked (contrary to what the PCN states), however because the CEO 'observed' parking they saw fit to issue a PCN in my absence, no matter how spurious. In this case I was simply dropping off a passenger and was clearly NOT parking. I am, however, put in a position where I have to question the honesty of the CEO involved. This is now the third time in less than a year that a Westminster PA/CEO has basically lied about what happened - on the previous two occasions they claimed that they handed me the PCN (pre March 2008). On one occasion I had a witness and none on the other. In spite of making a formal complaint, Westminster saw in favour of the PA, even though one of the PCNs was cancelled on appeal. What's more, Westminster appear to have a policy of issuing NTO's and charge certificates as rapidly as possible, thus making as difficult as possible for motorists to dispute PCN's. So my question is this: how are we going to deal with dishonest CEOs combined with an over-zealous authority who seem to support these CEOs?

I'll be dropping by the CC tomorrow to make my declaration, as that looks like the only way forward. Thanks again for everyone's help.

Thanks again for the info. The PCN was apparently issued by CEO no. XXXX, so it clearly wasn't a CCTV PCN. The CEO wasn't actually visible to me, so I find the whole thing rather sneaky (and presumably the PCN is invalid). As I understand it they have to have either attempted to hand it to me, or at least started to issue the PCN. I was actually dropping off a passenger (on a single yellow line) so I was in my vehicle for the whole period of around 1 minute. The problem, however, is that they have now issued a Charge Certificate. Am I correct in thinking that my only option is to make a Satutory Declaration then appeal it from there? thanks Mark

Thanks for the reply. But what does that mean in terms of my rights? Can they issue a charge certificate so quickly? thanks mark

Hi I wonder if anyone can tell me if City of Westminster are in breach of any regulations: I have just received a Charge Certificate Notice, but no previous correspondence (including a PCN). It claimed that: Parked in a Restricted Street etc In London Street (no postcoded so I have no idea where that is!) 'Observed by: civil enforcement officer ...' ... on 24/05/2008. At the top it says Penalty Charge Notice Issue Date 02/06/2008 It claims that 'A Notice to Owner (which experession includes a Penalty Charge Notice served by post) 02/06/2008' I have a number of questions: Are they allowed to issue a PCN and NTO at the same time? As I understand it, postal PCN's must allow 21 days at the discounted rate. Surely there must be a further period at the full rate before issuing a charge certificate? Can Westminster really issue a charge certificate with an additional £60 on 8th July ... just over one month after issuing the PCN. Suffice to say that I will be making a Stat Dec as I didn't get the NTO and making an appeal. Any information would be much appreciated. thanks Mark