Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About spaceman61

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think I'm right in saying that the Dart Charge pcns state that payment at the discounted rate should be made within 14 days beginning with date of service. That being the case, you need to go back and explain this to them. Have your pcn to hand when you speak to them so you can refer to it. There is a time limit for them issuing a pcn from the date of the contravention. This is 28 days in parking, not sure what it is for Dart Charge pcns, which are basically issued under the same regulations as congestion charge and ULEZ pcns. They can't 're-issue' beyond
  2. I love how their phone number is 'temporarily unavailable'! Appears to relate to a congestion charging scheme somewhere outside London. Quite a convincing scam unfortunately and I can see people being taken in by it.
  3. Firstly, there is no NIP in local authority parking enforcement. Secondly, the quote reproduced by Andyorch states: "...if you can prove you were not driving the car at the time, you should be able to avoid the fine". This is simply not the case for pcns issued by local authorities as a part of decriminalised enforcement.
  4. Andyorch's advice above refers to parking notice charges issued on private land. Owner is liable for penalty charges arising from pcns issued by local authorities.
  5. I see no problem with the signage but you are free to challenge/appeal if you wish. Decriminalised enforcement has been around since the Road Traffic Act 1991.
  6. Quite correct. OOT applications are almost universally opposed by authorities because they take the view, rightly or wrongly, that if the matter has reached that far it is almost certainly due to the RK/Owner's own actions, either by not updating their details at the DVLA in a timely fashion or simply ignoring correspondence from earlier stages in the process. This can of course be challenged before a district judge, either in person or on the papers, but it will cost a (normally) non-refundable fee to do this.
  7. Yes, it's a defence. But it is not one that can be put to an adjudicator. Pulling to the side of the road in the rain, no matter how heavy, is not one of the statutory grounds of appeal. And yes, there is a document which sets out the limit of an adjudicators powers. It's been around for 15 years and I attach it. It's well worth a read by those who do not understand these limitations. WalmsleyJudgmentCA171205.pdf
  8. No, don't "put the arguments anyway". Not to an adjudicator. They are barred by the High Court from considering mitigation. Think of something else.
  9. Forgetting things appears to be something you do quite well. I'm just trying to point out something your will be asked further down the line if you persist.
  10. I would just point out that it is not the authority's fault that you forgot, it's yours!
  11. These 'arguments' amount to mitigation and therefore cannot be considered by an adjudicator.
  12. How can the poster initiate an insurance claim on Currys insurance policy? Surely only Currys can do that?
  13. Go to the London Tribunal's website and have a look through their key cases. You may find something useful there.
  14. This link relates to an SI in respect of the London Local Authorities Act 2007. I stand to be corrected, but I'd be surprised if this pcn was issued under that legislation.
  15. Just to correct you, a penalty charge notice issued under decriminalised legislation can NEVER end up as a CCJ. The county court is not an avenue open to authorities to enforce the payment of a penalty charge. Private parking tickets yes, decriminalised penalty charges no.
  • Create New...