Have you received the Enforcement Notice they refer to in the PCN? This would be sent after the 28 days had expired on the PCN itself. It is in response to this notice that you need to make formal representations. All you appear to have done so far is make an informal challenge. If you ignore the Enforcement Notice, you're toast!

Formal complaints appear to be your only avenue here. Once the authority have requested a DNC and the adjudicator has made a decision to accept that request, your appeal route is effectively ended. However, you can apply for a review of the adjudicator's decision to accept the authority's DNC if you strongly believe there is an issue of law with their request (within the relevant regulations) that should be considered. This would not include a CEO lying as you have suggested, this would be a criminal matter and outside the adjudicator's jurisdiction.

They are simply saying that if you have any questions about the penalty charge, i.e. what it was for, when, where etc, then you need to ask the local authority not them. TEC themselves do not have these details, nor do they have any interest in them.

That's a bit like saying if I walk into a shop and pick up a product and walk out, I haven't made a contract because I haven't paid! But what I've done is still 'unlawful'. Rules for parking are set out in TMOs or TROs. If you park and don't pay you haven't entered a contract under contract law, but instead you have breached a legally enacted order detailing the conditions for parking there.

You say "the appeal got rejected". Was this an informal challenge, i.e. made within the 28 days from service of the PCN? Or was it a formal challenge in response to the Notice to Owner? There is a way back from this, but it depends what you mean by "appeal".

Contract law is clear. A contract is only made when someone offers money for something and that money has been accepted/received. [Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd, 1952]

Interesting that the OP has not once mentioned the ACTUAL legislation under which the PCN was issued and which sets out the enforcement steps authorities may take up to registration of the penalty charge as if it were a debt and beyond!

Londonboyj would be well advised to think carefully before submitting a witness statement/statutory declaration. We have no info on how his mother arrived at £195 as a penalty, but it suggests that at least one previous enforcement document was ignored. A WS/SD needs to be a truthful statement. Prison could well await anyone who makes a statement which isn't!

As no payment was made, no contract was entered into. Therefore 'contract frustration' would not apply here.

NO!!! Not unless you want bailiffs on your doorstep. You appear to be at Order for Recovery stage which means you should have received at least two other documents, a Notice to Owner and a Charge Certificate. Did you receive these? If so, what did you do with them? If you didn't receive a Notice to Owner, is your vehicle registration document up to date with your correct address? If so, is there a reason why you might not have received this? To challenge this now you need to revert it to an earlier stage of the process. To do this you would need to make a witness statement, the grounds for which are set out on the form TE9. Do not be tempted to tell any porkies if you do this. You could end up in prison if you do so! To be clear, you CANNOT at this stage challenge this with the council. Follow the process!

For eveyone's benefit, who was driving is irrelevant for council issued tickets.

Witness Statement??? Now??? Why???

Of course it's a parking PCN! A CPZ is a Controlled PARKING Zone.

Are you saying the pcn was issued to the hire car? If so, did you sign a hire agreement which allows the hire company to request liability be transferred to you? If you did, then only the hire company can make formal representations at this time and they will do this when they receive the Notice to Owner. Normally this will be on the grounds that the vehicle was on hire and they will provide the authority with your name and the address they have for you on the hire agreement. Provided they do this and do so in time, the authority will cancel the pcn and NtO issued to the hire company and re-issue a pcn to you. You can then make representations in your own name. If the hire company pay the penalty charge without appealing, they may pass this charge on to you provided the agreement you signed with them says they can.

These are alleged moving traffic contraventions, NOT parking and will require statutory declarations, not witness statements.

The bay is for 'goods vehicles' only. This would normally be a vehicle specifically designed and used for delivering goods. I'm not sure a Mini Estate would fall into that category.

Sorry to say it, but this sounds like a matter between you and the lease company. Normally, the following happens. Provided that your lease meets the requirements to permit the transfer of liability, the lease company would appeal to TfL that they were not the 'owner' of the vehicle at the material time and that you were for these purposes. TfL would then cancel the pcn issued to the lease company and reissue this to you allowing you to appeal should you wish. However, if the terms and conditions of the lease you agreed to specifically say that they will pay all parking and congestion charge penalty charges and they did that, TfL will consider the matter closed and you need to discuss the matter with the lease company. Do NOT submit a SD because, in the circumstances you have described, you have no legal right to do so. Knowingly submitting a false SD is a criminal offence and you don't want more aggro!

You can't appeal against a charge certificate. What type of pcn is this? If it was parking and you were served the pcn on the vehicle or if it was handed to you, then you would have had a total of at least 56 days in which to make representations/formal appeal. Were you away ALL of that time? You can now only get the matter reset to allow you to appeal, provided you can truthfully make a witness statement. If you wait, you will be issued with an Order for Recovery. This will enable you to make the aforesaid statement. Be aware, it is a criminal offence to knowingly make a false withness statement, so think carefully before doing this.

The authority issued a notice to owner and claim that the pcn was served on you at the time. As Michael Browne has rightly pointed out, if you drove away before service was effected (i.e. handed to you or affixed to the vehicle) and the CEO had begun to issue the pcn, then they must serve the pcn under regulation 10. This also doubles up as the notice to owner. If this reaches the adjudicator, it will be your word against the CEO and it will be their contempraneous notes that will interest the adjudicator. Photos are not required under the regulations and are of evidentiary value only. The fact they only have one, of the back of your car, strongly supports your version of events. Nor does taking photos form a part of the 'beginning to issue a pcn' process (source: London Councils). I would make it clear to the authority that you intend to contest this to the tribunal if necessary. It costs them money when this happens, so they may well not contest.

You can't "take advantage of the discount period and argue later" if this means pay up at discount and then appeal. Paying closes the case, at discount or otherwise. Only time it doesn't is for removals.

From what you have said, it seems that your ground for making a witness statement is not that you didn't receive the pcn but that you made representations against the notice to owner but did not receive a notice of rejection of those representations. If your witness statement is accepted, then the matter is referred to the adjudicator who will decide what happens next. This might be the register of an appeal at the tribunal or a request for a copy of your representations followed by either a direction to pay or registration of appeal. Not receiving the pcn is NOT a statutory ground of appeal since there are legal processes in place to address this situation, which you have availed yourself of.

The Authority are entitled to issue a pcn when you drive away provided they had begun to prepare the ticket before you did so. Taking photos of a vehicle are NOT a part of ticket issuance so does not count (source: London Councils). Nor does the simple observance of a vehicle in alleged contravention constitute 'beginning to prepare a ticket'. If he/she had begun to enter your details into their HHC and then stopped to take pictures, you may be in difficulty. You need to see the CEO's notes really to know what actually happened. You also need to be aware that a regulation 10 pcn (which this should be) also acts a Notice to Owner so you are straight into formal representations. If the pcn has been issued under regulation 9 then, if what you've said is correct, this would be a procedural impropriety and will win on its own at appeal to the tribunal.

It's irrelevant who the driver was. The owner is liable under decriminalised enforcement for council issued tickets. There are no CCJs under decriminalised parking enforcement.

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 this date, so you'll need to look up the regulations to see what they say. You can find them on www.legislation.co.uk. For info, 'procedural impropriety' is only a ground of appeal for pcns issued inder the Traffic Management Act 2004.

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.