Penalty Notice 8:29 am

[Silver406Coupe]

Hi All,

 

I received a damned penalty charge notice this morning, having left my car parked on a single yellow overnight. I came outside to move it and saw a warden writing a ticket. Got in the car to drive off but he slapped the ticket on as I was driving off. He then snapped a few shots as I was trying to move out into traffic.

 

Here's the PCN:

 

 

So, what can I do? I remember hearing somewhere that if the vehicle is moving it's illegal to issue a ticket. In my case the engine was running, and I was waiting to move out into traffic.... The PCN was put into its little plastic wallet, but this was not stuck onto my car, simply put under my windscreen wiper - once I'd parked it I immediately took photos to prove this.

 

So, my questions are:

 

1. If I'm moving (or at least attempting to move the vehicle), can the attendant legally issue a ticket?

 

2. If the ticket is not securely fastened to my car, is it legal?

 

3. Is there anything in the wording of the ticket (above) that can help me? Having had a read through here I believe it has to state date of issue. Mine doesn't, instead it's "Date of Notice".

 

4. Finally, am I better off paying the 50% now, then contesting, or contesting from the outset? Does the former make my position significantly weaker?

 

Thanks in advance for any advice.

 

 

Ben

[green_and_mean]

So, my questions are:

 

1. If I'm moving (or at least attempting to move the vehicle), can the attendant legally issue a ticket?

 

2. If the ticket is not securely fastened to my car, is it legal?

 

3. Is there anything in the wording of the ticket (above) that can help me? Having had a read through here I believe it has to state date of issue. Mine doesn't, instead it's "Date of Notice".

 

4. Finally, am I better off paying the 50% now, then contesting, or contesting from the outset? Does the former make my position significantly weaker?

 

Thanks in advance for any advice.

 

 

Ben

 

 

1. Yes, the ticket can be served if the vehicle is still at the scene and was observed in contravention.

 

2. Placing under the wiper is sufficient, attatching it TOO secure is criminal damage.

 

3. It has to have the date it was issued the date of notice serves that purpose.

 

4. You can contest it as you are entitled so by law to do so but none of the above are valid grounds for a PCN to be cancelled.

[Silver406Coupe]

Damn, guess I'm £50 down then.

 

Thanks for the quick reply,

 

 

B

[patdavies]

What are the times of the restrictions?

 

Are they (and the lines) correct?

[Silver406Coupe]

Times are restricted Mon-Sat 7am to 7pm. Lines are pretty clear and I believe correct.

 

Damn.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

2. If the ticket is not securely fastened to my car, is it legal?

 

2. Placing under the wiper is sufficient, attatching it TOO secure is criminal damage.

 

Green and Mean

I've been trying to find an authority on this. Do you have one?

The reason I ask is that I have this forming part of an appeal that I have. The RTA requirenment in S 66 (1) is to fix it to the vehicle. In my case the PCN envelope has sticky strips and a note to the PA to use them "if required to affix to vehicle". The "requirement" arises because the PCN was not handed to the person appearing to be in charge amd as the strips weren't used it was not affixed and therfore not served.

Anyway, a small part of an appeal but I couldn't find anything to say that use of the wipers is ok.

Thanks

Bernie

[Silver406Coupe]

Hmm, that gets me thinking.

 

Perhaps I should write to Richmond Council along the following lines:

Dear Sirs,

 

I am writing to you as one of your employees left a package on the bonnet of my car. Upon inspection it would appear to be a Penalty Notice. The law clearly states that a Penalty Notice must be securely fixed to the vehicle to which the alleged convravention applies. In this case, the sticky back of the package has not be stuck onto my vehicle and by law therefore does not apply to my vehicle.

 

I have gone to the trouble of returning this package to you, please see that it makes it to its proper owner. You will see that the postage of this comes to £1.36. and I would be appreciative if you would refund this cost to me by cheque.

 

Sincerely,

Ok - rough draft, but with a bit of work do you think I may be onto something?

[millsee]

Hmm, that gets me thinking.

 

Perhaps I should write to Richmond Council along the following lines:

Dear Sirs,

 

I am writing to you as one of your employees left a package on the bonnet of my car. Upon inspection it would appear to be a Penalty Notice. The law clearly states that a Penalty Notice must be securely fixed to the vehicle to which the alleged convravention applies. In this case, the sticky back of the package has not be stuck onto my vehicle and by law therefore does not apply to my vehicle.

 

I have gone to the trouble of returning this package to you, please see that it makes it to its proper owner. You will see that the postage of this comes to £1.36. and I would be appreciative if you would refund this cost to me by cheque.

 

Sincerely,

Ok - rough draft, but with a bit of work do you think I may be onto something?

 

Class

 

And I've just deleted a response, when something popped into my mind.

 

Don't send the PCN back to them. Otherwise, they'll just stick it to something, pull it off and claim if was fixed to your car correctly in the first place.

 

Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Ok - rough draft, but with a bit of work do you think I may be onto something?

 

Here's what you need to think about.

• You will not get this PCN cancelled on informal representations unless you have strong mitigation that you have not shared here.
  
• You need to decide whether you are comfortable with risking the loss of the 50% discount.
  
• If so you need to wait for the NTO.
  
• Base your appeal on a pedantic in the extreme analysis of the PCN and the NTO against the Road Traffic Act - for example your PCN says "For instructions on this payment see overleaf" however, I would argue that they are much more than that, they are part of the PCN itself.
  
• What you also do by appealing is to rely on the fact that the systems are administered by humans and are therefore prone to error.
  
• Do not give in to the temptation to be a "smart-alec", you will get no credit for it.

My theory is that if I appeal every PCN I get it costs me less in the long run. Further, If everyone appealed every PCN the whole system would grind to a halt until councils get the entire process right.

I fully accept that the flaw is that not everyone wants to risk loss of the discount or is prepared to put in the effort. Some may also question the morality of appealing like this to which my answer is that if I believe there is a case to be made I am free to make it.

[electron99]

Am I missing something here.Parking restrictions are 7am to 7 pm and you got a ticket for parking on the yellow line at 8.29 a.m. On what basis do you think you should be exempt from this parking charge?

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Am I missing something here.Parking restrictions are 7am to 7 pm and you got a ticket for parking on the yellow line at 8.29 a.m. On what basis do you think you should be exempt from this parking charge?

What you are missing is that the Penalty Charge Notice must be drafted and served in compliance with the law and the resultant enforcement must also follow the law. Local Authorities are not exempt from the law and just as they are pedantic and picky about regulations so is the motorist entitled to be.

The independent adjudicators who act in a judicial capacity frequently criticise Local Authorities for this and cancel PCNs accordingly.

[electron99]

What you are missing is that the Penalty Charge Notice must be drafted and served in compliance with the law and the resultant enforcement must also follow the law. Local Authorities are not exempt from the law and just as they are pedantic and picky about regulations so is the motorist entitled to be.

The independent adjudicators who act in a judicial capacity frequently criticise Local Authorities for this and cancel PCNs accordingly.

 

I entirely agree that local authorities should stick strictly to the letter of the law, and if they did not,the charge should be invalid.Equally,I think that if I saw a sign saying no parking after 7 a.m, I would make sure I didn't unless an emergency prevented me from doing so.It is known as taking responsibility,and the consequences, of your actions.

[Silver406Coupe]

Millsee - I have already taken photographs to prove the presence of the sticky-back covering of the plastic wallet. But good point regarding the paranoia

 

Bernie - Thankyou for the good advice. I am reticent about risking a further £50, especially this close to Christmas. Has anyone/is it possible to pay now and attempt to claim back later?

 

Electron - I appreciate your point. If the ticket has been served to me in full accordance with the law then I will pay it without complaint. At the moment I am simply trying to ascertain the legality of the ticket based on the opinions expressed here. I hope that is a reasonable explination for you.

 

Thanks everyone!

 

Once I finish work for the day I'm going to go over the length of the road and double check the single yellow has been correctly T'd. It's a very long road.

[green_and_mean]

RTA 1991 sect 66

 

(1) Where, in the case of a stationary vehicle in a designated parking place, a parking attendant has reason to believe that a penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle, he may—

(a) fix a penalty charge notice to the vehicle; or

(b) give such a notice to the person appearing to him to be in charge of the vehicle.

 

There is no mention of the word 'securely' just that is must be fixed to vehicle or given to the driver. It does not in fact say that the driver must accept it therefore one could say placing it under the wiper in your presence as the driver fulfilled BOTH these critea for service. You could claim the vehicle was moving but since the PCN was under the wiper this would be hard to prove, engine running and waiting to pull out is not moving.

[Silver406Coupe]

Thank you for the detailed response Green, I very much appreciate it. Seems that in this instance the ticket is entirely justifiable and valid.

[green_and_mean]

Thank you for the detailed response Green, I very much appreciate it. Seems that in this instance the ticket is entirely justifiable and valid.

 

The contravention obviously took place as you admit overstaying by 1hr 39 mins as you parked overnight. I appreciate your annoyance at getting caught but I think losing the discount period on the hope that your technical argument would get you anywhere would be a further waste of money.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

RTA 1991 sect 66

 

(1) Where, in the case of a stationary vehicle in a designated parking place, a parking attendant has reason to believe that a penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle, he may—

(a) fix a penalty charge notice to the vehicle; or

(b) give such a notice to the person appearing to him to be in charge of the vehicle.

 

There is no mention of the word 'securely' just that is must be fixed to vehicle or given to the driver. It does not in fact say that the driver must accept it therefore one could say placing it under the wiper in your presence as the driver fulfilled BOTH these critea for service. You could claim the vehicle was moving but since the PCN was under the wiper this would be hard to prove, engine running and waiting to pull out is not moving.

Thanks, I know this. It comes down to what "fix" means. I was wondering if you knew of any cases where it had been tested.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

It is known as taking responsibility,and the consequences, of your actions.

I'm quite happy to take responsibility for my actions thank you.

I'm also quite happy with my responsibility to ensure that a charge is being correctly levied before passing my money to a local authority that would, in my view, be better spent elsewhere.

The local authorities also have to take responsibility and accept the responsibilities for issuing defective PCNs and managing the processes incorrectly. The Parking Adjudicators frequently criticise them for this.

[green_and_mean]

Thanks, I know this. It comes down to what "fix" means. I was wondering if you knew of any cases where it had been tested.

 

 

I don't think anyone has taken it to adjudication and won I personally cannot see how placing it under the wiper cannot be deemed as 'fixed' though?

I doubt very much you could get an absolute ruling on it anyway as every case would have its own merits. Sticking a sticky back envelope on a wet window is less secure but you are saying that this legally would be more correct? Would you expect a ruling on the type of glue to depending on its adhesive qualities? I know it seems I'm being pedantic but how far are you willing to go to argue a technical point even within the law a certain amount of common sense needs to be used.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

I don't think anyone has taken it to adjudication and won I personally cannot see how placing it under the wiper cannot be deemed as 'fixed' though?

I doubt very much you could get an absolute ruling on it anyway as every case would have its own merits. Sticking a sticky back envelope on a wet window is less secure but you are saying that this legally would be more correct? Would you expect a ruling on the type of glue to depending on its adhesive qualities? I know it seems I'm being pedantic but how far are you willing to go to argue a technical point even within the law a certain amount of common sense needs to be used.

 

I know it's a matter for debate and I would only use this as part of a defence but consider this. I got a PCN on Sunday for parking in a resident's bay. The yellow lines are not operational on Sundays but residents bays are and I mis-read the signs. That part is down to me but I have some mitigation that I do not hold a lot of hope on. (But the LA is bound to consider it.) But the PCN was placed under one of the wipers (this LA has no sticky strips). The way the wipers lie on my car it was not visible. Further it was placed under the very tip of the wiper and at this point the wiper is not in tight contact with the screen (shape of screen/wiper thing). I only noticed the PCN as it was fluttering when I started to drive away and it virtually immediately flew off. I stopped to pick it up.

 

So I feel I can make an argument that it was not "fixed" to the vehicle. This argument may not win the day at all or on it's own but I shall couple it with some argument on drafting defects of the PCN (I don't yet know about the NTO as it hasn't come (and indeed may not)) and at LA stage mitigation.

 

I am happy to risk the loss of the discount for the chances I have. Others with a similar ticket may not. Neither approach IMHO should attract criticism.

[green_and_mean]

I know it's a matter for debate and I would only use this as part of a defence but consider this. I got a PCN on Sunday for parking in a resident's bay. The yellow lines are not operational on Sundays but residents bays are and I mis-read the signs. That part is down to me but I have some mitigation that I do not hold a lot of hope on. (But the LA is bound to consider it.) But the PCN was placed under one of the wipers (this LA has no sticky strips). The way the wipers lie on my car it was not visible. Further it was placed under the very tip of the wiper and at this point the wiper is not in tight contact with the screen (shape of screen/wiper thing). I only noticed the PCN as it was fluttering when I started to drive away and it virtually immediately flew off. I stopped to pick it up.

 

So I feel I can make an argument that it was not "fixed" to the vehicle. This argument may not win the day at all or on it's own but I shall couple it with some argument on drafting defects of the PCN (I don't yet know about the NTO as it hasn't come (and indeed may not)) and at LA stage mitigation.

 

I am happy to risk the loss of the discount for the chances I have. Others with a similar ticket may not. Neither approach IMHO should attract criticism.

 

 

Strangely the Law does not in fact state it has to be visible although good practice states the windscreen area it could I guess be stuck on the back bumper!

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Strangely the Law does not in fact state it has to be visible although good practice states the windscreen area it could I guess be stuck on the back bumper!

 

I know. The relevance of this is to explain why I did not see it until I drove and it started flapping and then blew off. It is the fact that it blew off that is my evidence that it was not "fixed" and therefore not properly served.