Jump to content


Motoring charge and photographic evidence don't match!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4371 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all, I have just received a PCN from Hammersmith & Fulham parking services for the alleged traffic contravention! - ‘Entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited’. The junction in question is given as ‘box junction – New kings road J/W Bagley’s Lane’. Knowing that I have not been across this junction recently, I was worried that my car registration had been cloned. However, when I looked at the photographic evidence that they have provided, it is superimposed with the camera location 'Butterwick/Talgarth' ( a junction that I use regularly), but this is an entirely different location to the one where they are alleging the offence occurred! My question is, what should I do next, bearing in mind that their evidence clearly contradicts their allegation?

Any help would be much appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dispute as lamma says, but don't expand on it. i.e. it's not for you to explain WHY it didn't occur (wrong location etc) but for them to prove it did, which they can't. So keep it as brief and to the point as lamma has written - "the contravention did not occur"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks very much guy's, - I will keep the reply short and sweet as you have suggested! - My one concern is that they will realise their mistake and ammend the PCN so that the alleged traffic contravention matches the photographic evidence!! - Is there a time limit from the date of alleged offence for them to serve the PCN for it to be enforceable?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Council will reject then it should be an easy win at PATAS. This is a reg 10 PCN/NTO ? ?

 

 

It has to be.

 

You can't (almost by definition) get a r.9 PCN as it is quite hard to fix to the vehicle or hand to the driver of a moving vehicle.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know pat - just checking with the OP that he knew it was also an NTO. Superickie, they CANNOT reissue the PCN.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I know pat - just checking with the OP that he knew it was also an NTO. Superickie, they CANNOT reissue the PCN.

 

Thats not actually true they could send you a new PCN although highly unlikely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

G&M is absolutely right. Whilst they cannot re-issue to correct the error, they can send a new and correct PCN.

 

I would therefore suggest that you wait until 28 days have passed - after which, they cannot issue a PCN for the alleged contravention.

 

As the defence to the original is a slam dunk, there is no reason to worry about the fine increasing. Just tick the box marked "The contravention did not occur" and send the appeal off (keeping a copy, of course), By the time they get around to rejecting, it will be too late to issue the new PCN and you simply go to the adjudicator with the original - leaving the Council to look very foolish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was my plan, the original alleged offence occurred on 28/04/2009 so the 28 days are already up! – The PCN notice is dated 05/05/2009, so if I send off the representation form today with the ‘Contravention did not occur’ box ticked, they will have no time left to send out a new PCN with the corrected allegation/evidence. Is this plan correct or am I still missing something?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...