PCN for Parking on Residents Bay but had Visitors Permit

[Diego.P]

Hi, I would appreciate some help with this one.

 

I received a PCN Code:12S whilst parked on a residents bay on my neighbourhood.

 

This was on my work vehicle, I put a visitors permit on the dashboard but apparently fell off when I closed the door as I found it on the floor inside the van, by the pedals.

 

I want to appeal sending the visitors permit but was thinking I should say the permit was on display as otherwise might not be successful, what do you think?

 

Also is there a template of the letter, as you might have noticed English is not my first language and would like to use the right wording.

 

Any help will be much appreciated.

 

Regards

[Jamberson]

There is no point claiming it was on display - they will have photos to show it was not, and the CEO who gave the ticket says it was not on display - they will not believe you.

 

I would write a letter and enclose a PHOTOCOPY of the permit. Keep the original just in case.

 

This is what I would write:

 

Dear sir/madam,

 

On [date of PCN] I parked in a residents bay and left a valid visitor permit on display. However when I returned to the vehicle, I found a PCN had been issued, and I realised that while I was away from the vehicle, the permit had slipped onto the car floor. Hopefully the CEO will have seen it inside the vehicle and made a note of this.

 

I would like to appeal against the charge. I was not attepting to avoid paying for my parking, and as evidence, I enclose a copy of the permit I was using at the time, which you will see was valid for that location.

 

Please would you reconsider the charge on this occasion.

 

Kind regards,

[Diego.P]

Thanks Jamberson for your quick reply and for your advice.

 

I thought they would have photos and have tried to view them on the council's website but aren't available.

 

I'll follow your recommendation and will write the letter today.

 

Thanks again

[green_and_mean]

Assuming its in London if you send in a permit the fine is reduced to the lower rate anyway so its worth writing in even if you end up paying.

[Diego.P]

Assuming its in London if you send in a permit the fine is reduced to the lower rate anyway so its worth writing in even if you end up paying.

 

Yes it's Camden, I sent the objection through their website today and also a copy of the visitor's permit.

 

Do you know how much is the lower rate?

[green_and_mean]

http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/transport-and-streets/parking/penalty-charge-notices/penalty-charges-from-july-1.en?page=3

[Diego.P]

Hi, I just received the following reply from Camden Parking Services:

 

 

Thank you for your letter received on 19/08/2010 regarding the above-mentioned Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). It was issued because the above vehicle was observed parked in a residents` or shared use parking place without clearly displaying either a permit or voucher or pay and display ticket issued for that place.

 

 

You have explained that you had displayed a valid Visitor's Permit which had fallen to vehicle floor and provided a copy of the permit. However, unfortunately the evidence you provided was illegible and so I am not satisfied that you were in possession of a valid Visitor's Permit at the time of the contravention.

 

 

I have examined the Civil Enforcement Officer's notes, made at the time of the contravention, and these note that a visual check inside your vehicle was done and all windows were checked. No valid permit or ticket was displayed. On this basis, I am satisfied this Notice was issued correctly.

 

 

For the reasons outlined above I am satisfied a contravention occurred. I have reset the discount charge for 14 days from the date of this letter and will accept payment of £60.00 in settlement if received during that time. After this period the charge will revert to £120.00. Payment can be made in the following ways:

 

I attached a scanned copy of the visitors permit, I don't know why they say is illegible, it is still on my pC and its perfect....I am not sure if I should reply to the email and attach the permit again, am I allowed to carry on with the appeal ?

 

 

Thanks for your help

[Diego.P]

Hi all,

 

Last month I received a parking fine for parking in a resident's bay without permit, I had a visitors permit and asked for help here in the forum: consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?273805-PCN-for-Parking-on-Residents-Bay-but-had-Visitors-Permit&p=3093695#post3093695 and received help to file an appeal.

 

Camden council had replied by email rejecting my appeal on the grounds that they don't believe I had a visitors permit because the copy I sent was illegible, which is not the case...this is the link on the councils website where the copy of the permit is still stored //forms.camden.gov.uk/cus/servlet/ep.getImg?ref=13958696473&print=Y&st=&auth=211&pw=Y (sorry I cant post links on this forum) the permit is on the centre of the page.

 

I replied to their email and sent the above link asking an explanation about their decision but they haven't answer me yet, I don't know if once they have made their decision about the appeal I then have to pay or can I still fight, If I have to pay I would like to do it before the 14 days expire which will be the 17/09

 

This is the text of their email. Any help will be much appreciated:

 

 

Thank you for your letter received on 19/08/2010 regarding the above-mentioned Penalty Charge Notice (pcn). It was issued because the above vehicle was observed parked in a residents` or shared use parking place without clearly displaying either a permit or voucher or pay and display ticket issued for that place.

 

 

You have explained that you had displayed a valid Visitor's Permit which had fallen to vehicle floor and provided a copy of the permit. However, unfortunately the evidence you provided was illegible and so I am not satisfied that you were in possession of a valid Visitor's Permit at the time of the contravention.

 

 

I have examined the Civil enforcement officer's notes, made at the time of the contravention, and these note that a visual check inside your vehicle was done and all windows were checked. No valid permit or ticket was displayed. On this basis, I am satisfied this Notice was issued correctly.

 

 

For the reasons outlined above I am satisfied a contravention occurred. I have reset the discount charge for 14 days from the date of this letter and will accept payment of £60.00 in settlement if received during that time. After this period the charge will revert to £120.00. Payment can be made in the following ways

Edited September 13, 2010 by Diego.P

[Jamberson]

Well, I can't view the permit from that link. You say it was legible, they say it wasn't - no-one can give a view on that without an image of the permit.

 

If you are sure it was legible, then why don't you phone them and ask them to view the permit and tell you which bits they can't read. This will shed light on the problem.

 

So far as appealing goes, there's no point writing again at this stage. If you want to fight on, you will forfeit the discount and in due course will be sent a Notice to Owner (I am assuming you are the registered keeper of the vehicle). At that point you can re-submit your evidence. It's a gamble, because even if you have a valid, legible permit, it wasn't correctly displayed at the time, so technically the PCN was issued with good reason and any cancellation would be on the basis of good will.

[green_and_mean]

Regardless of any 'guilt' you should be given the opportunity to provide a valid permit and pay the lower rate which I think is £80/40 Camden have an agreement with London Councils as do all London Authorities to accept a permit for the day subsequent to a PCN being issued. They have failed to inform you of this which is in my view impropriety.

 

http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/transport-and-streets/parking/penalty-charge-notices/penalty-charges-from-july-1.en?page=3

[Diego.P]

Thank you.

 

I called them today and they asked me to resend the permiit, I told them I will bring it in person to a parking office. Hope they give me the lower rate. Will let you know.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

If the penalty is offered at a lower rate, why is "the penalty exceeds the applicable amount" not a valid challenge?

[Jamberson]

Not sure why you raise this - I don't think the question came up earlier in this thread - but the applicable amount is the full rate. If they reinstate a discount now, it will be as a courtesy rather than a right.

 

Ironically, "the penalty is below the applicable amount" would better suit the situation!

[green_and_mean]

If the penalty is offered at a lower rate, why is "the penalty exceeds the applicable amount" not a valid challenge?

 

At the moment they claim not to have proof he was visiting a resident (they alledgedly can't read the permit) so the amount is corrrect if he sends in the permit and they still charge him the higher rate on the grounds it was not displayed you are correct it would be a valid grounds of appeal.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Not sure why you raise this - I don't think the question came up earlier in this thread - but the applicable amount is the full rate. If they reinstate a discount now, it will be as a courtesy rather than a right.

 

Ironically, "the penalty is below the applicable amount" would better suit the situation!

 

It's this funny thing with the differential penalties.

OP has had it levied at the higher rate when there is justification for the lower penalty so isn't this a "penalty exceeds the applicable amount" matter.

 

I think that the reason that this has now been raised is that it is now that it has been identified as a potential issue.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

At the moment they claim not to have proof he was visiting a resident (they alledgedly can't read the permit) so the amount is corrrect if he sends in the permit and they still charge him the higher rate on the grounds it was not displayed you are correct it would be a valid grounds of appeal.

 

My LA insists that this is a discretionary thing. I have one with my brother in law that is at appeal against NTO stage.

[green_and_mean]

My LA insists that this is a discretionary thing. I have one with my brother in law that is at appeal against NTO stage.

 

It was a formal agreement I beleive made with Ken when he was Mayor, it was only agreed to stick 12 in the higher band if genuine visitors could get a reduction. I think that London Councils would have the paperwork that confirms this assuming you live in London.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Yes London. The odd thing is that they say they may exercise discretion if a visitors permit is presented - no requirement for it to be in use at the time (I spotted as an interested anorak!)

[green_and_mean]

Mayoral Approval

1. London Councils has written to the Mayor of London to seek his approval for the additional parking charges set by TEC in December. The Mayor’s office requested that the submission be split into two letters:

• one letter covering the request by the London Borough of Brent to move from Band B to Band A in the area surrounding Wembley Stadium on event days from 1 March 2007; and
  
• one letter covering all the other charges agreed by TEC at their meeting on 8 December 2006 (and subsequently via Urgency Procedures as outlined above).
  

2. The Mayor’s office indicated that the Mayor was concerned about of the impact of the proposed differential parking system on visitors to residents. The Chairman of London Councils, Cllr Cockell spoke to the Mayor of London explaining the rationale for the TEC decision. It is anticipated that the Mayor will agree the TEC proposals subject to two caveats:

• in residents’ parking places, those residents’ visitors who at the time of the contravention were not displaying a visitor’s parking voucher should be notified that a lower penalty would be payable if the visitor provided a visitor’s voucher for the time of the contravention which resulted in a PCN. Councils should publicise the ability to pay at the lower rate (on provision of suitable evidence) widely, e.g. via household leaflet drops and use of the information on their website;
  

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/London%20Councils/Item8AdditionalParkingCharges08020.doc

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Very interesting and useful. Thanks G&M

[Diego.P]

Thanks all for your comments.

 

I've taken the permit to the parking office. An officer took a copy of it and said he will pass it to the person in charge, I'll call them the day before the 14 days and if nothing happens will pay the full amount of £60

[green_and_mean]

Thanks all for your comments.

 

I've taken the permit to the parking office. An officer took a copy of it and said he will pass it to the person in charge, I'll call them the day before the 14 days and if nothing happens will pay the full amount of £60

 

The discount amount should be £40!!

[Diego.P]

Not sure why you raise this - I don't think the question came up earlier in this thread - but the applicable amount is the full rate. If they reinstate a discount now, it will be as a courtesy rather than a right.

 

Ironically, "the penalty is below the applicable amount" would better suit the situation!

 

It actualy says at the back of the ticket that if you are issued a code 12 penalty and you can provide a visitors permit, you will get the fine discounted to a lower rate.

[Diego.P]

The discount amount should be £40!!

 

I understand, the thing is I don't know how long it will take for them to make a decision about the lower rate, and I don't want the 14 days to pass and then have to pay even more. I am counting 14 days since they replied to the appeal.

[Jamberson]

I don't want the 14 days to pass and then have to pay even more. I am counting 14 days since they replied to the appeal.

 

If they are still considering evidence, I would be amazed if the case is not on hold again - meaning the 14 days is suspended for now. If they haven't confirmed this to you, it is definitely worth checking before you make any payment against the clock.