Jump to content
billie.skeggs

NTO appeal (counsil pay and display)

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3637 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

My girlfriend neglected to tell me she got a ticket for not displaying a pay and display ticket.

 

however when the NTO arrived the accompanied picture did not show the ticket attached to the car..

 

im currently writing to them now asking for evidence that the ticket was issued correctly..

 

what i want to know is what can i ask for and what rules are they required to follow...

 

Email so far

Hi,

My Girlfriend has just notified me she recieved a NTO for her car #######.

Could you provide me the following so that i can ascertain that the
issue of this NTO was correct as she has no recollection of a parking ticket placed on her window.

I require:

Photographs of the contravention, including images showing the ticket displayed.
etc 
etc

Many thanks

Mr .

Edited by billie.skeggs
formatting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it's not your liability, the Council is unlikely to correspond with you - your girlfriend should request photos. However they might do if you try.

 

If they won't give them to you, I would strongly advise that she does not request them in writing. If she sends them a letter or email of any type, it could be viewed as an appeal letter (whatever it says!) and she will have used up her right of appeal. She should ask by phone.

 

Having said that, whether they have photos or not, and whether you get to see them or not will not affect your case. Lack of photos will not win you an appeal, unless you can strongly argue that no PCN was ever served. From what you say, it was served - she knew about the PCN but "neglected to tell you" - so it must have been served and there are bound to be photos. Either way, she'll need a better line of appeal than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is the RK ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photos are not a requirement. A statement from the PA is all the evidence that is required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is council policy to take photos and they haven't then they have some explaining to do.

this has gone against councils in adjudications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be preferred or even 'best practice', but it is simply additional support, nothing more. If the PA asserts he witnessed a breach of the regulations, his work will be fine. There are many excuses (reasons!) why photographs are not provided, anything from user error to technical difficulties, but I have yet to hear of cancellation on the basis of no photograph (effectively discounting any statement from the PA).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Adjudication service disagrees with you buzby,

 

See

Steven Mark Pasha v London Borough ofWaltham Forest

 

Case No. : 2090279728

 

"Whilst the notes do not say this expressly, the CEO appears implicitly to be explaining the absence of photographs by the fact that the driver drove off before the CEO was able to take any. This is not entirely convincing, since it is common practice to take some photographs of the vehicle before the Penalty Charge Notice is issued. Of course, photographs are not required, but they are now generally taken and the failure to take any requires clear explanation"

 

As I said earlier where it is policy to take photographs the absence of photos has gone against councils.

Did you think I was making it up ?

 

And why discourage a poster from a valid point that has been found in other cases ?

We post here to help others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With due respect to you Lamma, I don't think Buzby was trying to discourage the OP. I think it's just a case of clarifying the strength of the argument. I agree with Buzby that this would not win a case on its own. The case you cite is interesting but it appears to be a dispute over whether the PCN was served at all, and the fact that the vehicle left the scene. In such a scenario, there is room for doubt as to whether the CEO was prevented from serving the PCN, and this then becomes an issue of weight of evidence.

 

In the case we're looking at now, there was no drive away and so there is no logical reason why the PCN would not have been served. Therefore, there seems to be no mileage in disputing it on the basis of lack of photographic evidence. I see the adjudicator's comment "the failure to take any [photos] requires clear explanation" but it seems to be clutching at straws if we are to hope there is not an explanation. Indeed, he probably did take some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also post to ensure reasonable expectations are met. The situation you describe is a different issue. If an authority/adjudicator insists on a photo, fine. That's what they'll work with. However, I can assure you that to obtain a win there is nothing in statute that requires any photograph to be supplied. If this was the case, I would have been let off with all of mine. Issues that the car drove off before the ticket was affixed is erroneous. The offence had already been committed, are you saying not only there must be a ticket attached to the windscreen, but there has to be a picture of it as well?

 

In your dreams, perhaps.

 

Photographic evidence is helpful to the authority to show it's compliance, but certainly no more than that. If what you describe happened, then great news for parkers in that area, but let's not kid the OP that this is the way it always works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"which is why I gave an applicable case name and reference.

very applicable as the case shows that " If the PA asserts he witnessed a breach of the regulations, his work will be fine" is just not so.

this adjudication shows just the opposite !.

 

If it is council policy to take photos and they haven't then they have some explaining to do.

this has gone against councils in adjudications.

 

Look up the case.

See the full paragraph

" Whilst the notes do not say this expressly, the CEO appears implicitly to be explaining the absence of photographs by the fact that the driver drove off before the CEO was able to take any. This is not entirely convincing, since it is common practice to take some photographs of the vehicle before the Penalty Charge Notice is issued. Of course, photographs are not required, but they are now generally taken and the failure to take any requires clear explanation. On the evidence I have I do not consider it would be safe to conclude either that the contravention occurred or that the Penalty Charge Notice was served.

Will it swing every case on its own ? no, never said it would

are adjudicators consistent ? no

is it significant enough to use - for sure yes it is. It helps the poster's case.Especially as he can now quote the exact case in his own appeal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if this is one if the 100's of council's that don't have this policy? It's a pretty lame stab at a defence. The smart money would be to find out first, and take the discount if it's not going to go your way. NOT fight on an expectation that won't be realised!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, sorry to hear this. I had a lot of help from http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=30 they are brilliant and specialise in motoring issues. Scan ALL your documents to pdf received to date and post them up there, be sure to edit out your personal and ticket number details. They found several faults with mine which prevented them from enforcing the PCN, also found the signage was defective and that the TRO was unenforceable. My car was broken down at the time as well...

 

Hope that helps and good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can post them up here - there's a lot of expertise on this forum too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And if this is one if the 100's of council's that don't have this policy? It's a pretty lame stab at a defence. The smart money would be to find out first, and take the discount if it's not going to go your way. NOT fight on an expectation that won't be realised!

 

Which is why my post start with the clear qualifier "If it is council policy to take photos "

 

The quoted case then comes in.

 

But instead of attacking my posts that show what may help the poster why not just ask him which council it is ?

 

The smart money would be on looking at all the different ways the council can have messed up and been non-compliant rather than just giving your money away.

The appeal stats bear this out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...