PCN today, do i have legitimate grounds for appeal **Won at Tribunal**

[WarrenBuffet]

Was in town today to visit optician for new glasses perscription, didnt notice myself but my friend told me that i started acting quite strange half an hour into the optician visit. ( Im a Type1 Insulin dependant Diabetic) So, i was obviously having a hypo and my friend said "I think you are having a hypo" at this point i then realised i was and asked the optician to excuse me while i went to increase my bloodsugar level.

 

Went to coffee shop and had a strong sweet coffee and as i started coming round realised that i was parked in a one hour bay and i was 10mins over the hour. Rushed back to car and the traffic warden was beside my car, tried to explain my situation to him but all he said was "Sorry Sir but the ticket has already been issued".

 

I feel very strongly about this as usually when Im in the wrong i do accept it but, i feel i have been fined for circumstances beyond my control and punished because i am a diabetic and if i had attempted to drive my car 10mins earlier i would have been a danger to myself and both pedestrians and other road users.

 

Do i have grounds for appeal? ..... sorry i have no experience of these matters as it is the first time in 25yrs driving i have received a parking ticket.

[Jamberson]

You have grounds for a discretionary cancellation. There is no apparent dispute that the vehicle was in contravention, which is why it's not a dead-cert, and I don't suppose it will be possible to prove what happened on the day. But you stand a reasonable chance of getting them to cancel it. You will need to write an appeal letter outlining what happened. Include whatever evidence you can about your condition. I don't see there's much more you can do.

 

By the way, the CEOs who issue these things sometimes make notes if they speak to the driver - it would be worth asking them to look at the CEO's notes to see if there is some info there to support what you say in your appeal.

[WarrenBuffet]

Many thanks Jamberson, a friend also told me that 'Mitigating Circumstances' should be my grounds for appeal. I will give it a go and see what they conclude? Am i correct in thinking that even if my appeal fails that, i will have 14 days from the conclusion of appeal to still pay the £45 rather than the £90 if i get my appeal in, before the initial 14days from issue of ticket?

[Jamberson]

Yes, that's correct about the amount you would have to pay.

 

All you can do is try - a courteous letter explaining what happened will be your best chance.

[WarrenBuffet]

Thanks again, i will keep the thread updated as and when things happen.

[porkyp1g]

Why not ask the optician for a supporting statement, that should make it clear cut and your appeal should be confirmed.

[Jamberson]

It would help of course - anything to corroborate the story would be an advantage, but it won't guarantee a cancellation. It is still at the Council's discretion.

[Pocket Nines]

What Council is this?

 

Can you also confirm the amount of £90 ??? Sounds wrong unless there have been changes I haven't kept up with.

[WarrenBuffet]

Thanks porkyp1g, i did contact the optician and they did say "Yes" . They asked me to just give their name and telephone number as contact and even the coffee shop said they would confirm that i was in a hypo too.

 

Pocket nines, i should have clarified that this was a town called Coleraine in N.Ireland. What gets me is that if you exceed your pay and display time in the nearest carpark the fine is £20, yet in valid parking spaces by roadside the fine is £45 (half price ) if you pay within 14 days and full charge £90 if you exceed 14 days.

 

Anyways, appeal letter on 'Mitigating/Medical Circumstances' was posted today 2nd Class recorded delivery at a cost of approx £1.64.

[Pocket Nines]

Ah.

N.I. has it's own process for PCNs.

 

That said, is it actually a PCN (for which you have your own Regs, etc.) ? I'm not sure if some areas might still use the old 'criminal' legislation.

 

Either way, it is worth checking their stated 'policy' on how they deal with mitigating circumstances. Yours might be considered to come under 'medical emergency'.

[WarrenBuffet]

Sorry Pocket Nines, i should have clarified that N.I. is no longer 'Criminal' i beleive that it is now 'Civil'.

 

My informal appeal has been rejected as confirmed in letter today.

 

'Unfortunately, after consideration of circumstances i have found no grounds for the cancelation of the charge.'

 

'Your vehicle was parked for a time exceeding the maximum period of 1 hr in a restricted parking space. Your vehicle was first observed at 14:12 and notted in attendants hand held computer. Your vehicle was then observed at 15:28 and issued with a PCN.'

 

So, i guess now i let the extended discount period expire which will be 20th May and then wait for their NTO before i go to the 2nd stage of appeals process. I was speaking to someone who has considerable experience in appealing PCN's and they told me that stage1 & stage2 of appeals process are nearly always rejected and used to weed out those who do not feel strongly enough to follow through to conclusion. He advised that i prepare myself for stage3and the Independent Parking Adjudicator as he reckons the first two appeals will be rejected.

[Jamberson]

You have said that the vehicle did overstay by 10 minutes. That's what the PCN was issued for - I would think carefully before deciding to carry on with the appeals process. I don't think you have a great chance of winning it to be honest, but it's up to you.

[WarrenBuffet]

Hi Jamberson, please excuse my total lack of understanding but is the fact they say it's over 10 mins that voids my mitigating factor argument? It's just i have read online and heard people with experience in the appeals ( members of the public) say, that i should be prepared to be rejected at the first two appeal stages and not let this discourage me. Is this bad advice ?

[Jamberson]

It's impossible to say with absolute certainty what will happen. The adjudicator can't generally allow appeals on mitigation, and so I think it's unlikely to win. The only time adjudication is really worth it is where the facts are in dispute - eg was the parking bay valid, was the PCN correct in its details, and so on.

 

In this case, the facts are not apparently in dispute - you acknowledge that the car was there when it shouldn't have been. As your appeal is only based on the circumstances which led to that, you would be relying mainly on the council to allow a second appeal after having refused one already on the same grounds. Unless you can add something to what you originally sent, I am not optimistic that it would go your way and you'd end up with twice the cost.

 

Maybe someone else can see an angle for you?

 

There is some truth in what you were told - that councils often reject appeals - but it doesn't follow that if you go to the adjudicator you would expect to win. It depends on the details of the case, and as I said, appeals on mitigating circumstances rarely work at that stage.

[WarrenBuffet]

Just to update and bring this thread to a close ............... I Won!!!!!

 

I took the appeal the whole way and sat down at the tribunal with a lovely gentleman barrister. He granted my appeal on 'Mitigating Circumstances' and i didn't even need to speak. 5mins and i won, my faith in justice is restored.

 

PS: My tribunal was yesterday.

[Jamberson]

Amazing. Well done. Did the council attend?

[WarrenBuffet]

They did and it was all very civil too. I said to him "No hard feelings" and he replied,"If you had submitted a Doctor's letter it would have been cancelled".

 

I then told him that if i needed a medical note every time i had a hypo, i would be in my GP's surgery every week!

[ploddertom]

If this type of thing is a regular occurrence should you be actually driving? Have you notified DVLA?

[WarrenBuffet]

Now, now ploddertom. I am a person who attempts to operate within the law and do hold a 3 yr medical licence, pay a premium on my insurance. Im guessing you must be one of these wardens?

 

Might i suggest that rather than destroying City & town centres you should try some compassion in your revenue gathering activities and possibly some humanity towards the wider public.

 

I urge everyone to take their appeal the whole nine yards, just remember that you will be judged by someone trustworthy and not some jumped up little Fascist. ;-) .

 

As for "Hypo's" they are a regular evil for many type1 Diabetics and your statement just makes me think of David Ike and other such ignorant people. What is the saying " Never judge a man until you have walked a mile in his/her shoes. "

[ploddertom]

Well you are wrong on many accounts here. I also have a 3 year licence & my Consultant insists I comply & test every 2 hours & keep a record of everything. His argument being that if anything untoward were to happen I had taken every precaution necessary including carrying jelly babies & small cans of Coke in the car. As for insurance then I have to say they have been notified & as long as I comply with the above I have not been penalised monetarily.

[WarrenBuffet]

My apologies Ploddertom, i was being sarcastic and attempted to insert a "Wink" icon. The reason why i said the above was because, outside of the hearing the council rep did say something along those same lines of using a "Get out off Jail Free Card", this did urk me.

 

Please forgive me, i was attempting to convey my dry sense of humour.

[ploddertom]

That's OK no offence taken.

[WarrenBuffet]

A summary of my Submissions, are as follows:

 

-: Appeal on Medical Grounds/ Mitigating Circumstances.

 

-: Feels he/she is being punished for circumstances beyond his/her control. If he/she had attempted to drive, they would have been a danger to themself, pedestrians and other cars alike.

 

-: Type1 Diabetic hypo while in town premises.

 

-: Visited local coffee shop for hot sweet tea/coffee.

 

-: Admits he/she did overstay by approx 10-15 mins.

 

-: If he/she had attempted to drive car upon expiry of 1hr period, his/her insurance would not have covered them to drive and as a result would have broken the Law. This is because both medical and insurance advice is to 'Stop! driving immediately and consume glucose-sweet before attempting to get behind the driving seat again'.

 

-: He/She feels this is a very poor message to be sending out to many peoplewho suffer a medical condition that may indeed impede their driving at some points in time.

[SabreSheep]

I think has you failed your appeal, their might have been grounds to challenge re: Single Equality Act under disability

 

well done

[WarrenBuffet]

Thanks everyone i must admit that i am chuffed.