PCN through CCTV camera for 'parking' in a loading place for goods vehicle only (Code:23L) **PATAS Appeal Allowed**

[kkpc0703]

Hello Everyone. I would request your advice on the following matter.

I have received a subject PCN dated 25/03/2014 for the alleged contravention dated 15/03/2014. I requested to see the video evidence via email and by post to the council. I followed up the request over the phone. However, I have now received a 'notice of rejection of formal representation' dated 01/05/2014 with the choice to appeal to the Parking Adjudicator within 28 days.

But I have not yet received any video and of course I did not even make any 'formal representation'. Is this not a procedural impropriety?

Shall I now make an appeal to the Adjudicator? What shall be the full grounds? OR Shall I get back to the council to request the video and to allow the formal representation first?

 

Note: Another PCN on the same code on same location for contravention dated 16/03/2014 was also sent. I am waiting to receive video for that too. The location is close to station with parking bays opposite pharmacy and where I have parked many times in past to allow my wife and children to get off and to pick them up. The car is never left unattended and I never got any tickets in past while the camera has been there. And now suddenly two tickets for two consecutive days were sent.

Please advice me.

[Conniff]

Are you saying you have never been in this parking bay ?

 

 

What exactly does the sign say ?

[Michael Browne]

Alighting/boarding is an exemption, as long as you stopped just to pick them up, not waiting for them to arrive.

 

Some councils make the video available on-line. They are not obliged to send you the video, but they are required to make it available to view at one of their offices of your choice.

[kkpc0703]

The sign says 'Goods vehicles loading only 30 mins No return within 2 hours'.

I must have been in the bay. But I don't know for how long. I requested to see the video but it was not made available. I was just waiting for the video. But instead I got 'notice of rejection of formal representation'. But I have not yet made any representation. How can they reject my representation when I have not yet made one?

[Jamberson]

How can they reject my representation when I have not yet made one?

 

You mave made a tactical error. You would have been advised on the original paperwork that you had so many days (28?) to make a representation. If you haven't made one, you have shot yourself in the foot somewhat.

 

What's happened is they have treated your only communication as an appeal and now given you a new payment deadline. You could respond in writing, with an actual representation, and a clear statement pointing out that you have not yet made one - they might be sensible and consider it, or they might not.

 

In any case, you need to make more of an effort to get this dealt with. If it's possible to go down to their office and see the evidence, then that will give you a clearer picture of where you stand. If you do make a representation, make sure you chase them up, speak to them, find out where you stand, etc. If they don't respond in writing before the deadline for the adjudicator, then appeal to the adjudicator.

[kkpc0703]

What's happened is they have treated your only communication as an appeal and now given you a new payment deadline. You could respond in writing, with an actual representation, and a clear statement pointing out that you have not yet made one - they might be sensible and consider it, or they might not.

 

 

The only request in my communication to the council was as follows:

'A PCN dated 25/03/2014 has been served by post in relation to the alleged contravention (code 23L) dated 15/03/2014.

I would like to view the video recordings of the alleged contravention. The evidence sent through the post containing the stills is not conclusive. Please send me the recordings or make arrangements for its viewings and until that time please suspend progress on the case.'

 

Does the above wording in any way form my representation to the council? I followed up the request with calls made to the council and was advised that I will be notified once the video is ready via email or letter. While still awaiting such notification, I have now received 'notice of rejection of formal representation'.

Please advise in light of the above wording to the council from my end.

[Jamberson]

I presume you won't want to write an appeal until you've seen the evidence? All you can do is get on the case and get hold of the evidence and have a look. At the moment you haven't appealed, so it's progressing as it would normally.

[Michael Browne]

Personally I wouldn't chase the council for the video.

 

I'd appeal to the adjudicator on the grounds of procedural impropriety.

 

 

The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/3482/part/2/made (my bold)

 

(5) The recipient of a penalty charge notice served by virtue of regulation 10(1)(a) of the General Regulations may, by notice in writing to the enforcement authority, request it—

(a)to make available at one of its offices specified by him, free of charge and at a time during normal office hours so specified, for viewing by him or by his representative, the record of the contravention produced by the approved device pursuant to which the penalty charge was imposed; or

(b)to provide him, free of charge, with such still images from that record as, in the authority’s opinion, establish the contravention.

(6) Where the recipient of the penalty charge notice makes a request under paragraph (5), the enforcement authority shall comply with the request within a reasonable time.

 

You have complied with the legislation, the council have not.

 

You were alighting/boarding passengers, you wanted to view the video for confirmation, made the request as per regs both by email and post, the council ignored and instead sent a NoR. In doing so they have fettered your defence.

 

Now that they have sent the NoR, you owe the full penalty, so you have nothing to lpose by appealing to adjudication

[Jamberson]

Personally I wouldn't chase the council for the video.

 

I'd appeal to the adjudicator on the grounds of procedural impropriety.

 

 

The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/3482/part/2/made (my bold)

 

 

 

You have complied with the legislation, the council have not.

 

You were alighting/boarding passengers, you wanted to view the video for confirmation, made the request as per regs both by email and post, the council ignored and instead sent a NoR. In doing so they have fettered your defence.

 

Now that they have sent the NoR, you owe the full penalty, so you have nothing to lpose by appealing to adjudication

 

Actually, I think you have a point there. It is possible it could be upheld at adjudication without the need for a conventional appeal. I was guessing that there might be something in the footage which would provide a stronger case for cancellation, but without it, this is a possible way forward.

[Michael Browne]

I was guessing that there might be something in the footage which would provide a stronger case for cancellation, .

 

There may well be, but equally it might show he was there for a lot longer than it takes for passengers to alight/board.

 

At the moment, he can legitimately claim, that as far as he can remember he was only there momentarily, and if that was confirmed by the video could cite alighting/boarding exemption. The council by ignoring his request to view the video has prevented him from confirming that one way or the other.

[kkpc0703]

Thank you both for your useful advice.

I am now inclined to go to adjudication partly because I am not sure exactly how long I stayed there and what happened. This is because I have traditionally parked at this spot for years without getting a ticket and would struggle to remember each instance. Other cars are regularly parked there. I also believed (albeit wrongly in the hindsight now) that cars were also allowed 30 mins as long as loading was taking place. I have nevertheless always stayed inside my car while my wife normally goes inside pharmacy to collect medicines while I wait until she comes back. Ignorance is no defense.

Please advice me if the council can make the video available to the adjudication (which may or may not go into my favour) and if that can be considered as an evidence even though this is not yet shown to me.

[Michael Browne]

The location is close to station with parking bays opposite pharmacy and where I have parked many times in past to allow my wife and children to get off and to pick them up.

 

I have nevertheless always stayed inside my car while my wife normally goes inside pharmacy to collect medicines while I wait until she comes back.

 

So it's now likely that alighting//boarding exemption won't apply ie you were effectively shopping rather than picking up passengers

 

 

I have traditionally parked at this spot for years without getting a ticket and would struggle to remember each instance.

 

Please advice me if the council can make the video available to the adjudication (which may or may not go into my favour) and if that can be considered as an evidence even though this is not yet shown to me.

Yes but by ignoring your request for the video evidence it's still procedural impropriety and as you say you cant remember every instance, so without the video you are unable to be sure of what happened.

[Pocket Nines]

So you made a request to view the video but were not specific. Why? i.e. what exactly did the PCN say in regard to the right to view the footage?

 

Actually, where is the PCN? lets' see it. If it misled you in this respect or omitted mandatory info then it helps you.

[kkpc0703]

So you made a request to view the video but were not specific. Why? i.e. what exactly did the PCN say in regard to the right to view the footage?

 

Actually, where is the PCN? lets' see it. If it misled you in this respect or omitted mandatory info then it helps you.

 

Just managed to scan the PCN. Actually I have attached the NoR too if that helps.

I was not specific because I often stop the car on that location and could not be sure of what exactly happened on that day. Often this is just to drop my wife only to come back later to pick her up but sometimes I wait for her until she comes back. Durations varied from 2 mins to around 15 mins. I have to say all along I wrongly assumed 30 mins were allowed anyway.

[Pocket Nines]

There is so much wrong it's difficult to list it all. I don't have the time.

I'm probably not allowed to mentioned any other on-line forums but there certainly is one, with more active members, who will tear into this.

 

So you made a request to view the video but were not specific. Why? i.e. what exactly did the PCN say in regard to the right to view the footage?

 

Actually, where is the PCN? lets' see it. If it misled you in this respect or omitted mandatory info then it helps you.

I was not specific because I often stop the car on that location and could not be sure of what exactly happened on that day.

No, I've got the answer I was looking for. The PCN fails to tell you what to write! You weren't specific in that you didn't specify a time, date and office to view the vid. That's because the PCN fails to tell you that is what you must do and that is your right: It is therefore unlawful.

Viewing available on-line is not decreed as an acceptable alternative in law; The written request info is still required.

See what Michael posted earlier.

 

(Incidentally; Why haven't you viewed on-line?)

 

--------------------------------------------

 

++

The NoR has the timescale for payment or appeal to the Adjudicator wrong -- but again, I don't have time to explain fully here. Maybe others will?

 

The statement - 'not on hold' contradicts the clear statement on the PCN that cases ARE held?

 

There is probably a lot more to use.

 

Michael also mentioned that they have 'fettered your defence' by their obstruction to viewing the vid. I agree but I also think this amounts to a 'procedural impropriety'. they have not provided access to the vid in the way that the law prescribes and, although not directly stepping outside the statutory process, they have stepped outside their OWN stated promises.

 

----

You are lucky beacuse the fact you say you may have been there for considerably longer than is allowed for alighting would lose for you. Re-boarding, as you describe, is also not allowed. BUT - you're going to get away with this because of the Council's incompetence.

[kkpc0703]

 

Viewing available on-line is not decreed as an acceptable alternative in law; The written request info is still required.

See what Michael posted earlier.

 

(Incidentally; Why haven't you viewed on-line?)

 

Michael also mentioned that they have 'fettered your defence' by their obstruction to viewing the vid. I agree but I also think this amounts to a 'procedural impropriety'. they have not provided access to the vid in the way that the law prescribes and, although not directly stepping outside the statutory process, they have stepped outside their OWN stated promises.

 

 

They have not made any video available. I have not yet seen any video. I was told when the video is ready, I will get an email message. But I haven't received one. The link given on PCN only contains still images. I have been told there is a different link for videos but is not on PCN.

 

 

The statement - 'not on hold' contradicts the clear statement on the PCN that cases ARE held?

You are right. Thank you for all the effort.

I am going ahead with the appeal to adjudication.

[kkpc0703]

Just coming back from PATAS. My appeal is allowed today. Thank you all for your support.

[kkpc0703]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]51737[/ATTACH]Just received Adjudicator's reasons for the decision. It may help some.

Thanks.