Issued parking fine only through the post for emergency stop by traffic warden being untruthful

[bartonski]

I was travelling through a small suburban street in high Barnet a couple of months ago when my bag, full of work gear started to drop into the footwell of my car.

 

I didn't think twice about stoping on the side of the road, on a yellow line to pick it up, and the bits that had fallen out.

 

As I bent over I eased off the clutch and as it was in 2nd gear the car stalled.

 

Meanwhile a traffic warden had walked around the corner and when I looked up, was looking at me.

 

I looked at him back, put my seat belt on, packed my stuff back up and started the car.

 

I thought nothing of it until I had a notice to owner through the post a month later.

I immediately went onto the council website and told the story there,

 

a month later I had another letter saying they didn't believe me,

showing a picture that the guy had taken of me 'parked' and also said that the warden was a credible witness and had said that he had handed me a ticket!

 

What does the guy gain from lying about it.

 

Secondly, doesn't he have numbered page for this reason or can he just say he gave a whole street tickets without actually really giving them out

 

. Thirdly..why is he issuing me a ticket in the first place?

 

I guess the answer to the first question will answer that.

 

as you can imagine I'm fighting this all the way

but like everybody else I'm scared that I'll end up owing so much more than I can afford as their star 'credible witness' seems to have me banged to rights!

[Jamberson]

I don't think you should assume the CEO is lying. He's got absolutely nothing to gain by doing that - this is what he knows about the incident:

 

"Meanwhile a traffic warden had walked around the corner and when I looked up, was looking at me. I looked at him back, put my seat belt on, packed my stuff back up and started the car."

 

He doesn't know why you stopped, or what the circumstances are. The fact that the council responded by stating he was a credible witness suggests that when you appealed, you said he was lying. They aren't going to accept that.

 

A copy of your appeal letter would be helpful to see - and if possible their full reply.

[green_and_mean]

What is the time on the photo and PCN? The photo would surely show you sat in the car parked before the PCN was even issued? Why would anyone sit on a SYL waiting for a PCN to be issued something doesn't make sense we need to see their evidence and PCN.

[bartonski]

Hi, thanks for your responses. I'm not assuming he is lying, I know he is lying! His evidence was that he gave me the ticket in person, unless I blacked out and have no memory of the event and took the ticket in a daze then he is really defiantly 100% lying! I understand he had just walked around the corner and saw the car parked there and yes I could have been there for a few hours but the fact that he didn't tell the truth really winds me up. The picture was taken but you can't see me in the car unfortunately. The council says that even if I did pull over and the car was switched off then that counts as parking, and if that's the law then I guess I'll have to obide by that and pay but I won't take someone lying and in doing so preventing me from paying the reduced fine.

[bartonski]

''He doesn't know why you stopped, or what the circumstances are. The fact that the council responded by stating he was a credible witness suggests that when you appealed, you said he was lying. They aren't going to accept that.'

 

My initial response to the notice to owner was my own side of the story. All they said was the car was parked on a yellow line at 9:01am and that constitutes a fine alongside a picture of my car on the yellow line.. And that's it

 

I responded by saying I hadn't actually parked and I hadn't received a ticket. And my gripe was firstly, why do I have a ticket when I wasn't actually parking, secondly, why do I have a notice to owner and not the original ticket if they indeed felt that I was in contravention of parking regulations

 

What I don't understand is why didn't the warden just say I drove off before he could give me the ticket instead of saying he actually gave it to me

[bartonski]

Also forgot to mention... The street name and location on the notice to owner is completely wrong so really the whole thing doesn't add up

[Michael Browne]

Wrong location is fatal.

 

From what you have said, you received an NtO and made representations to that which the council rejected?

 

What is the date of the council's Notice of Rejection?

[bartonski]

Rejected 9/10 and no sorry my mistake, they have the right road

[unclebulgaria67]

You will end up paying it, because they will believe the photo and enforcement officers account. You have no evidence to back up your position. Pay it, before it becomes more expensive. Then make a formal complaint in writing against the enforcement officer.

[Michael Browne]

Rejected 9/10 and no sorry my mistake, they have the right road

Then you are left with either paying the full penalty or appealing to the adjudicator

[unclebulgaria67]

Then you are left with either paying the full penalty or appealing to the adjudicator

 

Given that there is evidence (photo and CEO) that the car was parked on yellow lines, how likely is it that an adjudicator would dismiss the ticket taking the word of the driver.

 

Unless i am missing something, i am not sure what argument could be made. If they tell the adjudicator that the CEO was telling lies, that would not be taken seriously.

[Jamberson]

Pay it, before it becomes more expensive. Then make a formal complaint in writing against the enforcement officer.

 

Unpicking the clues, the OP has made a formal rep and had it rejected. Turns out the CEO claims to have served the PCN on the scene, which wasn't explained above.

 

As things stand, it can't become more expensive. The OP can take it to the adjudicator at no cost, and argue his case - the council has no evidence that the PCN was served so the chances of winning are above zero.

[Michael Browne]

Well, somebody is not being truthful about whether the PCN was lawfully served, either the OP or the CEO.

 

It would all come down to how credible the OP is in front of an adjudicator.

[unclebulgaria67]

Unpicking the clues, the OP has made a formal rep and had it rejected. Turns out the CEO claims to have served the PCN on the scene, which wasn't explained above.

 

As things stand, it can't become more expensive. The OP can take it to the adjudicator at no cost, and argue his case - the council has no evidence that the PCN was served so the chances of winning are above zero.

 

Meant if they refused to pay and it was then subject to enforcement action.

 

I suppose they can try to make a reasoned argument to the adjudicator and raise questions.

[green_and_mean]

If the NTO is for a different location are you sure it refers to this scenario and not to a correctly issued PCN you got somewhere else?