Lambeth PCN NTO CC procedural impropriety?

[bigkahuna666]

Dear all,

 

I came here recently with help regarding a parking fine and bailiff issue with Southwark. Everyone here was so helpful and it was a great success. Thanks a lot everyone!

 

This time I have another problem with Lambeth. Similar in duration (Original PCN was from 22/05/14).

 

The original NTO I appealed last year and then never heard back from them until recently (09/15) when I received an OFR out of the blue demanding £202 (£130 for the original NTO + £95 for the CC + £7 Court registration fee). I filed a witness statement stating that I appealed the original NTO, but never received a reply. The WS was accepted and the NTO and CC were ordered to be revoked.

 

The original PCN was obviously not cancelled so I waited for Lambeth to send a new NTO, which they did on the 09/10/15.

 

The new NTO gives the wrong time of contravention. Instead of 12:34 (controlled times between 12:00-14:00) it says 00:34. I then sent the same appeal I sent them last year PLUS the additional comment about the wrong time (ie 00:34 is outside controlled hours etc.) via recorded mail and received a rejection notice on the 20/11/15 (pretty speedy response- only 5 days after my appeal).

 

The rejection notice is just the usual patronising, generic letter, not addressing any of my points (see my appeal below and their rejection attached). The rejection notice had an appeal form enclosed to give me the opportunity to appeal their decision to an adjudicator within 28 days after receipt of their RN. It's only been 21 days so far and today I received a new Charge Certificate from the LA dated 08/12/15, so they ignored my statutory right of 28 days to appeal their decision to the adjudicator and drafted and posted their new CC only 18 days(!!) after their rejection notice.

 

Apart from my original appeal, which had only a weak (but reason enough?) argument of me having a grace period of 20min loading/unloading, which I didn't exceed, am I right in assuming that their mistakes from this year (wrong time on NTO, sending of CC after 18days instead of 28) is enough material to present to the adjudicator and getting approval?

 

As always, any help would be really appreciated.

Edited December 12, 2015 by bigkahuna666
removing personal info in attachments

[dx100uk]

pers I would be removing the bar codes

 

 

pop all your pix into ONE multipage word doc

then file save as .pdf

and attach that

 

 

go edit your previous post

 

 

dx

[bigkahuna666]

hi dx,

 

thanks a lot for your advice. All done! removed barcodes and consolidated into one pdf.

[dx100uk]

bar code on page 1 still shown on ticket

 

 

page 2 remove officer number

and time and same on page 5

[bigkahuna666]

thanks dx! I think its all done now. By the way, I originally left the time on the NTO and CC because they are showing midnight time not the midday time as seen on the original PCN and original NTO (NTO from last year which I cant find at the moment)

[Michael Browne]

Both wrong time and early cc are procedural improprieties, along with lack of obs times to ascertainn whether you were loading or not.

 

Make sure you don't miss the deadline for appealing to adjudication.

[Jamberson]

I'm not sure why you needed to hide the times on the NTO and CC, but are you saying the NTO states 00:34? If so, the NTO is probably invalid.

 

I would appeal to the adjudicator on the basis that:

 

1. The contravention did not occur. You are being held liable on the basis of the NTO, not the PCN, and the contravention stated on it did not and could not have occurred. [explain further about the times etc]

 

2. There has been a procedural impropriety. You have been issued with a CC prior to the expiry of the time allowed to consider the rejection notice and appeal to the adjudicator.

 

3. The PCN is too old to be reasonably defended, since accurate recollection of events on the day is not possible.

 

Point 3 might sound unconvincing, but believe me, this is a strong argument where such timescales are involved. Cases like yours can be won on this point alone, so definitely chuck it in. I think you are likely to win this one.

[bigkahuna666]

Thanks a lot Jamberson and Michael,

 

this is exactly what I thought. I am glad to hear that this could be an easy appeal.

 

Jamberson, I removed the times because dx100uk adivsed to take them out along with the officer number. I can see why the officer, but I am not sure why the contravention times seeing that I am mentioning those in my text anyway. Maybe he meant something else and I misunderstood?

 

I will draft the appeal tonight and send it off first thing tomorrow.

 

Again, thanks a lot for your adivice. I will let you know if and when I hear back from the adjudicator to let you know the final decision.

 

Fingers crossed this is an easy winner.

[bigkahuna666]

just doing the online appeal as it means I can send it all off tonight rather than rushing to the post etc. Just wanted to double check: am I ok to just put the following text as the appeal?

 

I would appeal to the adjudicator on the basis that:

 

1. The contravention did not occur. I am being held liable on the basis of the NTO, not the PCN, and the contravention stated on the NTO did not and could not have occurred at the time given (00:34). I have pointed this out in my recent appeal to the authority, but their Rejection Notice is just a generic letter and does not address this issue.

 

2. There has been a procedural impropriety. I have been issued with a Charge Certificate prior to the expiry of the time allowed to consider the rejection notice and appeal to the adjudicator. The Rejection Notice is dated 20-11-15 and the Charge Certificate is dated 08-12-15 and was received 11-12-15. The Charge Certificate was therefore issued 18 days later instead of the statutory 28 days.

 

3. The PCN is too old to be reasonably defended, since accurate recollection of events on the day is not possible.

 

Should I include anything else?

Looking forward to any advise.

[Jamberson]

It's good. All I would suggest is a bit more info in each section. Rememer the adjudicator will be coming to this completely unaware of what hapened, so when you say the contravention could not have occurred, he'll wonder what you're getting at - better to tell him that the restriction is in force from x to x and the contravention is alleged to have taken place at xxx, outside of those times.

 

Likewise point 3, I would just inform him of the dates and timescales - just so he has all that info clear at the forefront of his mind without having to plough through the bundle of docs to find out.

 

Other than that, fine.

[bigkahuna666]

Great! Thanks a lot Jamberson! Just submitted everything. Fingers crossed they get back to me soon with positive news.

[bigkahuna666]

I forgot to update this thread with the final outcome. The adjudicator agreed with the appeal and asked the LA to cancel the initial PCN.

 

Thank you so much again everyone!

[Guest]