Camden Council PCN - pay by phone System down - Parked left note couldn't pay - still got PCN. Appeal refused - i could have gone elsewhere.!!

[Andy172]

I received a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) issued for 06/10/23.

I do not have parking apps on my phone.

The Pay by Phone system was down,  which I tried to call 3 times.

An automated message gave an other number to call, which I was unable to get through on.

I left a note in the car window explaining the above.

A PCN was issued despite my written explanation.

I have appealed the PCN and Camden had rejected it, on the basis that I should've found somewhere else to park.

Obviously that would have not been possible, as the phone payment system would have been down for the whole Camden Borough. 

Interestingly, the Notice to Owner has the incorrect make of the car on it, although the registration is of course correct.

I'm wondering, if this is a procedural error, and if this could form an appeal against the penalty charge notice.

Thank you for any help

[dx100uk]

Topic title amended to make it clearer

well the wrong car wont help you no. sadly.

if you'd have had or gotten the pay by mobile phone app could you not have paid then?

im a bit confused by you saying, you don't have any parking apps on your phone and their other? pay by phone system was down too?

 

[BankFodder]

I get the impression that this person doesn't use apps on the telephone but instead relied on the council telephone service which was out of order.
So the position of the council that they could have found someone else to park would have meant that they would be obliged to leave the area completely.

[Nicky Boy]

Just a thought... As it's a council, would "frustration of contract" as a defence, not apply in this case?

[spaceman61]

As no payment was made, no contract was entered into. Therefore 'contract frustration' would not apply here.

[Nicky Boy]

Surely, the contract was entered into when the OP read and agreed to the payment terms on the signage?...

Then couldn't pay because the council's payment portal was faulty...

 

Sounds like the exact wording of the signage could be important here...

On 19/11/2023 at 21:36, Andy172 said:

I have appealed the PCN and Camden had rejected it, on the basis that I should've found somewhere else to park.

But does it state that on the signage (contract)?

[spaceman61]

Contract law is clear.

A contract is only made when someone offers money for something and that money has been accepted/received.

[Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd, 1952]

[Nicky Boy]

So...

1. A sign in a car park says "If you park here for an hour, you must pay £5".

2. You park your car... implicitly accepting that "contract".

3. An hour later, you leave without paying.

4. Parking company issues their invoice to you.

You can refuse to pay it with no repercussions, because there was no contract?

[BankFodder]

Bravo

 

[Nicky Boy]

"Acceptance by conduct"

Always learning BF... Or trying to. There's so much conflicting stuff around!

[BankFodder]

20 hours ago, spaceman61 said:

Contract law is clear.

A contract is only made when someone offers money for something and that money has been accepted/received.

[Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd, 1952]

one of the main factors in the boots case was that it was open to the customer to change their mind and to return the item to the shelf and in time they wanted before the sale was made.

This is an essential element of that case.

In terms of parking, what you have parked – you have parked – and the car became eligible for a ticket at any time after that.

It's absolutely correct that if they visited the contract terms on the OP by administering a parking fine then clearly there must have been a contract in place.



 

[Nicky Boy]

So, going back to my previous comment about frustration of contract...

What is the exact wording on the signage?

Also, is there any way of proving that their payment system was faulty? (Phone call history of the 3 calls attempted?)

If the above points are favourable, would it be in the interests of the OP to just allow Camden to take it to court and cite frustration of contract?

Or is there another avenue of appeal to somebody who might actually have a brain, rather than just using standard template replies?

 

[BankFodder]

I think it would be helpful to do a freedom of information act enquiry to the council to find out about the outages on the telephone system that day

[spaceman61]

That's a bit like saying if I walk into a shop and pick up a product and walk out, I haven't made a contract because I haven't paid! But what I've done is still 'unlawful'. Rules for parking are set out in TMOs or TROs.

If you park and don't pay you haven't entered a contract under contract law, but instead you have breached a legally enacted order detailing the conditions for parking there.

'Frustration of contract' is NOT a ground of appeal under the regulations.

This goes to mitigation at best and is a matter solely for the local authority.

Adjudicators cannot consider mitigation, they are effectively barred from doing so by High Court rulings.

The High Court will not overturn an adjudicator's decision on judicial review unless there has been an error in law. None of the regulations currently in place apply to this issue.

[BankFodder]

Maybe you can give us a link to the regulations.

 

In terms of your reference to walking out of a shop without paying, your logic is completely wrong

[Nicky Boy]

Sorry,  don't know enough about local authority parking regulations to comment on spaceman's post, but it doesn't "sound" right.

Maybe @dx100uk has some input?

[dx100uk]

8 hours ago, spaceman61 said:

Rules for parking are set out in TMOs or TROs.

correct but payment methods? if they dont work...

[dx100uk]

and?

dx

 

[Nicky Boy]

Looks like the OP has lost interest. Not been here since the 20th last month.