PCN then car Towed - Is PCN valid?

[raet]

We were issued with a PCN for parking with one or more wheels on the curb. The "curb" was not actually raised but was brick paving to distinguish from the road. The PCN was issued at 12.21 on Monday 27/8.

 

Our car was towed sometime between 12.21 and us returning to it at 1.15pm. We had to go to the car pound to claim it and pay the £200 towing costs.

I've been searching for the policies on car removal and found that the Chief Parking Adjudicator submitted a paper to Parliament that any removal of a vehicle should be reasonable and proportionate. In our case it was in a lane with minimal traffic, was not obstructing any traffic or the footpath and it was bank holiday monday. The PCN looks valid to me but I'd welcome any tips on appealing both the PCN and the removal costs. Copies of paperwork attached. Thanks

 

 

 

 

 

[DeafSteve]

probably best to block out your address and vehicle reg, raet.

 

No idea about the pcn I'm afraid.

 

Steve

[raet]

Opps, thanks

[green_and_mean]

You should not get a PCN for parking on the kerb there was a ruling by the adjudicator that said the wheel must be on the footway not just the kerb stone. I think that Southwark will use the contravention of footway parking as the reason the removal was appropriate as it is technically an obstruction (of the footway). The volume of traffic is not generally a defence lets say for example you parked in the middle of the street of a quite cul de sac with one house at the end the person who lived there is still obstructed even if no one else is.

Try posting a photo then it will be easier to tell if the contravention had taken place as this is probably the best defence as I think Southwark PCNs are fully compliant.

[Zamzara]

The grounds they have given for representations are wrong: the first one should be 'the contravention did not occur', not what they have said. I don't know whether this invalidates the PCN though.

[green_and_mean]

The grounds they have given for representations are wrong: the first one should be 'the contravention did not occur', not what they have said. I don't know whether this invalidates the PCN though.

 

The document scanned is not a PCN its a Removal release fee receipt.

[Zamzara]

The document scanned is not a PCN its a Removal release fee receipt.

 

It nevertheless unfairly limits the owner's right to appeal and is a dodgy practice, and should be brought to the attention of the adjudicator along with the other grounds for appeal.

[LoveableRogue]

the southwark document lists only five grounds for appeal.

 

however, after southwark rejects your appeal, they are then obliged to deliver to you a patas form, which lists eight grounds of appeal.

 

furthermore, the wording of southwark's five grounds do not match patas' wording.

[nero12]

the southwark document lists only five grounds for appeal.

 

however, after southwark rejects your appeal, they are then obliged to deliver to you a patas form, which lists eight grounds of appeal.

 

furthermore, the wording of southwark's five grounds do not match patas' wording.

Appeal docs handed on collction of vehicle are bollox. They refer to RTA 1991 and a set of grounds that are not applicable.

 

the requirement to inform someone of their right of appeal when the vehicle is collected and the correct grounds are clearly set out in Reg 11 of CEoPC Reps and Appeals Regs.

[lamma]

I agree.

[green_and_mean]

Appeal docs handed on collction of vehicle are bollox. They refer to RTA 1991 and a set of grounds that are not applicable.

 

the requirement to inform someone of their right of appeal when the vehicle is collected and the correct grounds are clearly set out in Reg 11 of CEoPC Reps and Appeals Regs.

 

I don't think Southwark Parking Dept have mastered time travel yet? How can they include legislation that came into force in 2008 on documents issued in 2007?

[nero12]

I don't think Southwark Parking Dept have mastered time travel yet? How can they include legislation that came into force in 2008 on documents issued in 2007?

The right of appeal in the event of vehicle removal, along with the duty of the Council to inform of those rights, is defined in the Regs I quoted earlier. Check for yourself http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/uksi_20073482_en_4#pt4-l1g11

They have failed to comply with this mandatory requirement. this amounts to procedural impropriety.

 

G&M suggests that the Council cannot be expected to include 2008 legislation in a document produced in 2007???

The answer is simple! those documents should have been destroyed long ago.

By his reckoning it would follow that it would be ok to still issue PCNs under pre 31/3/08 legislation of RTA 1991?

Ridiculous.

[green_and_mean]

By his reckoning it would follow that it would be ok to still issue PCNs under pre 31/3/08 legislation of RTA 1991?

Ridiculous.

 

Sooner or later (probably later!) the penny may drop and you will realise its you that is being ridiculous!! :D:D

[nero12]

Sooner or later (probably later!) the penny may drop and you will realise its you that is being ridiculous!! :D:D

OMG... 16 month old thread

 

WTF is this being dug up for. LOL

 

OK leaving the room.