URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 129715--------------------------------------------------
       Kingston Council – N244 + EX160 not showing at TEC – PCNs on
       hold – Equita bailiff
   DIR By: min502
       Date: September 6, 2026, 10:09 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi,
       I would be very grateful for some advice regarding two Kingston
       Council PCNs, my N244 applications and ongoing Equita bailiff
       enforcement.
       Background
       I originally had 7 Kingston Council PCNs, all affected by the
       same underlying address problem. Statutory correspondence was
       sent to an incomplete address because my property number was
       missing, so I did not receive important notices.
       The only two PCNs that now remain outstanding are:
       QT10556169
       QT10601387
       For these PCNs, I submitted PE2/PE3 Out of Time applications
       because I had not received the statutory correspondence.
       The PE2/PE3 applications were subsequently refused. However, the
       Court Officer's refusal decisions were also sent to the same
       incomplete address, so I did not receive them and did not know
       that the applications had been refused.
       I only discovered that there was still a problem when I was
       contacted again by the enforcement agent.
       I then contacted TEC to find out what had happened and
       discovered that the Court Officer's refusal decisions had also
       been sent to the same incomplete address.
       TEC advised me that I would need to submit N244 applications if
       I wanted the Court Officer's decisions reviewed.
       17 June 2026 – N244 + EX160 submitted and Kingston Council
       contacted
       On 17 June 2026, I submitted separate N244 applications for
       QT10556169 and QT10601387, each together with an EX160 Help with
       Fees form and supporting evidence.
       The applications were sent in separate emails and I received
       automated CNBC acknowledgement emails confirming receipt of both
       submissions.
       On the same day, I also emailed Kingston Council explaining the
       address problem and what had happened with the PCNs.
       After submitting the N244 applications, I also contacted TEC by
       telephone and specifically checked that my full and correct
       address was now recorded on their system. I was told that it was
       correct.
       I therefore believed that both N244 applications had been
       received and were being processed.
       From 24 June 2026 – Kingston Council action
       Following my contact with Kingston Council on 17 June, there was
       movement on the cases from 24 June.
       The online case histories for the two PCNs that are still
       outstanding showed:
       “On hold: Representation Received” – 24 June 2026
       Following Kingston's review, 5 of the original 7 PCNs were
       subsequently resolved, leaving only QT10556169 and QT10601387
       outstanding.
       All seven PCNs had arisen from the same underlying address
       problem.
       3 July 2026 – Kingston said it could not intervene
       On 3 July, Kingston wrote regarding QT10556169 stating that a
       Warrant of Control had been authorised and the matter was with
       its Debt Management Provider.
       The Council said it was unable to intervene in the collection
       process at that stage.
       4 August 2026 – both PCNs changed to “On hold: Appeal”
       On 4 August, both remaining PCNs changed almost simultaneously
       to:
       “On hold: Appeal”
       I do not understand what triggered this change.
       There is also an earlier “On hold: Appeal” entry from March
       2026, which appeared when my PE2/PE3 applications were being
       dealt with.
       I therefore do not know whether the new “On hold: Appeal” status
       on 4 August was connected to my N244 applications, Kingston's
       own review, or something else.
       Kingston's website still currently shows both PCNs as “PCN on
       hold.”
       26 August 2026 – TEC said neither N244 was showing
       After receiving further correspondence from the enforcement
       agent, I telephoned TEC on 26 August to check the status of my
       N244 applications.
       I was surprised to be told that neither N244 application was
       showing on their system, despite the fact that I had submitted
       both on 17 June and received CNBC acknowledgement emails.
       I explained this to TEC and was specifically advised to
       resend/forward my original N244 submission emails together with
       evidence of the acknowledgement emails I had received at the
       time.
       I followed that advice immediately on 26 August and resent both
       applications, including the N244 forms, EX160 forms and
       supporting evidence, together with the original acknowledgement
       evidence.
       I received new automated CNBC acknowledgement emails following
       the resubmissions on 26 August.
       However, because I had also received automated acknowledgements
       following my original submissions on 17 June, I am concerned
       that the same problem may have occurred again.
       I have contacted TEC asking them to confirm whether both N244
       applications are now actually recorded on the system and to
       explain what happened to my original submissions, but I am still
       waiting for a substantive response.
       Equita bailiff enforcement
       Meanwhile, Equita has told me that its client hold on these
       accounts expired on 22 May 2026 and that an Enforcement Agent
       has been instructed to attend to collect payment in full or
       remove goods for sale.
       This is what I find particularly confusing:
       Equita: client hold expired 22 May / enforcement active
       Kingston: both PCNs changed to “On hold: Appeal” on 4 August and
       currently show “PCN on hold”
       TEC (26 August): neither N244 was showing on the system
       I have asked Kingston to explain why both PCNs were placed “On
       hold: Appeal” on 4 August, whether this was connected to my N244
       applications or Kingston's own review, and whether the hold
       applies to Equita enforcement.
       I have not yet received a substantive response.
       I am also still waiting for TEC to confirm what happened to my
       original N244 applications and whether the applications resent
       on 26 August are now properly recorded.
       My main questions are:
       Has anyone seen N244 + EX160 applications acknowledged by CNBC
       by email but then not appear on TEC's system?
       Could an issue with the EX160 Help with Fees process explain why
       the N244 applications were not registered?
       If the N244 applications are still not registered, should I
       submit fresh N244 applications and pay the court fees instead,
       or could this create duplicate applications?
       What could explain Kingston changing both PCNs to “On hold:
       Appeal” on 4 August, particularly after saying on 3 July that it
       could not intervene because a warrant had been issued?
       Is the earlier “On hold: Appeal” status during the PE2/PE3
       process relevant to understanding the new 4 August status?
       If Kingston currently shows both PCNs as “PCN on hold”, should
       Equita still be continuing enforcement?
       I have copies of the original N244 and EX160 submissions, CNBC
       acknowledgement emails, the 26 August resubmissions and
       acknowledgements, Kingston correspondence and full PCN case
       histories, screenshots showing the current hold status, and
       Equita's correspondence.
       I can upload copies with my name and address redacted if
       helpful.
       Thank you very much for any advice.
  HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/uZTmqZG.webp
  HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/xLrbYZX.webp
  HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/HhDbb3L.webp
  HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/1a7QrxO.webp
       #Post#: 129724--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council – N244 + EX160 not showing at TEC – PCNs on
       hold – Equita bailiff
   DIR By: tincombe
       Date: September 6, 2026, 1:42 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Let's shorten this to TEC pl, the rest is secondary at present.
       When you submitted an OOT submission, YOU generated your
       address, so how could TEC have sent their response to a
       different address?
       What is the deadline, based upon the date of the revocation
       order, in which to submit a valid N244?
       On a secondary issue, what address did DVLA hold for you as
       registered keeper(as per your V5C)?
       #Post#: 129725--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council – N244 + EX160 not showing at TEC – PCNs on
       hold – Equita bailiff
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: September 6, 2026, 2:09 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       No time to look at all videos. Is this the Elm Road junction? PM
       sent.
  HTML http://www.ftla.uk/news-press-articles/that-kingston-box-junction/msg129445/#msg129445
       #Post#: 129730--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council – N244 + EX160 not showing at TEC – PCNs on
       hold – Equita bailiff
   DIR By: min502
       Date: September 6, 2026, 3:00 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: tincombe link ---
       >
       > Let's shorten this to TEC pl, the rest is secondary at
       present.
       >
       > When you submitted an OOT submission, YOU generated your
       address, so how could TEC have sent their response to a
       different address?
       >
       > What is the deadline, based upon the date of the revocation
       order, in which to submit a valid N244?
       >
       > On a secondary issue, what address did DVLA hold for you as
       registered keeper(as per your V5C)?
       >
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Thank you for your reply. I will keep this to the TEC issue for
       now and explain the sequence from the beginning.
       February 2026 – how I first became aware of the problem
       I first became aware that there was a problem when enforcement
       agents contacted me about PCNs that I had not previously known
       about.
       I first contacted Kingston Council to find out what had happened
       and why the PCNs had reached enforcement without me receiving
       the notices.
       After making enquiries, I discovered that the address held by
       DVLA for my vehicle was incomplete. The flat number and postcode
       were correct, but the street number was missing.
       18 February 2026
       I submitted a V62 to DVLA to correct the vehicle registration
       address.
       23 February 2026
       I contacted TEC by email and explained the address problem and
       that I had not received the original PCNs or subsequent
       correspondence.
       In that email I clearly provided TEC with my full and correct
       address.
       25 February 2026
       I submitted my PE2/PE3 Out of Time applications. I also provided
       my full and correct address on those applications.
       27 February 2026
       DVLA issued a new V5C showing my corrected address. The date
       shown on the new V5C is 27 February 2026.
       3 March 2026
       TEC processed my Out of Time applications.
       31 March 2026
       TEC emailed me confirming that my Out of Time applications had
       been processed on 3 March. The email stated that enforcement
       would be suspended while the applications were considered and
       that, if the Local Authority rejected them, the cases would be
       referred to a Court Officer for a decision and I would be
       notified of the outcome.
       However, I never received the Court Officer’s refusal
       decisions/orders.
       I only discovered later that my Out of Time applications had
       been refused after the enforcement agent contacted me again. I
       then contacted TEC and learned that the Court Officer’s
       decisions had been sent to my old incomplete address.
       This is the part I do not understand. Before my PE2/PE3
       applications were processed, I had already provided TEC with my
       full and correct address, and my PE2/PE3 applications themselves
       also contained my full and correct address.
       Regarding your question about the N244 deadline:
       I could not know or calculate the N244 deadline at the time
       because I never received the Court Officer’s refusal
       decisions/orders and therefore did not know the date of those
       decisions. I only became aware that the Out of Time applications
       had been refused after the enforcement agent contacted me again
       and I subsequently spoke to TEC.
       Regarding your question about the V5C address:
       The address previously held by DVLA was incomplete. The flat
       number and postcode were correct, but the street number was
       missing. I submitted a V62 on 18 February 2026 to correct this,
       and the new V5C showing my full correct address is dated 27
       February 2026.
       #Post#: 129733--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council – N244 + EX160 not showing at TEC – PCNs on
       hold – Equita bailiff
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: September 6, 2026, 4:13 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I have looked at the two videos.
       #Post#: 129736--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council – N244 + EX160 not showing at TEC – PCNs on
       hold – Equita bailiff
   DIR By: tincombe
       Date: September 6, 2026, 4:39 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The refusal notices exist, they are dated, it's a matter of
       record.
       Service is presumed.
       Whether you received them is, for the moment, secondary.
       What were the deadlines applicable to TEC's refusals to accept
       your OOT submissions? Are you within these timeframes or would
       you need to submit a request for the DJ to consider your N244s
       late?
       This is the part I do not understand. Before my PE2/PE3
       applications were processed, I had already provided TEC with my
       full and correct address, and my PE2/PE3 applications themselves
       also contained my full and correct address.
       IMO, what you did pre-OOT is neither here nor there, you could
       have moved a dozen times since then. What you declare on your
       OOT as the address for correspondence is the one which TEC AND
       the authority, if it wishes to object, MUST use.
       According to you they did not.
       As regards DVLA holding your incorrect address, IMO this is down
       to you. You should have checked your V5C and if not satisfied
       with what was held on record notified DVLA as soon as possible.
       From your account, this error seems to lie at your door. But
       getting the PCNs reduced to the full penalty would be a success
       of sorts.
       #Post#: 129738--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council – N244 + EX160 not showing at TEC – PCNs on
       hold – Equita bailiff
   DIR By: min502
       Date: September 6, 2026, 4:58 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: tincombe link ---
       >
       > The refusal notices exist, they are dated, it's a matter of
       record.
       >
       > Service is presumed.
       >
       > Whether you received them is, for the moment, secondary.
       >
       > What were the deadlines applicable to TEC's refusals to accept
       your OOT submissions? Are you within these timeframes or would
       you need to submit a request for the DJ to consider your N244s
       late?
       >
       > This is the part I do not understand. Before my PE2/PE3
       applications were processed, I had already provided TEC with my
       full and correct address, and my PE2/PE3 applications themselves
       also contained my full and correct address.
       >
       > IMO, what you did pre-OOT is neither here nor there, you could
       have moved a dozen times since then. What you declare on your
       OOT as the address for correspondence is the one which TEC AND
       the authority, if it wishes to object, MUST use.
       >
       > According to you they did not.
       >
       > As regards DVLA holding your incorrect address, IMO this is
       down to you. You should have checked your V5C and if not
       satisfied with what was held on record notified DVLA as soon as
       possible. From your account, this error seems to lie at your
       door. But getting the PCNs reduced to the full penalty would be
       a success of sorts.
       >
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Thank you. I understand your point now.
       My N244 applications were outside the 14-day time limit, and I
       was aware of this when I submitted them.
       In section 3 of my N244, I specifically asked for leave to file
       the application outside the 14 days of service because I had not
       received the refusal order.
       I also specified in section 8 that the application required a
       District Judge.
       I submitted both N244 applications on 17 June 2026.
       Therefore, I had already asked for the District Judge to
       consider my N244 applications despite them being submitted late.
       Also, just to clarify, I am not seeking cancellation of these
       PCNs. There were originally seven PCNs affected by the same
       address issue. Five of those cases have already been returned to
       an earlier stage. I paid the amounts required on all five and
       those cases are now concluded.
       I am seeking the same type of outcome for the remaining two
       PCNs: for them to be returned to the appropriate earlier stage
       so that I can deal with and pay the PCNs through the normal
       process.
       #Post#: 129751--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council – N244 + EX160 not showing at TEC – PCNs on
       hold – Equita bailiff
   DIR By: tincombe
       Date: September 7, 2026, 2:01 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       As I said, getting the PCNs reduced to the full amount is the
       objective.
       As it stands, you are exposed. We haven't seen any
       correspondence, particularly regarding your contact with TEC,
       but you say you have it. I'm certain that it's possible to tease
       out the essentials from your account and that if you have a copy
       of your original OOT submission and TEC's rejection then a
       simple comparison of addresses would show that TEC used the
       wrong address for service, they used the one on the Order for
       Recovery as opposed to your submission.
       You seem to have met a brick wall regarding feedback, I
       therefore suggest you contact external advice:
       bailiffadviceonline has a good reputation.
       If you have a car which could be seized you might consider
       making it invisible. If you leave it on the highway or at your
       property, it's exposed.
       #Post#: 129766--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council – N244 + EX160 not showing at TEC – PCNs on
       hold – Equita bailiff
   DIR By: min502
       Date: September 7, 2026, 5:18 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: tincombe link ---
       >
       > As I said, getting the PCNs reduced to the full amount is the
       objective.
       >
       > As it stands, you are exposed. We haven't seen any
       correspondence, particularly regarding your contact with TEC,
       but you say you have it. I'm certain that it's possible to tease
       out the essentials from your account and that if you have a copy
       of your original OOT submission and TEC's rejection then a
       simple comparison of addresses would show that TEC used the
       wrong address for service, they used the one on the Order for
       Recovery as opposed to your submission.
       >
       > You seem to have met a brick wall regarding feedback, I
       therefore suggest you contact external advice:
       bailiffadviceonline has a good reputation.
       >
       > If you have a car which could be seized you might consider
       making it invisible. If you leave it on the highway or at your
       property, it's exposed.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Thank you for your advice.
       I do have copies of my original PE2 and PE3 submissions. On both
       forms, my full and correct name and address were entered in
       section 1.
       However, I have never received a copy of the Court Officer’s
       refusal decision/order.
       When I later spoke to TEC by telephone, I explained that I had
       not received the refusal decision. The person I spoke to checked
       the records and told me that the decision had been sent to the
       incorrect address. They then sent me the N244 and EX160 forms
       and advised me to submit an N244 application for a review.
       If the actual refusal decision/order is important for
       establishing exactly what happened, would TEC provide me with a
       copy if I telephone them and explain that I never received it
       and ask for it to be sent to me?
       There is also one other issue I am struggling to understand.
       I submitted both N244 applications on 17 June 2026 and received
       automated acknowledgements, but when I contacted TEC on 26
       August I was told that neither N244 was showing on their system.
       I was advised to resend the original applications and
       acknowledgement evidence, which I did that same day.
       What I still cannot establish is what actually happened to the
       original N244 applications — whether there was a problem with
       the applications, the EX160 Help with Fees forms, or something
       else that prevented them from being registered.
       TEC have only been able to tell me that the N244 applications
       are not showing on their system.
       Do you know who I should contact, or what I should ask for, to
       find out exactly why the N244 applications were not registered
       despite the acknowledgement emails?
       I will also contact Bailiff Advice Online as you suggested.
       Thank you again for taking the time to help me.
       #Post#: 129770--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council – N244 + EX160 not showing at TEC – PCNs on
       hold – Equita bailiff
   DIR By: Bailiff Advice
       Date: September 7, 2026, 5:58 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: min502 link ---
       >
       >
       > I had already provided TEC with my full and correct address,
       and my PE2/PE3 applications themselves also contained my full
       and correct address.
       >
       > My N244 applications were outside the 14-day time limit, and I
       was aware of this when I submitted them. In section 3 of my
       N244, I specifically asked for leave to file the application
       outside the 14 days of service because I had not received the
       refusal order.
       >
       > I also specified in section 8 that the application required a
       District Judge.
       >
       > I submitted both N244 applications on 17 June 2026.
       --- End Quote ---
       There is so much confusion with N244 Applications for seeking a
       Review of a Court Officers Order.
       Firstly, there is a misconception that TEC refuse OOT
       applications. That is not true.
       The PE2 and PE3 are sent to TEC by the motorist for
       'processing'. TEC in turn will notify the council of the
       application by email and a few days later a copy of both forms
       are sent by post. The council are informed that they have just
       19 business days to decide whether or not they are willing to
       give permission for the stat dec to be submitted late.
       If they are willing to grant permission, they don't need to
       reply (as the application will be accepted if there is no
       response within the 19 business day deadline.
       If the council are unwilling to grant permission (which Kingston
       appeared to have done), then they should outline the reason why
       and the  application forms and Kingston's response is then
       passed to a TEC 'Court Officer' for an 'impartial decision'(as
       to whether the council made the right decision.
       Sadly, in the 14 year that I have provided advise to motorists
       on OOT applications, I have only ever come across 3 cases where
       the 'Court Officer' overturned the decision of the council !!
       The TEC Court Officer is given 4 'grounds' to refuse an OOT
       application. As you had not received the rejection notice, you
       are at a disadvantage as you do not know WHY the application had
       been rejected.
       Coming now to the N244. You appear to have completed the correct
       boxes.
       Did you provide the PCN number in the Claim number box?
       Did you provide your correct email address at the end of the
       N244 Application form? Have you checked your junk mail folder
       for any emails from TEC (or CNBC)?
       Did you send the forms (and EX160) to the correct email address
       (which is: Applications.CNBC@justice.gov.uk
       Bailiff Advice Online
  HTML https://bailiffadviceonline.co.uk/index-page/traffic-enforcement-centre-tec/traffic-enforcement-centre-and-n244
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 2
   DIR Next Page