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#: 14092--------------------------------------------------
       Croydon x 8 PCNS! - 53j - School Street (Pedestrian Zone)
   DIR By: theeagleman
       Date: January 21, 2024, 10:11 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hello!
       It has been a while (from the old forum)
       This is a bit of a long one... given there is 8x PCN
       The car is leased, hence there was a delay in actually knowing
       the contravention.
       Route used for daily school run, and the residence is in a
       perpendicular road to the where the current restrictions are.
       Dates of contravention:
       1. 20/11/2023
       2. 21/11/2023
       3. 23/11/2023
       4. 24/11/2023
       5. 29/11/2023
       6. 01/12/2023 - AM
       7. 01/12/2023 - PM
       8. 08/12/2023
       No one knew of any of the contraventions, until the first email
       from the leasing company (Alphabet) stating there are PCNs (they
       batched them together to send on the to the lessor).
       Notice of first contravention from leasing company - 08/12/2023
       For contraventions 1 - 4, no PCN to date has been received to
       date, despite being the earlier PCNs. just a notice of rejection
       of the appeal and a discounted rate.
       PCNs 5 - 8 have been received. Snippet below.
       Appeals were made against them all (except #1. as there was no
       way to the first one appeal it on site for some reason).
       Appeals were made using letter of authorisation from the leasing
       company.
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/JzMmb6r/Image-edit1.jpg
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/MB4dG8P/Image-edit2-1.jpg
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/Lghp4F1/1.gif
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/FYvGV5X/Image-edit2.jpg
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/RN5LHvB/PCN-5-edit-1.jpg
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/VwkxY66/PCN-5-edit-2.jpg
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/LCSx1Pq/PCN-8-edit-1.jpg
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/x3Kdp72/PCN-8-edit-2.jpg
       Appeal made for PCNs 2 -8
       I appeal the above PCNs on the basis of the following reasons.
       That the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the
       circumstances of the case.
       I am a resident within the school street, and I received no
       notice at all in regard to the restriction being in place.
       Moreover, being a resident in the school street area means I am
       exempt from such restriction.
       The following is evidenced in Croydon’s website
       
       Source:
  HTML https://www.croydon.gov.uk/healthy-school-streets/how-healthy-school-streets-work
       Furthermore, there was no advanced warning sign except when a
       driver passes the junction, and it too late. Again, it is state
       on the Croydon site the following:
       
       Source:
  HTML https://www.croydon.gov.uk/healthy-school-streets/how-healthy-school-streets-work
       There is absolutely no opportunity to take an alternative route
       once the driver has entered into junction.
       Furthermore, this route has been taken by me on weekday morning
       school runs and even leading up to the enforcement of the
       healthy school street scheme, there was never any indication any
       restriction was going to take place.
       There is no advance warning sign when turning into Stroud Green
       Way from Long Lane, then continuing right onto Stroud Green Way.
       Finally, in regard to this point, the **** of such signage,
       along with the restrictions were not conveyed to the residents
       whom live within the restricted school area.
       Continuing Contravention
       The above PCNs were sent sequentially, however I was not aware
       of the initial PCN CR18780944. Thus it would be deemed
       disproportionate to punish multiple times, as the driver was not
       aware.
       I would like to draw your attention to the following case:
       2160273606
       The appellant does not deny the contravention but states that he
       was travelling to Highgate hospital and was a stranger to the
       area and made the same mistake twice in one day as a consequence
       of which he received two PCN's
       I am satisfied form the evidence that the contravention did
       occur. However I also find that as the there is a time lag in
       issuing a PCN by post, a motorist can unwittingly continue to
       make the same mistake until they receive notification of the PCN
       and in these circumstances I find the second PCN issued to be a
       continuing contravention and allow the appeal in relation to the
       second PCN under case number 2160273606 but refuse the first PCN
       issued under case number 2160273661
       Proof of Residence + Letter of Authorisation
       Please find attached Council Tax Notice showing proof the
       residency. Furthermore, please also find attached the Letter of
       Authorisation from our car financer, Alphabet, which allows me
       to appeal the PCN directly to Croydon.
       In light of the aforementioned, I ask you cancel the PCNs as I
       am a resident of the area, and therefore a valid exemption
       applies to me. Also, I was not aware of any subsequent PCNs thus
       also ask for these to cancelled.
       Thank you,
       Best wishes,
       Should add now that the exemption does not apply to the
       residence, despite it being a stones throw away from the
       restriction.
       Also, there is no advance warning except the below signage,
       which just before the giveaway line on the junction, before the
       restrictions start
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/cy8dPfg/Signage.jpg
       Any advice? Thanks in advance!
       #Post#: 14102--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Croydon x 8 PCNS! - 53j - School Street (Pedestrian Zone)
   DIR By: ivanleo
       Date: January 21, 2024, 12:08 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [member=1185]theeagleman[/member] show us the authorisation
       letter from Alphabet.
       #Post#: 14113--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Croydon x 8 PCNS! - 53j - School Street (Pedestrian Zone)
   DIR By: theeagleman
       Date: January 21, 2024, 4:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Should add, mistaken in regards to the appeal saying the company
       gave letter of authorisation to appeal.  :-\
       They gave Croydon that letter, so they can issue a fresh PCN.
       I only attach #1 below, to not clutter, but they all follow the
       same format.
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/Z6MTDfp/11.jpg
       #Post#: 14309--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Croydon x 8 PCNS! - 53j - School Street (Pedestrian Zone)
   DIR By: theeagleman
       Date: January 25, 2024, 9:54 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Anyone have any further thoughts on this   :o
       Thanks in advance
       #Post#: 14347--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Croydon x 8 PCNS! - 53j - School Street (Pedestrian Zone)
   DIR By: theeagleman
       Date: January 26, 2024, 5:57 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: theeagleman link ---
       >
       >
       > Dates of contravention:
       > 1. 20/11/2023
       >
       >
       >
       >
       >
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/JzMmb6r/Image-edit1.jpg
       >
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/MB4dG8P/Image-edit2-1.jpg
       >
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/Lghp4F1/1.gif
       >
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       A Charge Certificate has now been issued for this one... despite
       not receiving any PCN...
       #Post#: 14351--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Croydon x 8 PCNS! - 53j - School Street (Pedestrian Zone)
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: January 26, 2024, 6:51 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       OP, pl answer the following:
       What PCNs have you received from the council in your name?
       To whom is the Charge Certificate addressed.
       To whom are the council's responses addressed?
       That's it.
       #Post#: 14367--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Croydon x 8 PCNS! - 53j - School Street (Pedestrian Zone)
   DIR By: theeagleman
       Date: January 26, 2024, 11:39 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi HCA,
       - PCNS have been received for ONLY the below
       5. 29/11/2023
       6. 01/12/2023 - AM
       7. 01/12/2023 - PM
       8. 08/12/2023
       - The charge certificate is addressed to lessor i.e. my partner
       - The council responses have been addressed to also the lessor
       i.e. my partner
       #Post#: 14716--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Croydon x 8 PCNS! - 53j - School Street (Pedestrian Zone)
   DIR By: theeagleman
       Date: January 31, 2024, 5:21 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Re: PCNs: CR18869039, CR18892314, CR18892176, CR18958503
       I appeal the above PCNs on the basis of the following reasons.
       That the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the
       circumstances of the case.
       I am a resident within the school street, and I received no
       notice at all in regard to the restriction being in place.
       Furthermore, there was no advanced warning sign except when a
       driver passes the junction, and it too late. Again, it is state
       on the Croydon site the following:
       There is absolutely no opportunity to take an alternative route
       once the driver has entered into junction.
       Furthermore, this route has been taken by me on weekday morning
       school runs and even leading up to the enforcement of the
       healthy school street scheme, there was never any indication any
       restriction was going to take place.
       There is no advance warning sign when turning into Stroud Green
       Way from Long Lane, then continuing right onto Stroud Green Way.
       Please see signage and this is the ONLY one, so there is no
       advanced warning beforehand.
       Finally, in regard to this point, the **** of such signage,
       along with the restrictions were not conveyed to the residents
       whom live within the restricted school area.
       The signage is at the Junction of the contravention, there is NO
       earlier warning on Stroud Green Way as vehicles enter from Long
       Lane. Furthermore, this is very recent restriction, considering
       I have been using this route for the past 6 years.
       Continuing Contravention
       The above PCNs were sent sequentially, however I was not aware
       of the initial PCN. Thus it would be deemed disproportionate to
       punish multiple times, as the driver was not aware.
       I would like to draw the councils attention to the following
       case:
       2160273606
       The appellant does not deny the contravention but states that he
       was travelling to Highgate hospital and was a stranger to the
       area and made the same mistake twice in one day as a consequence
       of which he received two PCN's
       I am satisfied form the evidence that the contravention did
       occur. However I also find that as the there is a time lag in
       issuing a PCN by post, a motorist can unwittingly continue to
       make the same mistake until they receive notification of the PCN
       and in these circumstances I find the second PCN issued to be a
       continuing contravention and allow the appeal in relation to the
       second PCN under case number 2160273606 but refuse the first PCN
       issued under case number 2160273661
       I would also like to draw attention to the following case
       2170368185
       The appellant told me when attending on 14 September explained
       that it was dark when he had mistakenly parked in a business bay
       near to where he lived. He said that he was concentrating on the
       zone letter and omitted focussing on the crucial word "business"
       element in the signage.
       I understood that he had been issued with nine penalty charge
       notices. The explanation for the repetition was absence on
       business abroad,
       The appellant told me that of the nine he had paid one and paid
       this at the discounted rate.
       Administrative cancellations had resulted in there being now
       only three penalty charges outstanding and it was these that
       were under appeal to me.
       The appellant has effectively accepted responsibility for the
       mistake he made.
       The issues which have the focus of the Tribunal are those of
       quantum and the appellant argument that the contravention should
       be regarded as a "continuing offence" for which only a single
       penalty charge can legitimately be sought.
       I mentioned during the course of the hearing that the
       "continuing offence" argument might be taken as failing as there
       were times in the day when the public at large could lawfully
       park in the bay.
       More importantly I indicated that daily penalty charges were
       generally seen as legally unobjectionable in this Tribunal
       although adjudicators could on occasion be persuaded in their
       discretion that a single penalty charge alone was appropriate on
       account of there being but a "single driver mistake".
       I decided against ruling for cancellation on the basis of
       "continuing offence" arguments presented.
       I was more impressed by appellant arguments about the quantum of
       the combined penalty charges sought being excessive.
       A starting benchmark is the regard I have for the financial
       consequences of impounding had the Council proceeded down that
       route as opposed to successive daily penalty charges.
       Impounding would have cost £265 without daily storage charges.
       Some or all of daily storage charges are frequently waived where
       there is genuine explanation of absence abroad. This Tribunal
       regularly sees that as reasonable.
       The Council has not persuaded me that there is sufficient
       justification for a further payment as high as £390.
       The factors I have described have resulted in me upholding only
       the first and last of the three penalty charges under appeal.
       The consequence is that the appellant must now pay £260 within
       28 days to avoid further escalation.
       In total, there are 8 PCNs and it is grossly and
       disproportionately to pay them all, when I was not even aware of
       the first one.
       Thank you,
       Best wishes,
       They sent the 4 PCNs, but no way to make an appeal, as they took
       the appeal on the first basis.
       The above should be emailed in this case?
       Also, they have provided no tribunal referral code on any of
       them.
       #Post#: 14792--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Croydon x 8 PCNS! - 53j - School Street (Pedestrian Zone)
   DIR By: ivanleo
       Date: February 1, 2024, 4:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [member=1185]theeagleman[/member] this is all incredibly
       confusing and we want to put our energy into devising an appeal
       strategy rather than unpicking what document is what.
       Please make a google driver or dropbox folder, and create two
       subfolders: one named "lessor" and one named "alphabet".
       In each subfolder, make one subfolder for each PCN (use the PCN
       number as the folder name), and dump all the documents for each
       PCN into the corresponding PCN subfolder.
       This way we can easily work out what stage each PCN is at and
       who is responsible for it.
       #Post#: 14833--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Croydon x 8 PCNS! - 53j - School Street (Pedestrian Zone)
   DIR By: theeagleman
       Date: February 2, 2024, 4:44 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I appreciate that it is indeed confusing.
       I will sort this out over the weekend as suggested.
       Thanks
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 2
   DIR Next Page