DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 31828--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
DIR By: Enceladus
Date: August 1, 2024, 5:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Well TFL asked for all pages of the V5, so send them all pages
of the V5c.
"Particulate Matter" is explicitly mentioned and that only
applies to a diesel. I doubt if TFL would bother checking the
MOT status.
You should be able to upload the V5c online using the "Update
your representation" button on the TFL site when you view PCN
XJ31678760. Make sure you make reference to "further evidence".
Let's see what the Notice of Rejection actually says, if they
continue to reject.
#Post#: 34698--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
DIR By: Charsiu
Date: August 27, 2024, 7:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So my SIL received the rejection letter today, but confusingly
it quotes a PCN and date not related to her case:
--- Quote ---
> Our records show that a Penalty Charge Notice - YJ38857187 was
issued to you on 09/07/2022 which you paid. We believe this was
sufficient notice given to you to make you aware of the ULEZ and
the need to correctly purchase a charge for each day of entry
into the ULEZ
--- End Quote ---
The wording of the sentence above suggests that the reviewer may
have waived the second PCN, had they looked at the correct PCN
charge in question and realised there was not enough notice for
my SIL to realise the penalty.
Anyone know of a way to ask TFL to re-review the above, without
having to proceed to the next formal stage?
To clarify the sequence of events in terms of payment and issue
dates:
Friday 23rd June - ENTERED ULEZ
Sunday 25th June - EXIT ULEZ
Wednesday 3rd July- First PCN Received (XJ31432319)
Wednesday 3rd July - First PCN PAID
Friday 5th July - Second PCN Received (XJ31678760)
[img]
HTML https://imgur.com/UDt0uNp[/img]
Link to first page - got problems with image link not loading up
in the post
HTML https://imgur.com/UDt0uNp
Remaining Pages
HTML https://imgur.com/a/48iEeWn
#Post#: 34708--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: August 27, 2024, 8:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What do the TfL timelines show for each PCN?
#Post#: 34711--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
DIR By: Charsiu
Date: August 27, 2024, 9:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: John U.K. link ---
>
> What do the TfL timelines show for each PCN?
>
--- End Quote ---
First One
PCN status history
19 August 2024 Representation Rejected
TfL has rejected a representation received for this PCN.
03 July 2024 Email dispatched to: xxx@gmail.com Subj Receipt
E112465931 for your payment
N/A
03 July 2024 Paid
TfL has received full payment for this PCN.
29 June 2024 PCN Batched
N/A
Second One
PCN status history
19 August 2024 Representation Rejected
TfL has rejected a representation received for this PCN.
02 August 2024 On Hold: SUS26 - Representation Received
N/A
23 July 2024 On Hold: SUS29 - Further Evidence Requested
N/A
11 July 2024 Representation submitted Under review
N/A
10 July 2024 Email dispatched to: xxx@gmail.com Subj
Representation receipted
N/A
10 July 2024 On Hold: SUS26 - Representation Received
N/A
02 July 2024 PCN Batched
N/A
#Post#: 34765--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
DIR By: Enceladus
Date: August 27, 2024, 8:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You've shown us page 1 of the Notice of Rejection. Please post
up the remaining pages.
--- Quote from: Charsiu link ---
>
> ..................
> [quote]Our records show that a Penalty Charge Notice -
YJ38857187 was issued to you on 09/07/2022 which you paid. We
believe this was sufficient notice given to you to make you
aware of the ULEZ and the need to correctly purchase a charge
for each day of entry into the ULEZ
--- End Quote ---
The wording of the sentence above suggests that the reviewer may
have waived the second PCN, had they looked at the correct PCN
charge in question and realised there was not enough notice for
my SIL to realise the penalty.
.................
[/quote]
The TFL website shows PCN Y338857187 to be a ULEZ PCN for the
same car, that was paid in 2022. The V5c was last updated in Feb
2021 so the RK hasn't changed. Hence it's hard to see how your
sister can now argue that she was unaware of the ULEZ? It's the
expansion of the zone that she fell victim to.
What exactly did your represenations say?
#Post#: 34776--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
DIR By: MrChips
Date: August 28, 2024, 2:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Post deleted
#Post#: 34792--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
DIR By: Charsiu
Date: August 28, 2024, 4:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Enceladus link ---
>
> You've shown us page 1 of the Notice of Rejection. Please post
up the remaining pages.
>
> [quote author=Charsiu link=topic=2433.msg34698#msg34698
date=1724762479]
> ..................
> [quote]Our records show that a Penalty Charge Notice -
YJ38857187 was issued to you on 09/07/2022 which you paid. We
believe this was sufficient notice given to you to make you
aware of the ULEZ and the need to correctly purchase a charge
for each day of entry into the ULEZ
--- End Quote ---
The wording of the sentence above suggests that the reviewer may
have waived the second PCN, had they looked at the correct PCN
charge in question and realised there was not enough notice for
my SIL to realise the penalty.
.................
[/quote]
The TFL website shows PCN Y338857187 to be a ULEZ PCN for the
same car, that was paid in 2022. The V5c was last updated in Feb
2021 so the RK hasn't changed. Hence it's hard to see how your
sister can now argue that she was unaware of the ULEZ? It's the
expansion of the zone that she fell victim to.
What exactly did your represenations say?
[/quote]
There was another 7-8 pages of the rejection, so I had just
linked to the album on my previous post (Remaining Pages). But
here it is again REMAINING PAGES AGAIN
HTML https://imgur.com/a/48iEeWn
It didn't occur to me to check the "incorrect" PCN, and you are
absolutely right! Their vehicle was caught in ULEZ back in 2022,
I noticed the e-mail receipt was to the husband - I wonder if he
ever told her back then! ;D
In this case, I might just tell her to just pay up - bit much to
ask TFL for leniency when the car was fined previously, not
plausible in their eyes which I understand.
My representation was essentially stating the facts of the
events (as I have on this post) and asking for leniency and
waiving of the second PCN. The PCN from 2022 completely skewered
that for both my SIL and myself, I suspect she's having words
with the other half!
#Post#: 34796--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
DIR By: roythebus
Date: August 28, 2024, 5:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If the historic PCN was sent to her husband, has the registered
keeper changed since then from hubby to mrs? Or did he open her
mail? Just because "the car" has been clocked in the ULEZ before
doesn't mean it was with the same RK, so that argument may be
irrelevant.
#Post#: 34799--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
DIR By: Charsiu
Date: August 28, 2024, 5:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: roythebus link ---
>
> If the historic PCN was sent to her husband, has the
registered keeper changed since then from hubby to mrs? Or did
he open her mail? Just because "the car" has been clocked in the
ULEZ before doesn't mean it was with the same RK, so that
argument may be irrelevant.
>
--- End Quote ---
That's a good point, they would not have made changes to the
Registered Keeper, so I suspect he either intercepted the PCN
fine, or I imagined she would have opened it and gave it to him
to handle.
#Post#: 34841--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for ULEZ - Family Visit - Romford/Essex.
DIR By: Enceladus
Date: August 28, 2024, 10:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: roythebus link ---
>
> If the historic PCN was sent to her husband, has the
registered keeper changed since then from hubby to mrs? Or did
he open her mail? Just because "the car" has been clocked in the
ULEZ before doesn't mean it was with the same RK, so that
argument may be irrelevant.
>
--- End Quote ---
The last V5c update was Feb 2021 and that well predates PCN
Y338857187 referenced in the NOR, so the RK hasn't changed.
TfL reoffered the discount in the NoR. The discount window
expires close of business on Sunday the 1st Sep. Our
Administartor @cp8759 seems confident that if you submit an
appeal to the Adjudicator within the discount windows then TFL
will accept the discount rate if you lose the appeal. I'm aware
that that happens with TFL PCNs, but usually when it involves a
business and a parking contravention.
So if you have nothing further to lose by having a go at an
appeal then I would do so. But it seems to me risky as to the
discount. If they won't accept the discount rate if you lose the
appeal then you would, or rather your sister, be in for £180.
Other than the NoR is some sort of a bad attempt at creating a
one size fits all rejection I don't see much to put before the
Adjudicator. It's a bit black & white. Were you in the ULEZ at
the time alleged, yes you were. Was your car emmissions
compliant, no it wasn't, so there is no exemption that applies.
The Adjudicator has no discretion regarding mitigation so it's
highly likely you'd lose. Probably the best you can hope for is
that TFL "do not contest".
See what others have to say and PM @cp8759 and ask him to look
at the current status of your cases.
Is it worth a shot with the Adjudicator? On balance I feel you
might be best of paying it at the discount before Sunday.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page