DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 2101--------------------------------------------------
TfL red route - largely illegible PCN (thermal paper) &
known flaws?
DIR By: NotFair
Date: July 29, 2023, 6:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted from pepipoo.
My vehicle was stopped in a loading bay erroneously on a red
route, outside of loading hours. Driver admits the error. Had
they parked the adjacent parking bay, all would have been fine!
The windscreen PCN issued is, for the most part, totally
illegible. It's printed on thermal paper and the CEO's
printer/paper must have been faulty.
The PCN number is itself very hard to read and I only succeeded
in getting the photo evidence from the TfL website following
arduous trial-and-error. At least two of the characters (first
and last) are ambiguous.
Would there be any grounds for appeal here? Still within the
discount period for informal reps. The PCN number is so
illegible that it makes getting on to the website, viewing the
evidence (and making [discounted] payment) very hard.
Looking at the known flaws spreadsheet, it would appear this PCN
also has the TMA2004 and may/will flaws.
Thanks!
HTML [url=http://"
HTML https://ibb.co/7CrJpjR"]https://i.ibb.co/yPgnkdY/1690623589698.jpg[/url]
HTML [url=http://"
HTML https://ibb.co/MG4jG1G"]https://i.ibb.co/9VLfV4V/download-1.jpg[/url]
HTML [url=http://"
HTML https://ibb.co/f0SCfTS"]https://i.ibb.co/PCY5KVY/download-2.jpg[/url]
HTML [url=http://"
HTML https://ibb.co/3F13Gvw"]https://i.ibb.co/M1nvWfb/download-3.jpg[/url]
HTML [url=http://"
HTML https://ibb.co/HGtqRLP"]https://i.ibb.co/YfchJ4d/download.jpg[/url]
#Post#: 2111--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL red route - largely illegible PCN (thermal paper) &
known flaws?
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: July 29, 2023, 8:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Give us the PCN number and number plate please.
#Post#: 2117--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL red route - largely illegible PCN (thermal paper) &
known flaws?
DIR By: NotFair
Date: July 29, 2023, 9:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> Give us the PCN number and number plate please.
>
--- End Quote ---
VRM: YS21TNO
PCN: GF83565073
#Post#: 2149--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL red route - largely illegible PCN (thermal paper) &
known flaws?
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: July 29, 2023, 7:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
TFL photos:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/lzdg3Gb.jpg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/nQGHNB9.jpg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/lgfiyqP.jpg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/oTHFug8.jpg
Please can you confirm whether there is any indication of water
damage to the PCN?
If not, and it is undisputably a printing fault, then the PCN is
so hopelessly defective that it's a virtually guaranteed win.
GSV:
HTML https://goo.gl/maps/SskfLZhYhnQShbBD8
I'll get hold of the traffic order.
#Post#: 2267--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL red route - largely illegible PCN (thermal paper) &
known flaws?
DIR By: NotFair
Date: July 31, 2023, 11:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I do not believe there is any water damage. There are some blue
streaks in the paper (you can see them in the 2nd photo in the
original post) though.
Might the known flaws (TMA2004, may/will wording) constitute
stronger grounds for appeal?
#Post#: 2420--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL red route - largely illegible PCN (thermal paper) &
known flaws?
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: August 2, 2023, 11:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Gerald Styles rejected the will / may argument in Jamal Hossain
v Transport for London (2200229658, 05 August 2020)
HTML https://bit.ly/33YaLve,
but it's always possible another
adjudicator might take a different view.
There's another argument about whether the person who issued the
PCN was wearing the required uniform, but that depends on
whether it was a PCSO employed by the MET police, or a direct
employee of Transport for London.
However by far the strongest argument is the faulty printing of
the PCN, as long as there's no evidence of water damage it
should be an easy appeal. This would however be dependant on you
going to a hearing in person and exhibiting the PCN to the
adjudicator, but providing you can do that (or someone can go on
your behalf) it's hard to see how you couple possibly lose.
Some of your images are not loading up, please see guidance here
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/<br
/>on how to post, imgur typically works very well.
#Post#: 2423--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL red route - largely illegible PCN (thermal paper) &
known flaws?
DIR By: NotFair
Date: August 2, 2023, 12:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I am wondering how I can prove lack of water damage.
I don't believe it's water damaged - PCN was definitely in this
condition when removed from the windshield - but I imagine an
adjudicator would assess 'on the balance of probabilities'.
The top half of the PCN (top two uploaded images) is largely
illegible, and it is this half which contains the specific
information such as PCN number, penalty amounts etc. The bottom
half of the PCN (3rd and 4th images) are printed normally.
It could be argued that if the printer was/is faulty, the whole
PCN would have been illegible.
This is why I thought TMA2004 & may/will flaws might be a better
approach. But I suppose I could include those as well as the
illegibility.
#Post#: 2424--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL red route - largely illegible PCN (thermal paper) &
known flaws?
DIR By: NotFair
Date: August 2, 2023, 12:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> Some of your images are not loading up, please see guidance
here
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/<br
/>on how to post, imgur typically works very well.
>
--- End Quote ---
Those are just the CEO (or PSCO) photos, which you have uploaded
subsequently anyway :)
#Post#: 2471--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL red route - largely illegible PCN (thermal paper) &
known flaws?
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: August 2, 2023, 4:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: NotFair link ---
>
> I am wondering how I can prove lack of water damage.
>
--- End Quote ---
Paper that is water damaged normally bulges out and becomes
crinkled, and is usually pretty obvious. If the paper is the
correct shape and size and it rests flat on a flat surface, it's
unlikely the misprinting can be explained away as water damage.
Obviously we can't examine the physical PCN ourselves so we just
have to go by what you tell us.
You can include as many grounds as you wish, as long as they're
at least arguable. You only need to succeed on one point.
If you've not made reps yet, write a draft based on all of the
above and we'll tidy it up for you.
#Post#: 2536--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL red route - largely illegible PCN (thermal paper) &
known flaws?
DIR By: NotFair
Date: August 3, 2023, 2:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Here's my attempt:
--- Quote ---
> I write to appeal this PCN as it fails a number of basic
procedural criteria necessary for enforcement.
>
> 1. The PCN is barely legible due to poor print quality; this
is a procedural impropriety. A large proportion of the PCN is
unreadable, including important details such as the PCN number,
date of service, VRM, charge amount and discount details, and
payment instructions. Accessing the TfL portal to look up the
PCN took multiple trial-and-error attempts. The London Local
Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 (under which this
PCN should have been issued - see below) states that the PCN
must contain this basic information, which it does not, due to
illegibility.
>
> 2. The PCN has been issued under the Traffic Management Act
2004. No stopping is not a contravention under this Act. The PCN
has been issued under the wrong Act; this is a procedural
impropriety.
>
> 3. Regulation 9A of The Civil Enforcement of Parking
Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 (the General
Regulations) states that PCNs must state that a Notice to Owner
"may" be served. However, this PCN states that a Notice to Owner
"will" be issued. This is a procedural impropriety.
--- End Quote ---
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page