DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 66480--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN Parked in residents bay without valid permit, BB
holder, half of badge fell off dashboard
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: April 10, 2025, 10:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've deleted your name and email but your name will appear on
the tribunal register of cases.
Harrow behaving very badly.
I'm sure Mr Anderson will be along with his thoughts.
#Post#: 66493--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN Parked in residents bay without valid permit, BB
holder, half of badge fell off dashboard
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: April 10, 2025, 11:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I refer the adjudicator to the council's evidence, in particular
this statement:
'In order for the boarding/alighting exemption to apply,
activity must be seen taking place. The Civil Enforcement
Officer noted the vehicle parked and unattended.'
I also refer to the council's references to previous PCNs which,
although gratuitous as regards this PCN, give ample supporting
evidence that I have a disabled father whom I transport
regularly and who holds a Blue Badge which, between the two of
us, manages on very rare occasions to fall metaphorically
between two stools and literally on to a seat or into the
footwell. It happens rarely, but it has occurred because the
demands placed upon me when assisting my father can give rise to
mistakes.
On this occasion, between us we managed to not display the badge
correctly and were this to be the basis of my appeal then I
could not take issue with being deemed to be in technical breach
of conditions.
But in this case my appeal (as regards the contravention) is
based upon the exemption under the Traffic Management Order of
alighting, in this case assisted alighting, which brings the
council's statement above into focus. As I understand it, an
exemption is an exemption. It is not mitigation or a request to
exercise discretion but an exemption. I respectfully suggest
that this may be exercised as and when the conditions are met. I
ask the adjudicator to infer from the council's statement that
they are seeking to modify its application, by misstating the
position in law, rather than examining a claim to satisfy
themselves that it applies. I respectfully suggest that
dismissing a defence of assisted alighting without proper
scrutiny of the owner's assertion is improper and would be a
procedural impropriety in itself as well as, in this case,
rejection of a legitimate exemption based upon a false legal
premise. I find it difficult to believe that the council have
applied their framework against me alone and therefore had they
checked their records and other adjudication decisions I believe
that it could be stated that, to use their words, 'they have
been advised on a number of occasions of the necessity and
importance and assessing representations against the correct
legal framework'.
I also suggest that this applies in respect of the procedural
improprieties within the Notice of Rejection. As I understand
it, the basic mandatory wording regarding the 'Duties of an
Enforcement Authority as regards representations made' have
remained unaltered since the Regulations were first issued in
2008, since when adjudicators have stressed to authorities the
necessity and importance of conveying the meaning of these
duties correctly. In my case the NOR states:
'You have 28 days from the date of this letter being served
to..'
It then refers to the owner's statutory right to appeal and
their power to issue a Charge Certificate under this umbrella
condition.
However, the regulations stipulate that the applicable period is
no later than the end of the period of 28 days beginning on the
date of service, not from. I understand that adjudicators have
consistently found that whether the effects of the 'extra day'
are beneficial to the driver or not (and they cannot be as
regards the adjudicator's power to not register appeals made
late, even by one day) misstating these mandatory provisions is
grounds for allowing appeals for procedural impropriety.
I respectfully ask the adjudicator to find that the
contravention did not occur and that there have been procedural
improprieties by the authority and therefore allow my appeal.
Some thoughts.
#Post#: 66525--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN Parked in residents bay without valid permit, BB
holder, half of badge fell off dashboard
DIR By: dbcc33
Date: April 10, 2025, 2:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks so much to both Stamfordman and Andersen.
I'm not sure i understood everything in Andersen's response but
I got the gist!
The question i have is do i need to include my formal appeal in
this appeal as well or will the adjudicator read that before
reading this one?
The part that i think i would like to emphasise more strongly is
that they didn't even at all consider the exemption at either
formal or informal appeal. they've only considered it now and
said it wasnt seen so not allowed. so would it be made stronger
to highlight that they failed to consider the exemption at all
all the way through.
#Post#: 66527--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN Parked in residents bay without valid permit, BB
holder, half of badge fell off dashboard
DIR By: dbcc33
Date: April 10, 2025, 2:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
also I don't know if anyone bothers to read or understand the
medical evidence, but from that alone It proves that he needs
help from having cognitive and physical impairments (brain
bleeds, multifactorial breathlessness and balance issues etc)
irrespective of the BB i.e. there are lots of disabilities and
his are multiple and severe.
if they gave him a disabled bay outside his home it wouldnt be
an issue, but because he is too disabled to drive, and i drive
him he doesnt get one, and we get penalised repeatedly for as
you say genuine mistakes which very occasionally happen as that
is life.
#Post#: 66540--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN Parked in residents bay without valid permit, BB
holder, half of badge fell off dashboard
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: April 10, 2025, 4:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
and we get penalised repeatedly for as you say genuine mistakes
which very occasionally happen as that is life.
No. Stick to your defence of assisted alighting..which means you
cannot park but must stop, assist, return and move if a BB is
not visible. And surely you would have known had you returned as
soon as practicable after assisting, wouldn't you!
I don't know the details because I wasn't there. But the facts
only fit the defence if unfortunately the CEO appeared while you
were assisting because if what you did was park, think you'd
displayed the BB, left your vehicle, albeit assisting your dad,
and then stayed with him then your defence collapses because you
did not display the BB as required and therefore only have
mitigation, not a statutory defence.
But the PIs should withstand scrutiny and succeed anyway because
they're objective.
#Post#: 66656--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN Parked in residents bay without valid permit, BB
holder, half of badge fell off dashboard
DIR By: dbcc33
Date: April 11, 2025, 11:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
sorry, known what?
I was merely talking about the badge dropping off.
I noticed when i returned to drive off. I didnt notice when i
returned to offload shopping as i went to the back of the car
not the front. I am not certain of exact timings.
Had the CEO hung around im sure he would have seen, but i didnt
see anyone only the pcn.
I was asking if we should highlight that the exemption was not
considered at all during any appeals or if you think this is
irrelevant?
#Post#: 66658--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN Parked in residents bay without valid permit, BB
holder, half of badge fell off dashboard
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: April 11, 2025, 11:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I would go with HC Andersen's write-up - you can add that
assisted alighting was not considered at informal/formal stages
too. This will come down to whether the adjudicator finds you a
credible person, which I'm sure they will.
One thing occurs to me - not maybe to overegg your father's
disability as the alighting exemption here depends on you
leaving after necessary time and I presume he was ok to leave.
#Post#: 66661--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN Parked in residents bay without valid permit, BB
holder, half of badge fell off dashboard
DIR By: dbcc33
Date: April 11, 2025, 11:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
thanks stamfordman.
OK - that's what takes the time, getting him in without falling
- his bedroom is downstairs so he lives in a microenvironment
and once in and seated with the shopping unloaded he's ok to
shuffle just at ground level (ie no steps etc) where everything
is within reach.
#Post#: 66716--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN Parked in residents bay without valid permit, BB
holder, half of badge fell off dashboard
DIR By: dbcc33
Date: April 12, 2025, 4:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
How about this?
I removed the line about "metaphorically between 2 stools" as i
didnt understand it and added a line about the council failing
to consider the exemption at informal/formal appeal stages.
The other thing i was wondering is what about unloading - if you
recall there were 2 trips, one to assist dad into the house and
the other to unload the shopping. the latter is missing here
though i dont know how much it matters. i did include it at
formal appeal though.
Thanks
I refer the adjudicator to the council's evidence, in particular
this statement:
'In order for the boarding/alighting exemption to apply,
activity must be seen taking place. The Civil Enforcement
Officer noted the vehicle parked and unattended.'
I also refer to the council's references to previous PCNs which,
although gratuitous as regards this PCN, give ample supporting
evidence that I have a disabled father whom I transport
regularly and who holds a Blue Badge which, between the two of
us, manages on very rare occasions to dislodge on to the
seat/footwell because the demands placed upon me when assisting
my father can give rise to mistakes.
On this occasion, between us we didn’t display the badge
correctly and were this to be the basis of my appeal then I
could not take issue with being deemed to be in technical breach
of conditions.
But in this case my appeal (as regards the contravention) is
based upon the exemption under the Traffic Management Order of
alighting, in this case assisted alighting, which brings the
council's statement above into focus. As I understand it, an
exemption is an exemption. It is not mitigation or a request to
exercise discretion but an exemption. I respectfully suggest
that this may be exercised as and when the conditions are met. I
ask the adjudicator to infer from the council's statement that
they are seeking to modify its application, by misstating the
position in law, rather than examining a claim to satisfy
themselves that it applies. I respectfully suggest that
dismissing a defence of assisted alighting without proper
scrutiny of the owner's assertion is improper and would be a
procedural impropriety in itself as well as, in this case,
rejection of a legitimate exemption based upon a false legal
premise. I find it difficult to believe that the council have
applied their framework against me alone and therefore had they
checked their records and other adjudication decisions I believe
that it could be stated that, to use their words, 'they have
been advised on a number of occasions of the necessity and
importance and assessing representations against the correct
legal framework'. To reiterate, the council also failed to
consider the exemption both at informal and formal appeal
stages.
I also suggest that this applies in respect of the procedural
improprieties within the Notice of Rejection. As I understand
it, the basic mandatory wording regarding the 'Duties of an
Enforcement Authority as regards representations made' have
remained unaltered since the Regulations were first issued in
2008, since when adjudicators have stressed to authorities the
necessity and importance of conveying the meaning of these
duties correctly. In my case the NOR states:
'You have 28 days from the date of this letter being served
to..'
It then refers to the owner's statutory right to appeal and
their power to issue a Charge Certificate under this umbrella
condition.
However, the regulations stipulate that the applicable period is
no later than the end of the period of 28 days beginning on the
date of service, not from. I understand that adjudicators have
consistently found that whether the effects of the 'extra day'
are beneficial to the driver or not (and they cannot be as
regards the adjudicator's power to not register appeals made
late, even by one day) misstating these mandatory provisions is
grounds for allowing appeals for procedural impropriety.
I respectfully ask the adjudicator to find that the
contravention did not occur and that there have been procedural
improprieties by the authority and therefore allow my appeal.
#Post#: 66717--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN Parked in residents bay without valid permit, BB
holder, half of badge fell off dashboard
DIR By: dbcc33
Date: April 12, 2025, 5:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
my other question is do i upload everything i put at formal
appeal again ie the medical evidence etc or i presume they will
get that from the previous uploads and the council pack?
*****************************************************
Page 9 of 13
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page