DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 51216--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: December 28, 2024, 12:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, believe it or not the authority are not required by law to
respond to 'representations before a NTO is served' in writing,
merely to consider.
But most do.
Don't beat yourself up about this. We don't need to go into
detail at this stage.
As you've given your account, something is seriously amiss
within the authority and you have a 99.9999% winning hand. They
MUST address the NTO to address A. Your current address is
neither here nor there.
#Post#: 51332--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: seanjean123
Date: December 29, 2024, 5:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> OP, believe it or not the authority are not required by law to
respond to 'representations before a NTO is served' in writing,
merely to consider.
>
> But most do.
>
> Don't beat yourself up about this. We don't need to go into
detail at this stage.
>
> As you've given your account, something is seriously amiss
within the authority and you have a 99.9999% winning hand. They
MUST address the NTO to address A. Your current address is
neither here nor there.
>
--- End Quote ---
Please how you should i proceed ?
#Post#: 51333--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: seanjean123
Date: December 29, 2024, 5:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> [quote author=seanjean123 link=topic=3829.msg51209#msg51209
date=1735409379]
> [quote author=Incandescent link=topic=3829.msg51206#msg51206
date=1735407604]
> [quote author=seanjean123 link=topic=3829.msg51174#msg51174
date=1735387974]
> Hi all,
>
> I responded on the website to the charge and challeneged it. I
did not receive anything back until today. I received a letter
from the post saying i should pay GBP 70 as i did not pay the
GBP35. I did not even receive anything about my challenge if it
was successful or not. Please how should i proceed
>
--- End Quote ---
Please post what you have received first. If it is a Notice to
Owner, you must respond to it or lose any further appeal
options.
[/quote]
I attached the picture. It is a Notice to Owner. I am just
surprised my previous challenge was not acknowledged
[/quote]
Don't be surprised, council incompetence and stupidity means
this sort of thing happens quite a lot. In fact, the
regulations demand that a warning be placed on parking PCNs
served at the roadside. See here, (3.(1)(c): -
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2022/9780348232752/part/2/chapter/1
[/quote]
Please what is the best way to proceed
#Post#: 51344--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: December 30, 2024, 4:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
NTO posted 27th Dec.
Last day of 28-day period for making reps is therefore 27 Jan.
You have plenty of time....
..which is why I'm trying to nail the issue of addresses.
Date of contravention is 7 Nov. at which time you were the
registered keeper living at address A which is the one still on
your V5C;
You moved from address A to address B on 26 Nov;
(edit)
The NTO is addressed to B and not A.
Unless you have notified the authority in writing that you are
the owner and that for the purpose of serving formal notices
they should use address B and not A then IMO you win
irrespective of the merits of the contravention.
I did move house on the 26th of nov. I updated my V5c a week
later due to all the moves (01/12/2024)
and....
I never notified DVLA of any.
Still causes me confusion!
#Post#: 51412--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: seanjean123
Date: December 30, 2024, 2:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> NTO posted 27th Dec.
> Last day of 28-day period for making reps is therefore 27 Jan.
>
> You have plenty of time....
>
> ..which is why I'm trying to nail the issue of addresses.
>
> Date of contravention is 7 Nov. at which time you were the
registered keeper living at address A which is the one still on
your V5C;
>
> You moved from address A to address B on 26 Nov;
>
> (edit)
>
> The NTO is addressed to B and not A.
>
> Unless you have notified the authority in writing that you are
the owner and that for the purpose of serving formal notices
they should use address B and not A then IMO you win
irrespective of the merits of the contravention.
>
>
> I did move house on the 26th of nov. I updated my V5c a week
later due to all the moves (01/12/2024)
>
> and....
>
> I never notified DVLA of any.
>
> Still causes me confusion!
>
--- End Quote ---
OK let me clarify
Date of contravention = 07/11/2024
Address on day of contravention = A
Challenged the contravention online - 16/11/2024. When
challenging the contravention, i did not admit to being the
driver but i signed my name at the bottom
Moved homes from address A to Address B - 26/11/2024
Updated VSC to show address B on 01/12/2024
Received a NTO on the 28/11/2024 at Address B with my name on
it. The NTO was sent to address B directly
#Post#: 51437--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: December 30, 2024, 5:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If you know the NTO has been issued you can make
representations, you don't need to physically receive it in your
hands as the representations can be made online. Post a draft on
here first.
#Post#: 51449--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: December 31, 2024, 2:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The authority were not permitted to use address B therefore IMO
your primary grounds are:
Procedural Impropriety:
Failure to serve the Notice to Owner using relevant particulars
obtained from DVLA as regards the owner at the 'material time'.
As the authority will see, the NTO was addressed as follows:
Your name
********(address B).
The regulations define 'material time' as follows:
“the material time” means the time when the contravention giving
rise to the penalty charge is said to have been committed.
Therefore the 'material time' was 7 November 2024 at which time
your 'relevant particulars' held by DVLA were:
You..
******* (address A)
Your relevant particulars were amended by DVLA on ****(enclose a
copy of your V5C and highlight the 'docref' date) following your
change of address on 26 Nov.
The authority were obliged by virtue of Regulations 6 and 20 of
the General Regulations to use ******* (address A) for the
purposes of serving the NTO and this failure constitutes a
procedural impropriety.
The contravention did not occur
**essentially the arguments given in your previous
representations.
As per cp's post, put these together yourself and post a draft
here.
#Post#: 51932--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: seanjean123
Date: January 4, 2025, 5:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> The authority were not permitted to use address B therefore
IMO your primary grounds are:
>
> Procedural Impropriety:
> Failure to serve the Notice to Owner using relevant
particulars obtained from DVLA as regards the owner at the
'material time'.
>
> As the authority will see, the NTO was addressed as follows:
>
> Your name
> ********(address B).
>
> The regulations define 'material time' as follows:
>
> “the material time” means the time when the contravention
giving rise to the penalty charge is said to have been
committed.
>
>
> Therefore the 'material time' was 7 November 2024 at which
time your 'relevant particulars' held by DVLA were:
>
> You..
> ******* (address A)
>
> Your relevant particulars were amended by DVLA on ****(enclose
a copy of your V5C and highlight the 'docref' date) following
your change of address on 26 Nov.
>
> The authority were obliged by virtue of Regulations 6 and 20
of the General Regulations to use ******* (address A) for the
purposes of serving the NTO and this failure constitutes a
procedural impropriety.
>
> The contravention did not occur
> **essentially the arguments given in your previous
representations.
>
>
> As per cp's post, put these together yourself and post a draft
here.
>
--- End Quote ---
Hi thank you. This is what i am thinking of sending. Pls can you
have a read and let me know if its good to go or if i need to
make any changes.
Subject: Formal Representation Against Notice to Owner for PCN
BF55509843
Dear Bedford Borough Council / Parking Services,
I am writing to formally challenge the Notice to Owner (NTO)
issued on 27/12/2024 for the alleged contravention of "parking
with one or more wheels on any part of an urban road other than
a carriageway (footway parking)." I believe the NTO is invalid,
and I request its cancellation based on the following:
1. The Contravention Did Not Occur
a) Vehicle Was Not Parked on a Footway or Verge
The council’s photographic evidence shows that my vehicle was
parked entirely on the tarmac hardstanding of the Swan Hotel’s
car park. None of the wheels were fully positioned on a footway,
verge, or non-carriageway area.
b) De Minimis Encroachment
Even if the council contends that a portion of the vehicle
(e.g., bumper or part of a wheel) marginally overhung the verge
or grassed area, this is a minor encroachment falling under the
principle of de minimis non curat lex ("the law does not concern
itself with trifles"). Such a trivial encroachment caused no
obstruction or harm and cannot reasonably justify enforcement.
c) Ambiguity in Boundaries and Signage
The "No Parking on Verge" sign visible in the council's
photographs applies to the grassed areas beyond the sign, not
the tarmac where my vehicle was parked.
There is no clear demarcation between the hotel’s private car
park and council-controlled land.
The sign does not indicate that parking on the tarmac before the
sign is prohibited.
This lack of clarity makes enforcement unreasonable and the
contravention unenforceable.
d) Misapplication of Contravention Code
The alleged contravention under Code 62 applies specifically to
parking with wheels fully on a footway, verge, or
non-carriageway area. This code does not apply to the location
in question, as my vehicle was parked predominantly on tarmac.
If the council believed a different restriction applied, a
different contravention code should have been used.
2. Procedural Impropriety
a) Failure to Serve the NTO Using Relevant DVLA Details at the
Material Time
The council has failed to comply with its statutory duty to
serve the NTO using the DVLA-registered address of the vehicle’s
keeper at the material time, as required by Regulations 6 and 20
of the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England)
General Regulations 2007.
The regulations define "the material time" as:
“the material time” means the time when the contravention giving
rise to the penalty charge is said to have been committed.
The alleged contravention occurred on 07/11/2024, at which time
my registered address with the DVLA was:
[My Name]
[Address A]
I moved to my current address on 26/11/2024, and my vehicle’s
DVLA records were updated on 01/12/2024 (see enclosed copy of my
V5C logbook, highlighting the ‘DocRef’ date). The NTO was issued
to:
[My Name]
[Address B]
This demonstrates that the council improperly relied on my
updated DVLA details (post-01/12/2024) instead of using the
registered keeper’s details at the material time (07/11/2024).
b) Breach of Statutory Obligation
By failing to serve the NTO using the DVLA-registered address at
the material time, the council has breached its statutory duty.
This constitutes procedural impropriety, rendering the NTO
invalid and unenforceable.
Request for Cancellation
Given the procedural impropriety and the fact that the
contravention did not occur, I respectfully request that the NTO
and associated PCN be canceled.
I look forward to your confirmation that this matter has been
resolved. If the council does not agree with my representations,
I am prepared to escalate the appeal to the Traffic Penalty
Tribunal .
#Post#: 51933--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: seanjean123
Date: January 4, 2025, 5:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Please just an addition... do i need to respond by post or via
email ? Also i responded to the PCN within 2 weeks which should
have meant a GBP 35 fine not GBP 70. Why is GBP 70 on NTO ? It
is almost as if the PCN and PCN challenge never happened
#Post#: 51937--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bedford, Code 62 Parked with one or more wheels on any part
of an urban road other than a carriage way, Embankment
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: January 4, 2025, 6:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: seanjean123 link ---
>
> Please just an addition... do i need to respond by post or via
email ? Also i responded to the PCN within 2 weeks which should
have meant a GBP 35 fine not GBP 70. Why is GBP 70 on NTO ? It
is almost as if the PCN and PCN challenge never happened
>
--- End Quote ---
Because all NtOs everywhere have the full PCN penalty. They
should re-offer the discount when responding to your reps
against the NtO. Does the PCN "small print" say they will
re-offer the discount if informal reps are rejected ?
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 7
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page