DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 52534--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, code 52m failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain type of vehicles, Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions R
DIR By: correcthaunt
Date: January 8, 2025, 5:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> [member=3455]correcthaunt[/member] for PN76007402 obviously
the council never received your representations. You send a
representation by post, that was obviously a mistake: anything
you send by post gets scanned into the computer and the paper
copy is immediately shredded, so it's a massive waste of time.
If you make a representation online it goes directly into the
council computer, so as well as being immediate, cheaper and
more environmentally friendly you avoid the risk of postal
issue. You now for next time. For now, all you can do is wait
for the debt to be registered.
>
> For this PCN, follows the process outlined here:
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/announcements/charge-certificates-london-local-authorities-and-tfl-act-2003-london-l-1805/
>
>
> For PN62628875, PN62645400, PN62647643, there's nothing you
can do aside from waiting for the debt to be registered with
TEC. Follow the process outlined here:
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/announcements/charge-certificates-london-local-authorities-and-tfl-act-2003-london-local-autho/
>
> By law statutory declarations can be done at either the County
Court or the Magistrates' Court, but the County Court will be
easier because they do it all the time, the staff at the
Magistrates' Court might have no idea how the process works so
it's not really worth the hassle of having to deal with them. As
an alternative, any high street solicitor will normally do this
for around £10 / £15.
>
> Once you've made the statutory declarations let me know, but
do not submit them before the debt is registered with TEC or
they'll just get rejected.
>
--- End Quote ---
Hi [member=1]cp8759[/member],
Thank you for getting back to me, I really appreciate it.
PN76007402
Why wouldn’t the council get my representations? I posted all 3
together and they responded to the first two. Not to mention
that I also submitted my representation for all 3 online as
well. The proof of submission can be seen on the original post.
I feel like this one is going to be registered but I am curious
to see what they say to the request for information. Will I be
notified of this being registered with TEC or do I need to check
with TEC myself on weekly basis?
Thank you for the link I will prepare the PE3 just in case now.
PN62628875, PN62645400, PN62647643
It’s annoying that there's nothing I can do aside from waiting
for the debt to be registered with TEC. Given that these
happened in 2021 and haven’t been registered yet I don’t think
they will do so any time soon. Last two questions on this
1.
years from now?
2.
need to check with TEC myself regularly?
#Post#: 52537--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, code 52m failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain type of vehicles, Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions R
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: January 8, 2025, 5:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: correcthaunt link ---
>
> PN76007402
> Why wouldn’t the council get my representations? I posted all
3 together and they responded to the first two.
>
--- End Quote ---
The post office receipt suggests you sent three separate letters
in three separate envelopes. Royal Mail used to be 99.97%
reliable back in the day, but that all stopped with Covid and
they never really recovered, see
HTML https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp8nkj2k237o
and
HTML https://www.thecomet.net/news/24098443.anger-rogue-postman-dumped-peoples-letters/<br
/>and
HTML https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6513571/postman-sacked<br
/>(I'm sure there's many more).
So, we'll never know why but for whatever reason one of the
three envelopes was never received, it is what it is.
As for the Order for Recovery, you could just rely on the Royal
Mail delivering it, but if the postie throws it in a hedge you
then have a real problem.
You don't need to call TEC, just check the amount on the council
website every couple of weeks, once the penalty goes up from
£195 to £205 you know that the debt has been registered.
For PN62628875, PN62645400 & PN62647643 you could raise a formal
complaint on the grounds of undue delay using the complaint form
here:
HTML https://www.newham.gov.uk/contact-information/make-complaint/2
If you go down the complaint route you need to make it very
clear that you're not complaining about the PCNs or asking them
to cancel them, you're only complaining about the undue delay in
the council following the statutory process, and make it clear
that all you want them to do is carry on with the next statutory
step i.e. register the debt with TEC. Maybe post a draft on here
first.
#Post#: 52538--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, code 52m failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain type of vehicles, Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions R
DIR By: correcthaunt
Date: January 8, 2025, 6:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> [quote author=correcthaunt link=topic=4387.msg52534#msg52534
date=1736379344]
> PN76007402
> Why wouldn’t the council get my representations? I posted all
3 together and they responded to the first two.
>
--- End Quote ---
The post office receipt suggests you sent three separate letters
in three separate envelopes. Royal Mail used to be 99.97%
reliable back in the day, but that all stopped with Covid and
they never really recovered, see
HTML https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp8nkj2k237o
and
HTML https://www.thecomet.net/news/24098443.anger-rogue-postman-dumped-peoples-letters/<br
/>and
HTML https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6513571/postman-sacked<br
/>(I'm sure there's many more).
So, we'll never know why but for whatever reason one of the
three envelopes was never received, it is what it is.
As for the Order for Recovery, you could just rely on the Royal
Mail delivering it, but if the postie throws it in a hedge you
then have a real problem.
You don't need to call TEC, just check the amount on the council
website every couple of weeks, once the penalty goes up from
£195 to £205 you know that the debt has been registered.
For PN62628875, PN62645400 & PN62647643 you could raise a formal
complaint on the grounds of undue delay using the complaint form
here:
HTML https://www.newham.gov.uk/contact-information/make-complaint/2
If you go down the complaint route you need to make it very
clear that you're not complaining about the PCNs or asking them
to cancel them, you're only complaining about the undue delay in
the council following the statutory process, and make it clear
that all you want them to do is carry on with the next statutory
step i.e. register the debt with TEC. Maybe post a draft on here
first.
[/quote]
PN76007402
I hear you regarding the post office and that's fine, although I
would imagine they should have received it. That said, I still
submitted it online so either way they should have gotten it
somehow.
Checking the website once a week won't be a problem so that
should be fine.
PN62628875, PN62645400 & PN62647643
Say I do the complaint, and they proceed to register it. I then
do the PE3, and it starts the process again.
What happens then? How do I go about getting it dismissed? I
would be happy to pay £65 for the first one only. Had I actually
received it, I would have paid the £65 and be extra careful with
that box and never let the other two happen.
Also that camera has been since destroyed by someone so not sure
if this helps me or not as it clearly worked at the time
#Post#: 52543--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, code 52m failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain type of vehicles, Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions R
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: January 8, 2025, 6:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The signage at the locations for your PCNs has already been
subject to damning criticism by one of the longest serving
adjudicators in London Tribunals, and the case(s) involved can,
and must, be quoted in your reps.
#Post#: 52552--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, code 52m failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain type of vehicles, Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions R
DIR By: Enceladus
Date: January 8, 2025, 10:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As I understand the position.
You actually received PCN PN76007402 and
PCN date = 29/10/2024
Reps created = 10/11/2024
Online Representation date = 11/11/2024
Acknowledgement receipt date = 11/11/2024 22:13, Ack Ref =
W26800139
Reps physically posted = 12/11/2024 & proof of posting received
Charge Cert date = 19/12/2024
Non statutory letter date = 06/01/2025
So for PCN PN76007402 you received the PCN and you submitted a
representation online within the deadlines. You posted via Royal
Mail your reps next day for good measure and obtained a proof of
posting. The Council then issued a Charge Cert and a
non-statutory follow up letter. The PCN currently sits at £195
due on their website.
All of the above being true then you need to sit tight and wait
for them to register the debt with the Traffic Enforcement
Centre which will add the £10 court fee to the amount due.
Registering the debt allows them to issue and serve an Order for
Recovery.
When you receive the Order for Recovery you can complete and
submit to the TEC the Statutory Declaration (form PE3) that will
be included. Tick the box that says "I made representations
about the penalty charge to the local authority concerned within
28 days of the service of the Notice to Owner/Enforcement
Notice/Penalty Charge Notice, but did not receive a rejection
notice". One box only.
The TEC will order the OfR revoked and the CC cancelled and the
case should be referred to the Adjudicator for direction on how
to proceed. Standing practice is for the Council to re-serve the
Notice of Rejection where one exists. You can then pay or submit
an appeal to the Adjudicator. If no NoR exists then the
Adjudicator will schedule a hearing, the case will be heard as
if it were an appeal. You will be invited to make a submission
and to attend in person or by phone.
As you are aware you don't actually have to receive the OfR in
order to submit the SD. You can download the form, complete it,
get it witnessed and email it to the TEC once you see that the
charge due has increased to £205 from the current £195.
I wouldn't bother with any further follow up correspondence with
Newham. They've had their chance.
I note the the Ack receipt for your reps doesn't actually quote
the PCN number, just an enquiry number. Is that true of the
online Ack emails for the other PCNs?
RE: PCNs PN62628875, PN62645400, PN62647643. These PCNs are all
in Feb 2021. The V5c for your car was last updated 07/09/2021.
So I would suggest that the Registered Keeper address was likely
incorrect prior to Sept 2021 and this is why you did not receive
any of the notices for these three PCNs. Sit tight with these as
well.
#Post#: 52938--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, code 52m failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain type of vehicles, Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions R
DIR By: correcthaunt
Date: January 11, 2025, 7:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=12]Incandescent[/member], thanks for getting back to me.
Only PN76007402 is at Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions Round. The
other 3 (i.e. PN62628875, PN62645400, PN62647643) refer to a
different location also in Newham but I found out about it while
dealing with PN76007402 hence in this thread.
#Post#: 52939--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, code 52m failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain type of vehicles, Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions R
DIR By: correcthaunt
Date: January 11, 2025, 7:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
@Enceladus, thanks for taking the time and looking into this.
You understanding and summary is correct.
There were 6 PCNs in total.
#1 PN75748188 – paid and case closed
#2 PN75748213 – paid and case closed
#3 PN76007402 – This is what the post is about re Albert Way
#4 PN62628875 – never knew about this until they mentioned it in
the e-mail when dealing with #1 and #2 as council sent it to a
wrong address.
#5 PN62645400 – never knew about this until they mentioned it in
the e-mail when dealing with #1 and #2 as council sent it to a
wrong address.
#6 PN62647643 – never knew about this until they mentioned it in
the e-mail when dealing with #1 and #2 as council sent it to a
wrong address.
Council made a mistake with the first two so when writing to
them I found out about the #4, #5 & #6 which are for the car
being in the yellow box. I am going to sit tight and wait for
them to register the debt with the Traffic Enforcement Centre.
--- Quote ---
> I note that the Ack receipt for your reps doesn't actually
quote the PCN number, just an enquiry number. Is that true of
the online Ack emails for the other PCNs?
--- End Quote ---
Yes this is true for the other 2. I submitted my defence for
PN75748188, PN75748213 & PN76007402. These were then posted to
them too. I have 3 different references for that and none of
them refers to the actual PCN.
--- Quote ---
> The V5c for your car was last updated 07/09/2021. So I would
suggest that the Registered Keeper address was likely incorrect
prior to Sept 2021 and this is why you did not receive any of
the notices for these three PCNs.
--- End Quote ---
I requested a copy of these PCNs as per advice from @cp8759 and
the address they had on file was indeed incorrect. I am not sure
how this happened as I have been there since 2012 and because
everything else is correct (first line, city and postcode)
except the house number. It should be 39 but it’s 33. So, they
sent this to a wrong address.
Re PN76007402 I want to appeal to the Adjudicator and I am quite
confident it can be won as I have seen quite a lot of people
here win this. That said, not so confident regarding the other
3. Although I have no faith that this will get ever registered
as it has been so long that they would have done by now. That
said I would like to know 2 things regarding them:
1. What would be my line of defence here for PN62628875,
PN62645400, PN62647643?
2. Is there statutory limitation period i.e. an expiration date
for council to register this with TEC?
Statutory Declaration (form PE3)
I also would like to clarify the process surrounding the
Statutory Declaration (form PE3) & debt registration with the
Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC). Can I sign and have witnesses
sign the PE3 form before the debt is officially registered with
the TEC? I.e. can the date on the PE3 form precede the date of
registration with TEC ensuring it's ready to submit as soon as
the debt is registered? [b]I am aware that I cannot submit the
PE3 to the court or TEC until after the debt has been registered
as it will get rejected.[b]
#Post#: 52957--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, code 52m failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain type of vehicles, Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions R
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: January 11, 2025, 8:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So let me summarise where I think we are:
PN76007402: You say that you made representations both online
and by post, do you have a screenshot of the confirmation page
or an acknowledgment email confirming that you made
representations?
Also I note you made a Subject Access Request for this PCN,
correct me if I'm wrong but this is still outstanding so for all
we know, it might be that the council did receive your
representation and it's the Notice of Rejection that got lost in
the post?
PN62628875, PN62645400 & PN62647643: for these you really have
nothing at all to worry about as the council is guilty of a
gross delay in progressing the case, have a read of Paul Richard
Davis v The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (1970198981,
30 March 1998)
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-RndFZ_r1JlVDGvo13wKLGpDCy3OBXqW/view
That decision has stook the test of time and adjudicator who
made that decision went on to become a High Court Judge, then a
judge of the Court of Appeal, and is currently the President of
Welsh Tribunals, so he knows a thing or two.
Normally a delay of over 3 / 4 months is a bar to enforcement,
in this case the delay is several years so there's no real doubt
about what the outcome would be.
#Post#: 52965--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, code 52m failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain type of vehicles, Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions R
DIR By: correcthaunt
Date: January 11, 2025, 9:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> PN76007402: You say that you made representations both online
and by post, do you have a screenshot of the confirmation page
or an acknowledgment email confirming that you made
representations?
--- End Quote ---
Yes I have submitted my defence and got evidence of posting it
both via post office as well as online. In the original post of
this thread we have a copy of my representation submitted to
them, and picture/screenshot of acknowledgments. Proof of the
online submission is W26800139 but it doesn’t state the actual
PCN on it. That’s just Newham’s system though
--- Quote ---
> Also I note you made a Subject Access Request for this PCN,
correct me if I'm wrong but this is still outstanding so for all
we know, it might be that the council did receive your
representation and it's the Notice of Rejection that got lost in
the post?
--- End Quote ---
Correct as per your suggestion I have asked them for a copy of
the rejection. They said they would get back to me by 30th of
January but nothing since. Even though they have provided the
copies of the other request already. They did send me a letter
saying to get in touch if I am struggling financially to repay
it as they could help. I have posted a copy of that letter too.
--- Quote ---
> PN62628875, PN62645400 & PN62647643: for these you really have
nothing at all to worry about as the council is guilty of a
gross delay in progressing the case, have a read of Paul Richard
Davis v The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (1970198981,
30 March 1998)
--- End Quote ---
Understood, so I should complain to the council to have this
registered with TEC. Once this is done I can appeal. Only way to
really get this closed off?
#Post#: 52966--------------------------------------------------
Re: Newham, code 52m failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain type of vehicles, Royal Albert Way E16 & Gallions R
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: January 11, 2025, 9:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: correcthaunt link ---
>
> [quote]PN76007402: You say that you made representations both
online and by post, do you have a screenshot of the confirmation
page or an acknowledgment email confirming that you made
representations?
--- End Quote ---
They said they would get back to me by 30th of January but
nothing since.
[/quote]
I think we can't really do anything until the 30 January
deadline has expired.
--- Quote from: correcthaunt link ---
>
> [quote]PN62628875, PN62645400 & PN62647643: for these you
really have nothing at all to worry about as the council is
guilty of a gross delay in progressing the case, have a read of
Paul Richard Davis v The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
(1970198981, 30 March 1998)
--- End Quote ---
Understood, so I should complain to the council to have this
registered with TEC. Once this is done I can appeal. Only way to
really get this closed?
[/quote]
Yes. It is possible that they might cancel it at the complaint
stage if they realise their case is hopeless, but if they want
to carry on then they will have to issue new PCNs to you once
the previous ones are cancelled by TEC, if that happens you will
have to make a representation based on the delay and then if the
council rejects, you'll have to appeal to the tribunal.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page