DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 55104--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth London, 52 M failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain types of vehicle - Upper Ground
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: January 25, 2025, 3:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I will draft tomorrow.
#Post#: 55145--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth London, 52 M failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain types of vehicle - Upper Ground
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: January 26, 2025, 5:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So:
1. Go to the website: www.lambeth.gov.uk/mypcn
2. Skip the chat box.
3. Make a pdf of this and attach the screenshot. No
contravention
Dear Lambeth
I received the PCN on 22nd January. Notwithstanding this
considerable day, a motorist is entitled to have clear and
correct information from a Council as to what is required to be
paid and when. Your website fails in this regard as proved by
the attached screenshot. Therefore, please cancel the PCN as
this plays fast and loose with the statutory process.
#Post#: 55190--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth London, 52 M failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain types of vehicle - Upper Ground
DIR By: cristinika
Date: January 26, 2025, 11:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> So:
>
> 1. Go to the website: www.lambeth.gov.uk/mypcn
>
> 2. Skip the chat box.
>
> 3. Make a pdf of this and attach the screenshot. No
contravention
>
> Dear Lambeth
>
> I received the PCN on 22nd January. Notwithstanding this
considerable day, a motorist is entitled to have clear and
correct information from a Council as to what is required to be
paid and when. Your website fails in this regard as proved by
the attached screenshot. Therefore, please cancel the PCN as
this plays fast and loose with the statutory process.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks, this is great. I tried to do this now, but it's asking
me to elaborate further, by selecting one of these options and
adding more info in the box.
It won't let me submit until I filled in those additional rows:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/xw2fhqe.jpeg
Any tips, please?
#Post#: 55432--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth London, 52 M failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain types of vehicle - Upper Ground
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: January 27, 2025, 3:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> [member=1960]cristinika[/member] Thanks. Date of PCN: 6th
January. Deemed served 8th January. Therefore, price should
increase on 22nd January.
>
> Have you kept the envelope as proof of service?
>
> Sorry should be 20th. My bad. But the point is the same.
>
>
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/motorbike-52m-pcn-lambeth/msg41795/#msg41795
>
> ETA Register of Appeals
> Register kept under Regulation 20 of the Road Traffic (Parking
Adjudicators) (London) Regulations 1993, as amended and
Regulation 17 of the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic
Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England)
Regulations 2022.
> Case Details
> Case reference 2240362722
> Appellant Ian Prideaux
> Authority London Borough of Lambeth
> VRM KY15HXG
> PCN Details
> PCN LJ2877492A
> Contravention date 15 Jun 2024
> Contravention time 18:27:00
> Contravention location Larkhall Rise
> Penalty amount GBP 130.00
> Contravention Fail comply prohibition on certain types vehicle
> Referral date -
> Decision Date 15 Oct 2024
> Adjudicator Edward Houghton
> Appeal decision Appeal allowed
> Direction
> cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.
>
> Reasons
> The Appellant appeared in person and was represented by Mr
Morgan. Having heard the Appeal I reserved my decision to give
further consideration to the rather detailed procedural and
technical issues raised. I directed the Appellant to produce a
chronological summary which has proved to be of assistance.
>
> The Appellant has produced in evidence a copy of The Lambeth
(Moving Traffic Restrictions) Order 2024 coming into force on
the27th April 2024 which provides that “ all previous Orders are
hereby revoked in their entirety.” This must include the 2023
Order relied on by the Council. However it seems to me highly
probable that the 2024 Order would re-enact the restriction
based on the “map-based schedule” and that if the Appellant is
to challenge order relied on by the Council on this basis the
onus is on him to produce a complete, not a partial, copy of it.
>
> The main challenge lies on procedural grounds, In bare summary
the Appellant submits that the Council’s website was giving
incorrect and/or confusing information regarding payment dates,
and that it was still showing a demand for payment after an
appeal had been lodged. It seems to me that even if the
Statutory notices are in themselves technically correct what is
shown on the Council’s website should be in accordance with
those notices; and that if it is not, it inevitably has the
effect of undermining what is sted in the Notices. In the
present case I see no reason to doubt the Appellant’s evidence,
supported by screenshots, as to whet was shown on the website at
various times These include a statement that “The amount
outstanding on the Charge Notice will increase to £130.00 on
Tue,16 Jul 2024. Please pay £65.00 now”. The correct date (the
end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the PCN)
is in fact the 17th July. There is a subsequent statement that
“The amount outstanding on the Charge Notice will increase to
£195.00 on Mon,5 Aug 2024. Please pay £65.00 now. The Rejection
Notice is dated the 16th July and states correctly that the
Appellant has 28 days from that date before a Charge certificate
may be issued. The motorist is entitled to have clear and
correct information from a Council as to what is required to be
paid and when; and in my judgement these errors are serious
enough for the Appeal to be allowed on the basis of a collateral
challenge. In addition, I agree with the decision of my learned
colleague Mr Greenslade in the case cited by the Appellant,
2240178326 Maurice Fisher v London Borough of Hackney, in which
he sted that “it is not open to the Enforcement Authority to
seek any sum beyond the prescribed amount or any amount at all
whilst an appellant is appealing to the Environment and Traffic
Adjudicator.”
>
>
> The Appeal is therefore allowed.
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 55490--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth London, 52 M failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain types of vehicle - Upper Ground
DIR By: cristinika
Date: January 28, 2025, 3:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=4791.msg55039#msg55039
date=1737811861]
> [member=1960]cristinika[/member] Thanks. Date of PCN: 6th
January. Deemed served 8th January. Therefore, price should
increase on 22nd January.
>
> Have you kept the envelope as proof of service?
>
> Sorry should be 20th. My bad. But the point is the same.
>
>
>
--- End Quote ---
isn't it 14 days from the date of service? sorry I keep mixing
these up, when is it from date of service and when is it from
date of notice?
#Post#: 56658--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth London, 52 M failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain types of vehicle - Upper Ground
DIR By: Mentimate
Date: February 4, 2025, 2:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cristinika link ---
>
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=4791.msg55432#msg55432
date=1738013071]
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=4791.msg55039#msg55039
date=1737811861]
> [member=1960]cristinika[/member] Thanks. Date of PCN: 6th
January. Deemed served 8th January. Therefore, price should
increase on 22nd January.
>
> Have you kept the envelope as proof of service?
>
> Sorry should be 20th. My bad. But the point is the same.
>
>
>
--- End Quote ---
isn't it 14 days from the date of service? sorry I keep mixing
these up, when is it from date of service and when is it from
date of notice?
[/quote]
[/quote]
Hi Cristinika. How did you get on with this? Any one response
yet?
#Post#: 56660--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth London, 52 M failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain types of vehicle - Upper Ground
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: February 4, 2025, 2:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I will be taking care of this and will post accordingly when it
develops.
#Post#: 56675--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth London, 52 M failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain types of vehicle - Upper Ground
DIR By: cristinika
Date: February 4, 2025, 4:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[/quote]
Hi Cristinika. How did you get on with this? Any one response
yet?
[/quote]
No news yet, I will post here when I get a reply from Lambeth,
thanks so much.
#Post#: 62300--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth London, 52 M failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain types of vehicle - Upper Ground
DIR By: cristinika
Date: March 13, 2025, 8:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[/quote]
Hi Cristinika. How did you get on with this? Any one response
yet?
[/quote]
Hi, I received the reply only yesterday, posting it here:
[URL=
HTML https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME10ANRV]https://thumbs4.imagebam.com/a7/05/7a/ME10ANRV_t.jpg[/URL]<br
/>[URL=
HTML https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME10ANRW]https://thumbs4.imagebam.com/21/c7/6a/ME10ANRW_t.jpg[/URL]<br
/>[URL=
HTML https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME10ANRX]https://thumbs4.imagebam.com/08/27/34/ME10ANRX_t.jpg[/URL]<br
/>[URL=
HTML https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME10ANRY]https://thumbs4.imagebam.com/a1/32/79/ME10ANRY_t.jpg[/URL]<br
/>[URL=
HTML https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME10ANRZ]https://thumbs4.imagebam.com/bf/af/b6/ME10ANRZ_t.jpg[/URL]<br
/>
Please let me know if you can see the images or I should
reupload.
I am surprised at their reasoning, it's unrelated to my appeal -
I used the exact wording you provided, so unclear where their
reply is coming from. Any thoughts what to do next please?
Thanks!
#Post#: 62331--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth London, 52 M failing to comply with a prohibition on
certain types of vehicle - Upper Ground
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 13, 2025, 10:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Do not pay it. I will PM you my details. Screenshot today
please.
The amount outstanding on the Charge Notice will increase to
£195.00 on Fri, 28 Mar 2025. Please pay £65.00 now.
You have already made representations for this PCN and we
replied on Sun, 9 Mar 2025. You cannot make representations
twice
This is poppycock and illegal.
Tribunal time I say.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page