DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 59359--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Congestion charging TFL Upper Woburn Place (Car not
owned) Bailiff
DIR By: bnorth
Date: February 22, 2025, 5:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: MrChips link ---
>
> Paying now is just a means to limit the potential loss.
Meanwhile you can go about beating the original penalty charge
(hopefully).
>
--- End Quote ---
Could you give me more information on that process? Will I get
the opportunity to submit my evidence again to TFL and request a
refund of the fine amount?
#Post#: 59361--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Congestion charging TFL Upper Woburn Place (Car not
owned) Bailiff
DIR By: MrChips
Date: February 22, 2025, 6:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
This is slightly outside my area of expertise, but in order to
beat the PCN you would need to get back into the official
process (which you are currently outside of because TFL don't
think your father has engaged with the official process within
the stated timescales).
One way of doing that is to submit an out of time declaration
with compelling reasons for missing the deadlines. Unfortunately
in so doing you are throwing yourself at the discretion of the
court (and TFL) and experience of many posters on here is that
more often than not they reject such requests. But if it is
worded well, and the reasons are strong, there is a chance.
#Post#: 59362--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Congestion charging TFL Upper Woburn Place (Car not
owned) Bailiff
DIR By: bnorth
Date: February 22, 2025, 6:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: MrChips link ---
>
> This is slightly outside my area of expertise, but in order to
beat the PCN you would need to get back into the official
process (which you are currently outside of because TFL don't
think your father has engaged with the official process within
the stated timescales).
>
> One way of doing that is to submit an out of time declaration
with compelling reasons for missing the deadlines. Unfortunately
in so doing you are throwing yourself at the discretion of the
court (and TFL) and experience of many posters on here is that
more often than not they reject such requests. But if it is
worded well, and the reasons are strong, there is a chance.
>
--- End Quote ---
There is no reason for it to have been out of time, because I
sent the evidence well in time. By the time they admitted the
evidence existed and they had received it, it was outside of the
time and they were demanding a reason for the delay. I have no
excuse for it, there is no excuse for it. Because I reacted
straight away. But they won't admit they had the evidence. How
do I convince them there's a compelling reason when the mistake
is theirs. This whole situation is moronic and we are not in the
wrong. We hadn't even seen the vehicle in nearly 6 months. It's
ludicrous.
#Post#: 59363--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Congestion charging TFL Upper Woburn Place (Car not
owned) Bailiff
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: February 22, 2025, 6:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: MrChips link ---
>
> This is slightly outside my area of expertise, but in order to
beat the PCN you would need to get back into the official
process (which you are currently outside of because TFL don't
think your father has engaged with the official process within
the stated timescales).
>
> One way of doing that is to submit an out of time declaration
with compelling reasons for missing the deadlines. Unfortunately
in so doing you are throwing yourself at the discretion of the
court (and TFL) and experience of many posters on here is that
more often than not they reject such requests. But if it is
worded well, and the reasons are strong, there is a chance.
>
--- End Quote ---
Yes, that is indeed the ONLY way of getting the matter reverted
to the PCN stage. What I'm not sure about is which form should
be used. As ULEZ is a road user charging scheme I would expect
that Form TE9 is needed, plus Form TE7 because the OP would be
submitting out-of-time.
So here is Form TE7 for the OOT request
HTML https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/60c73ad0d3bf7f4bd6a9bc69/te7-dart-eng.pdf
and here is Form TE9 for the actual Witness Statement
HTML https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62e14db38fa8f5649f912647/TE9.pdf
Question is - do any of the circumstances on the TE9 fit the
OP's situation ?
#Post#: 59365--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Congestion charging TFL Upper Woburn Place (Car not
owned) Bailiff
DIR By: Enceladus
Date: February 22, 2025, 9:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
??/04/2024 = date of vehicle sale
26/08/2024 = date of alleged ULEZ infringement
03/09/2024 = date of PCN
17/09/2024 = date of docs sent to DVLA and TFL
16/10/2024 = Charge Cert
07/11/2024 = TFL log receipt of representation
25/11/2024 = SUS28 Late Representation Further Evidence
(16/12/2024)
16/12/2024 = TFL Order for Recovery authorised
06/02/2024 = Warrant authorised
??/02/2025 = Notice of Enforcement CDER
17/02/2024 = Notice of Enforcement Reminder Notice
The above is the sequence of events, so far as I can determine
from your account and the case progression from the TFL site.
When did your Dad sell the car? IE the date the money changed
hands. Why are you so vague about it? The details must be in the
ebay history and the seller's email address.
What does "My Dad had long since removed the car from the MID
(Trade Insurance)....." mean? Is Dad a motor trader?
17/09/2024 "All I have is a payment made to the post office on
the day in question which WOULD add up to the correct amount for
postage for two a4 manilla envelopes ....". Presumably one to
the DVLA and one to TFL posted on the 17th. Do you have a
receipt for the postage? Or anything to show the payment? Or
what is it you have?
CDER posted a Notice of Enforcement to Dad, sometime on or after
the 6th Feb but before the 17th Feb. Did he receive the Notice
of Enforcement? I don't mean the reminder letter of the 17th
Feb. What's the date of the NoE?
From the history above, if it is correct, it would seem that
representations were posted well within the 28 day relevant
period. So on any TE9 Witness Statement form tick the box, one
box only, that says "I made representations about the penalty
charge to the Charging Authority concerned, within 28 days of
the service of the Penalty Charge Notice, but did not receive a
rejection notice."
The Witness Statement (TE9) will require an accompanying Out of
Time application (TE7). On this you will need to put good reason
to be late. And that's the only thing that the TEC will
consider. so what are you intending to put on it? TFL will also
be sent a copy and can object.
So I'm going to suggest that you also write to TFL telling them
that you have submitted a Witness Statement to the effect that
you did not receive any response to your representation posted
17/09/2024. Point out that you were not the owner or keeper of
the car on the date of the contravention. The car had been sold
to Ms Speedy @ address on the nn/04/2024 and here is a printout
of the ebay sale transaction, ebay bill to the seller, bank
statement show funds transferred and so on with whatever you
have. Point out that it would not be in the interests of justice
and it would bring TFL and the ULEZ into disrepute to continue
to pursue the PCN since Dad was not the owner or keeper of the
vehicle on the date of contravention. Ask them not to oppose
your Witness Statement.
See what others have to say as such a letter is a bit out of
process. And I hardly ever advise anyone to step out of process.
#Post#: 59367--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Congestion charging TFL Upper Woburn Place (Car not
owned) Bailiff
DIR By: Neil B
Date: February 23, 2025, 2:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What I'm not sure about is which form should be used. As ULEZ is
a road user charging scheme I would expect that Form TE9 is
needed, plus Form TE7 because the OP would be submitting
out-of-time.
[/quote]
Pretty sure it's PE forms.
#Post#: 59368--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Congestion charging TFL Upper Woburn Place (Car not
owned) Bailiff
DIR By: Neil B
Date: February 23, 2025, 2:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
And here's the clue >
--- Quote from: bnorth link ---
>
>
>
- The letter posted as a picture. All that was included in this
was a statutory declaration form. I did not send this back.
There was no form to submit a witness statement, I have no
received such a form
>
>
--- End Quote ---
The OP pushed themself Out OF TIme by not completing the initial
Stat Dec.
And bnorth, you need to understand what we mean by out of time;
this has now vecome purely procedural because you failed to
complete a step because you were expecting a different form.
--- Quote from: bnorth link ---
>
> Could you give me more information on that process? Will I get
the opportunity to submit my evidence again to TFL and request a
refund of the fine amount?
>
--- End Quote ---
You do not currently have any way of challenging the pcn itself;
you first need to get it back to that stage, as members are
explaining.
#Post#: 59373--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Congestion charging TFL Upper Woburn Place (Car not
owned) Bailiff
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: February 23, 2025, 3:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I understand the confusion, but according to the OP they have
never been the owner, this was their father.(but 'I' as opposed
to 'he' does rather come across, so who's actually who?)
If as per the OP, then it's their father's circumstances during
the 'in-time' period which are key.
We haven't had any info direct from the father.
We're told by the OP that they had and continue to have health
problems and I have suggested that on behalf of their father
they contact bailiffonline to see whether they might be able to
compile a compelling OOT which fits the circumstances.
Who knows?
OP, your continued procrastination and failure to post the
Notice of Enforcement is likely to mean that your father would
be charged the additional £235.
Paying has NOTHING to do with which TEC form is used. Pl get on
with it!
As I and others have explained in detail, the circumstances of
the PCN etc. are for the moment irrelevant. You were told which
grounds applied for a SD to be submitted.
This is the process in which your father is embroiled:
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/ruc/understanding-enforcement-process
#Post#: 59441--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Congestion charging TFL Upper Woburn Place (Car not
owned) Bailiff
DIR By: Neil B
Date: February 24, 2025, 2:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
At this point it is important that you respond to recent posts
made by members.
And ask any questions you may have, to aid your understanding.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page