URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 72732--------------------------------------------------
       Bristol city council code 17J driving in clean air zone. camera
       on A370 brunel way
   DIR By: Nikon1149
       Date: May 22, 2025, 6:29 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I live in Wales but travel to bristol regularly as I used to
       live there and have friends there. I usually use Waze maps app
       when travelling outside of my home town, as it avoids ULEZ and
       CAZ type zones automatically. This particular day I must have
       defaulted to google maps and not realised. The route google maps
       choose takes you just inside the CAZ for all of about half a
       mile and straight back out. My route is really nowhere near the
       centre.
       They sent me the PCN notice with a single day to spare before
       the 28 days period of notice ran out, so i'm not sure I have any
       recourse here, but £69 is not a small sum for my current
       situation and if there's any way of avoiding this, i'll happily
       take it.
  HTML https://imgur.com/a/NKFIGMD
       #Post#: 72735--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Bristol city council code 17J driving in clean air zone.
       camera on A370 brunel way
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: May 22, 2025, 6:35 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The only way to potentially avoid paying it is to register an
       appeal at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, on the basis that asking
       for payment of the CAZ toll, as well as the PCN penalty is
       unlawful as there are no powers in the CAZ regulations that
       allow this.
       Needless to say, if you do this, then the full PCN penalty would
       be in play, (£120)
       #Post#: 72736--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Bristol city council code 17J driving in clean air zone.
       camera on A370 brunel way
   DIR By: Nikon1149
       Date: May 22, 2025, 6:47 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
       >
       > The only way to potentially avoid paying it is to register an
       appeal at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, on the basis that asking
       for payment of the CAZ toll, as well as the PCN penalty is
       unlawful as there are no powers in the CAZ regulations that
       allow this.
       >
       > Needless to say, if you do this, then the full PCN penalty
       would be in play, (£120)
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I noticed another thread from 2023 for the exact same violation
       on the exact same road had [member=1]cp8759[/member] reply this,
       I was wondering if this course of action is still possible. His
       post was as follow;
       EDIT: Oh, the number to call has changed from an 0870 number, I
       guess this isn't possible anymore.
       ---
       Make representations online via the council website, we don't
       want to risk any issues with the post. Here's a draft:
       Dear Bristol City Council,
       I challenge liability on the basis that the penalty demanded
       exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case. The PCN
       carries an 0870 premium rate telephone number, and I contend
       that as in Paul Bateman v Derbyshire County Council
       (DJ00037-2209, 10 November 2022) this amounts to a demand that
       exceeds the amount due in the circumstances of the case.
       It follows that the PCN must be cancelled.
       Yours faithfully
       Attach copies of these two cases:
       Andrew Young v London Borough of Croydon (2190531198, 27 January
       2020)
       Paul Bateman v Derbyshire County Council (DJ00037-2209, 10
       November 2022)
       #Post#: 72806--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Bristol city council code 17J driving in clean air zone.
       camera on A370 brunel way
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: May 22, 2025, 11:26 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Here are the CAZ regulations.
  HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1783/regulation/7/made
       Also the TPT Case 2018
       Case Number : IA01249-1803
       Decision Date : 13/06/2018
       Adjudicator : Caroline Sheppard
       Extract
       "There is no power in Regulation 7 for the PCN to require the
       road user charge to be paid in
       addition to the penalty charge. Nor is there a power for the
       charging authority to refuse to
       allocate a payment made for a crossing to that crossing, and
       hold it, possibly indefinitely, for
       future use."
       #Post#: 72817--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Bristol city council code 17J driving in clean air zone.
       camera on A370 brunel way
   DIR By: Nikon1149
       Date: May 22, 2025, 11:59 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
       >
       > Here are the CAZ regulations.
       >
  HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1783/regulation/7/made
       >
       > Also the TPT Case 2018
       >
       > Case Number : IA01249-1803
       > Decision Date : 13/06/2018
       > Adjudicator : Caroline Sheppard
       >
       > Extract
       > "There is no power in Regulation 7 for the PCN to require the
       road user charge to be paid in
       > addition to the penalty charge. Nor is there a power for the
       charging authority to refuse to
       > allocate a payment made for a crossing to that crossing, and
       hold it, possibly indefinitely, for
       > future use."
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       So do I have this correct, the issue is that they have charged
       me the penalty (£120, discounted to £60 for 14 days) and also
       asked me to pay the initial £9 fee for entering the zone, and
       asked for this sum together £69/£129 when they should only be
       charing me the penalty at this point?
       #Post#: 72832--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Bristol city council code 17J driving in clean air zone.
       camera on A370 brunel way
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: May 22, 2025, 12:58 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Nikon1149 link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Incandescent link=topic=6443.msg72806#msg72806
       date=1747931184]
       > Here are the CAZ regulations.
       >
  HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1783/regulation/7/made
       >
       > Also the TPT Case 2018
       >
       > Case Number : IA01249-1803
       > Decision Date : 13/06/2018
       > Adjudicator : Caroline Sheppard
       >
       > Extract
       > "There is no power in Regulation 7 for the PCN to require the
       road user charge to be paid in
       > addition to the penalty charge. Nor is there a power for the
       charging authority to refuse to
       > allocate a payment made for a crossing to that crossing, and
       hold it, possibly indefinitely, for
       > future use."
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       So do I have this correct, the issue is that they have charged
       me the penalty (£120, discounted to £60 for 14 days) and also
       asked me to pay the initial £9 fee for entering the zone, and
       asked for this sum together £69/£129 when they should only be
       charing me the penalty at this point?
       [/quote]
       Correct, but despite this decision being by the CHief
       Adjudicator at the time, (now retired), it is not binding on
       other adjudicators, but IMHO is valid. The Birmingham CAZ PCNs
       do not request the toll, only the penalty charge. Of course, in
       order to test the matter, you would have to take them to the
       Traffic Penalty Tribunal as Bristol are unlikely to give way. So
       the full PCN penalty would be in play, no discount.  It's a
       double-or-quits gamble, basically.
       #Post#: 73080--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Bristol city council code 17J driving in clean air zone.
       camera on A370 brunel way
   DIR By: ivanleo
       Date: May 24, 2025, 9:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Nikon1149 link ---
       >
       > So do I have this correct, the issue is that they have charged
       me the penalty (£120, discounted to £60 for 14 days) and also
       asked me to pay the initial £9 fee for entering the zone, and
       asked for this sum together £69/£129 when they should only be
       charing me the penalty at this point?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Yes, that's the gist of it. If for instance you get a PCN for
       parking in a car park without paying, the council can only
       pursue you for the penalty charge, they don't demand that you
       pay the penalty and the original pay & display fee on top of the
       penalty.
       If you want to pursue this you could instruct me to represent
       you at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, but first you will need to
       make a representation to the council in order to get a notice of
       rejection. If you post a draft representation on here I'm happy
       to proofread it for you.
       #Post#: 73165--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Bristol city council code 17J driving in clean air zone.
       camera on A370 brunel way
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: May 25, 2025, 5:26 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       OP, look at the 3 pieces of legislation referenced at the top of
       the notice.
       This process is governed by the Transport Act which in turn
       enabled the Secretary of State(the 'national authority') to make
       regulations. Here is the key provision IMO:
       It's important to understand the terms which although similar
       are legislatively chalk and cheese:
       Enforcement of charging schemes
       173 Penalty charges.
       (1)The appropriate national authority may by regulations make
       provision for or in connection with the imposition and payment
       of charges (“charging scheme penalty charges”) in respect of
       acts, omissions, events or circumstances relating to or
       connected with charging schemes under this Part.
       (2)The regulations may include provision for or in connection
       with setting the rates of [i]charging scheme penalty charges
       (which may include provision for discounts or surcharges).
       (3)Charging scheme penalty charges in respect of any motor
       vehicle shall be paid—
       (a)by the registered keeper of the motor vehicle, or
       (b)in circumstances specified in regulations made by the
       appropriate national authority, by such person as is so
       specified.
       (4)The Lord Chancellor may make regulations about the
       notification, adjudication and enforcement of charging scheme
       penalty charges.[/i]
       The ONLY basis on which penalties may be imposed and recovered
       is set out in the regs. The regs CANNOT and DO NOT exceed the
       authority provided by the Act i.e. they make provision for the
       imposition and recovery of charging scheme penalty charges and
       NOT charging scheme road user charges.
       The Bristol Order is created by the council which CANNOT and
       DOES NOT seek to act ultra vires by purporting to grant powers
       which are NOT PERMITTED by statute and regulations.
       But they try.
       IMO,
       Are the council entitled to recover the road user charge? Yes,
       it's a power available to them.
       Are the council permitted to use the 'charging scheme penalty
       charge' regulatory provisions to do so?  Clearly not.
       Does the penalty charge notice in this case make clear that the
       council are demanding payment of the road user charge under the
       'charging scheme penalty charge' regulations? Yes.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1