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#: 78096--------------------------------------------------
       Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm for
       me?
   DIR By: GRYOUT
       Date: June 25, 2025, 5:41 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Intentionally leaving details of the EA out of my post as I
       intend to follow it up myself if experts consider it worthy
       Received a PCN last week for a 53C. The PCN states the charge is
       £80 discounted, £160 after discount period, and £240 in the
       event payment isn't made or a representation isn't submitted. I
       submitted a rep.
       Timelines as follows:
       12/06/25: Alleged contravention
       19/06/25: PCN issued
       20/06/25: PCN served
       24/06/25: Representation submitted
       24/06/25: NoR dated and posted
       25/06/25: NoR served
       [attach=1]
       On the NoR, under the heading "If you do nothing", it's written
       “If you have taken no action, before the end of 28 days
       beginning with the date of service of this Notice of Rejection,
       we may serve a Charge Certificate increasing the charge from
       £130 to £195.”
       That appears wrong for 2 reasons:
       1. Overlapping timelines: By using the words "before the end of
       28 days beginning with the date of service of this Notice of
       Rejection", the notice implies the council can send a Charge
       Certificate during the 28-day window, i.e. on day 1–28. That
       contradicts the statute, which requires them to wait until the
       28-day period has expired
       2. Mis-stating the charge amount: I've done some research and
       can see London’s higher-band PCNs went up on 7 April 2025, so
       the correct wording should be **£160 increasing to £240**.  It
       seems they’re still using the pre-April 2025 template (£130
       → £195).
       Questions
       1. Should the NoR not have made use of the word "before the end
       of 28 days..."
       2. Is it correct to think the NoR figure should match the £160
       → £240 band?
       3. Has anyone here succeeded on a similar “wrong amount”
       argument recently?
       4. Would you appeal now or wait to see if they serve a CC, or
       try and run down as much of the 56-day clock as possible before
       putting in the appeal to reduce the chances of the EA
       withdrawing their NoR and reissuing a corrected NoR which I
       can't appeal.
       Thanks in advanced.
       [attachment deleted by admin]
       #Post#: 78106--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
       for me?
   DIR By: Enceladus
       Date: June 25, 2025, 6:59 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Please post up the postal PCN you received and the Notice of
       Rejection and the text of your representation against the PCN.
       Just redact your name and address / email address where present.
       Please leave everything else visible.
       All as per the instructions in the READ THIS FIRST - **BEFORE
       POSTING YOUR CASE!**
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/<br
       />sticky post at the top of this forum.
       #Post#: 78107--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
       for me?
   DIR By: stamfordman
       Date: June 25, 2025, 7:00 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yes let's see the material but the correct action is to appeal
       to the tribunal on the basis of a defective rejection.
       #Post#: 78111--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
       for me?
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: June 25, 2025, 7:14 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Possible scenarios:
       The sum demanded in the NOR is incorrect i.e. the contravention
       occurred after the new mandated penalties came into effect,
       which would be borne out by the fact that you 'received it last
       week' if you are the registered keeper because otherwise if the
       contravention occurred before 7 April then prima facie the PCN
       has been served late and is invalid, or
       The PCN is in respect of a pre-change contravention but your
       'receipt' is due to it not being delivered direct to you, or
       You are not the registered keeper, the contravention occurred
       before the change but was sent first to, say, a leasing company
       who then made successful reps following which a fresh PCN was
       sent to you...etc?
       Is why we need the PCN with all dates and other non-personal
       info in place.
       #Post#: 78114--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
       for me?
   DIR By: GRYOUT
       Date: June 25, 2025, 7:21 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I should have been clearer in my first post (which I'll update
       to reflect the below).
       12/06/25: Alleged contravention
       19/06/25: PCN issued
       20/06/25: PCN served
       24/06/25: Representation submitted
       24/06/25: NoR dated and posted
       25/06/25: NoR served
       [attach=1]
       Is there a way to share the notice privately, as I don't want to
       give the EA the opportunity to withdraw the NoR and reissue a
       corrected version (if a procedural impropriety angle exists).
       I understand they have up to 56 days in which to do this if they
       wise up and decide to.
       [attachment deleted by admin]
       #Post#: 78127--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
       for me?
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: June 25, 2025, 9:07 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You can PM me if you like; but, the normal procedure is to post
       as suggested above. Yes, I won one case re the wrong amount
       "subceded". Redbridge. I would not advise cutting it fine and do
       not know what 56 days are in this regard.
       #Post#: 78131--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
       for me?
   DIR By: Enceladus
       Date: June 25, 2025, 9:26 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       They can't withdraw the NoR and issue a new one. You're entitled
       to rely on what it says. But if it makes you feel more secure
       then register an appeal with the independent adjudicator. Put
       "detailed submission to follow" in the relevant box.
       Registering an appeal might trigger a DNC, Do Not Contest.
       As to which Tribunal has jurisdiction I have no idea as you have
       failed to disclose the required information. Not least which
       Enforcement Authority you are dealing with.
       So once again, if you want the comprehensive advice then please
       read the instructions in the READ THIS FIRST - **BEFORE POSTING
       YOUR CASE!**
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/<br
       />sticky post at the top of the forum.
       Please post up the postal PCN you received and the Notice of
       Rejection and the text of your representation against the PCN.
       Just redact your name and address / email address where present.
       Please leave everything else visible.
       #Post#: 78151--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
       for me?
   DIR By: GRYOUT
       Date: June 25, 2025, 11:19 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I'll get it uploaded shortly when back home.
       It'd be London Tribunals, as it's a London Borough.
       I'd read that the EA has 56 days in which to issue a compliant
       NoR. If they realise their mistake, they could withdraw the NoR,
       fix it and re-issue it within 56-days of my representation being
       made.
       #Post#: 78152--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
       for me?
   DIR By: stamfordman
       Date: June 25, 2025, 11:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Authorities have 56 days to reply to formal representations made
       against parking PCNs - nothing to do with this.
       They can't reissue an NOR and in any case they deal with 1000s
       of PCNs and while we'd hope they dip in here to learn things I
       doubt many do.
       #Post#: 78156--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
       for me?
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: June 25, 2025, 11:29 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       We don't know whether it's a Notice of Rejection of Formal
       Representations or not, we haven't seen it.
       By the way..the council can send a Charge Certificate during the
       28-day window, i.e. on day 1–28
       Correct. But they risk it being served without lawful authority
       if it's sent before the 28-day window closes and action is taken
       during its transit. It's happened and occasionally authorities
       have come a cropper.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 3
   DIR Next Page