DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 78160--------------------------------------------------
Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
for me?
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: June 25, 2025, 11:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
53C - buses/cycles only moving traffic contravention.
#Post#: 78161--------------------------------------------------
Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
for me?
DIR By: GRYOUT
Date: June 25, 2025, 11:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: stamfordman link ---
>
> 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.
>
--- End Quote ---
In my case it's a formal representation made against a moving
traffic PCN (53c).
The way I understood it, the informal representation wasn't even
an option given the nature of the PCN the moving traffic type.
#Post#: 78162--------------------------------------------------
Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
for me?
DIR By: GRYOUT
Date: June 25, 2025, 11:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: stamfordman link ---
>
> 53C - buses/cycles only moving traffic contravention.
>
--- End Quote ---
53C: Failing to comply with restrictions on vehicles entering a
pedestrian and cycle zone
It was a school street with restricted access at pick up time
#Post#: 78165--------------------------------------------------
Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
for me?
DIR By: GRYOUT
Date: June 25, 2025, 11:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> 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.
>
--- End Quote ---
Yes, it's a Notice of Rejection of Representations (which is the
same as a Notice of Rejection of Formal Representations I'm led
to believe).
Just to clarify your last message, when you said "By the
way..the council can send a Charge Certificate during the 28-day
window, i.e. on day 1–28" , were you quoting my post, or were
you confirming that the council are permitted to send a CC
between day 1-28?
Your last message where you say "Correct" suggests that you were
quoting my post and confirming that the council shouldn't be
sending it out before 28 days.
#Post#: 78170--------------------------------------------------
Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
for me?
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: June 25, 2025, 12:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Sending is not the determinant issue, it's service.
Service is presumed 2 working days after posting. Therefore in
theory a council could issue on a Thurs when the window closes
on a Sunday i.e. 3 days 'early' and still be OK providing that
reps weren't made on the Thurs, Fri, Sat or Sun. It's all
programmed and some will be quick off the mark, others will wait
until the window has closed before issuing, just to be on the
safe side.
Frankly, I cannot see how a council could give consideration to
the reps in such a short timeframe, but we haven't seen them. I
refer to them in the third person because I get the impression
that you aren't the 'respondent'.
#Post#: 78261--------------------------------------------------
Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
for me?
DIR By: GRYOUT
Date: June 26, 2025, 3:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Out of curiosity, the PCN says that the contravention falls
under the LLA & TfL Act 2003.
I noticed this is slightly different to the TMA 2004 legislation
when it comes to detailing what a NoR must state. The 2004 Act
is clearer, the 2003 Act seems a little more vague and
generalised.
Can arguments that lean towards the 2004 act be made, e.g. the
NoR states the incorrect Charge Certificate amount and misleads
regarding the financial impact of the charge.
Does the fact the PCN falls under the 2003 Act disadvantage this
arguement?
For clarity:
- The PCN was for £80 discounted, £160 after discounted, and
£240 in the event of no action via a Charge Certificate
- The NoR is for £80 discounted, £160 after discount, and
increases from £130 to £195 in the event of no action via a
Charge Certificate
The £130 to £195 figure is wrong, and should say £160 to £240
instead.
#Post#: 78467--------------------------------------------------
Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
for me?
DIR By: Neil B
Date: June 27, 2025, 6:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Left this a couple of days ago as OP had not posted any
documents, despite requests and promises.
Now just daft questions.
Shouldn't have bothered looking again! :o
#Post#: 78468--------------------------------------------------
Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
for me?
DIR By: GRYOUT
Date: June 27, 2025, 6:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Enceladus link ---
>
> 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.
>
--- End Quote ---
Is this for certain? Is there any way they could send me another
(valid) NoR that supersedes the first one? Is there any
workaround on the council's side that they can rely on to
invalidate the first NoR once they're aware of their mistake?
I'm wondering if I need to wait to file the appeal with London
Tribunals, or if I can just file it now knowing the council has
no recourse or power to fix the mistake once it come to light.
I.e. can they say they didn't issue a valid NoR as it was
defective and treat it as no notice at all in effect, and then
issue another one that's not defective?
#Post#: 78469--------------------------------------------------
Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
for me?
DIR By: GRYOUT
Date: June 27, 2025, 7:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Neil B link ---
>
> Left this a couple of days ago as OP had not posted any
documents, despite requests and promises.
>
> Now just daft questions.
>
> Shouldn't have bothered looking again! :o
>
--- End Quote ---
Haven't managed to scan it as of yet. I'll ensure to do it this
evening or by tomorrow at the latest.
There's me thinking I was asking a smart question ::) . Just
trying to understand the legislative application to the PCN.
#Post#: 78478--------------------------------------------------
Re: Possible Procedural Impropriety on NoR - can someone confirm
for me?
DIR By: Enceladus
Date: June 27, 2025, 7:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: GRYOUT link ---
>
> [quote author=Enceladus link=topic=6984.msg78131#msg78131
date=1750861574]
> 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.
>
--- End Quote ---
Is this for certain? Is there any way they could send me another
(valid) NoR that supersedes the first one? Is there any
workaround on the council's side that they can rely on to
invalidate the first NoR once they're aware of their mistake?
I'm wondering if I need to wait to file the appeal with London
Tribunals, or if I can just file it now knowing the council has
no recourse or power to fix the mistake once it come to light.
I.e. can they say they didn't issue a valid NoR as it was
defective and treat it as no notice at all in effect, and then
issue another one that's not defective?
[/quote]
The clock is ticking with the Adjudicator. The window to submit
an appeal is determined with reference to the date of service of
the Notice of Rejection that you currently have. There is a time
limited validity code on the NoR which you will need to use.
I advised you to submit an appeal. State that a detailed
submission will follow. You could add that the Notice of
Rejection is defective as mandatory information concerning the
amounts due are incorrectly stated and that this is potentially
prejudicial.
Registering an appeal will buy you some time to refine your
argument about a defective NoR. The Council will have to respond
with their evidence as it stands now. Not with what they might
wish they had sent.
To get started with refining your argument please post up the
documents previously requested.
If you don't get an appeal registered then you run the risk of
timing out, the council will then serve a charge certificate
adding 50% to the amount due. And you will have no option but to
pay it.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page