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#: 84547--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Havering - Notice to Owner following rejected appeal of PCN
       attached to vehicle
   DIR By: stamfordman
       Date: August 7, 2025, 5:17 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I posted the relevant pics. There was a duplicate of the sign
       and I think one of front of van.
       #Post#: 84548--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Havering - Notice to Owner following rejected appeal of PCN
       attached to vehicle
   DIR By: Naomi_Brooks
       Date: August 7, 2025, 5:21 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
       >
       > Is this the sum total of their evidential photos and are you
       the registered keeper?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       The company I work for is the registered keeper.  I am
       representing the driver
       #Post#: 86256--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Havering - Notice to Owner following rejected appeal of PCN
       attached to vehicle
   DIR By: Naomi_Brooks
       Date: August 19, 2025, 3:45 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi Guys,
       I unfortunately did not keep a copy of my original appeal - do
       you think I could get one from Havering?
       I have until the 29th August to make the formal response, but I
       am having trouble.
       I think from the picture provided above that was taken from
       Google Maps, that the van was not parked near any kerb markings
       and the marks that can be seen are worn, and it was not near the
       'no loading' sign (the position of the van can be seen in the
       evidence photos).  I also mentioned earlier that we had a ticket
       last year for parking in the same place that was revoked upon
       appeal, with the reason that we gave as 'if no loading then why
       are the bins there'.  I can see from a reply above that the
       restrictions are not related to bins/refuse, so I am not sure
       where to go with this to be successful.  The appeal response
       from last year did not mention anything about the clause
       relating to refuse, so I am thinking that I could argue that our
       driver assumed it was okay, as he was not told otherwise - but
       that would be an ignorance claim.    I want to try my best to
       help the driver. I feel it is really unfair.
       Thanks :-)
       #Post#: 86257--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Havering - Notice to Owner following rejected appeal of PCN
       attached to vehicle
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: August 19, 2025, 4:14 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Our appeal was rejected, and I have been waiting for the Notice
       to Owner so that I can appeal again.
       The company I work for is the registered keeper.  I am
       representing the driver
       I want to try my best to help the driver.
       I have until the 29th August to make the formal response,
       Before I make a formal representation, does anyone have any
       advice?
       Yes, STOP! I see a procedural mess on the horizon.
       You are not the RK and only they may make formal reps. You have
       no standing in this matter, neither does the driver. Even if the
       'company' have given written authority for the driver or you (by
       name in either case) to submit reps, these would be in the
       company's name.
       When you posted earlier this month your 'appeal was rejected,
       and I have been waiting for the Notice to Owner so that I can
       appeal again.'
       You posted last on 7 August at which time you made no mention of
       the RK having received the NTO. It therefore seems reasonable to
       assume that the earliest this could have been served was 8 Aug
       which would give a 28-day period ending on 4 Sept, not 29 Aug.
       Post the NTO pl leaving in everything except the RK's details;
       Pl explain your role vis-a-vis the RK e.g. do you or the driver
       have written authority etc.
       Post Havering's response to the informal reps;
       This case is retrievable IMO.
       #Post#: 86263--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Havering - Notice to Owner following rejected appeal of PCN
       attached to vehicle
   DIR By: Naomi_Brooks
       Date: August 19, 2025, 4:53 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks for your response.
       When making appeals, we (I) do so as the company as we are the
       RK. Should I be doing that? Sorry for my naivety.
       I have attached the response, and the NTO.
       Many thanks
       
       #Post#: 86270--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Havering - Notice to Owner following rejected appeal of PCN
       attached to vehicle
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: August 19, 2025, 6:10 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       There's no need to dance around matters, this is not a private
       parking issue. Your earlier posts did not make clear that as
       regards these procedures you and the company are the same
       because you have authority and all matters are conducted on the
       company's behalf.
       A NTO dated 30 July is deemed served on 1 Aug. which is day 1,
       therefore day 28 is 28th Aug.
       As reps, IMO the contravention did not occur and procedural
       impropriety.
       I think the PI is a shoo-in winner, see below:
       Notice to owner
       20.—(1) Where—.....
       (a)....
       (2) .....
       (3) A notice to owner must, in addition to the matters required
       to be included in it under regulation 3(2) of the 2022 Appeals
       Regulations, state—
       (a)the date of the notice, which must be the date on which the
       notice is posted,
       (b)the name of the enforcement authority serving the notice,
       (c)the amount of the penalty charge payable,
       (d)the date on which the penalty charge notice was served,
       (e)the grounds on which the civil enforcement officer who served
       the penalty charge notice under regulation 9 believed that a
       penalty charge was payable with respect to the vehicle,
       (f)that the penalty charge, [...] must be paid within “the
       payment period” as defined by regulation 3(2)(a) of the 2022
       Appeals Regulations,
       Which is:
       3.—(1)
       (2) An enforcement notice must include the following
       information—
       (a)that—
       (i)
       (ii)...the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which
       the notice is served (“the payment period”).....;
       The NTO states that the penalty must be paid no later than the
       last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of
       this Notice to Owner.
       In short, they've c****d-up!
       They've used the payment period which applies to moving traffic
       contraventions!
       As regards the contravention, I would argue that this did not
       occur.
       These restrictiond operate at right-angles to road markings.
       GSV seems to show that there aren't any loading blips either to
       the immediate rear of the van or to its nearside(the restriction
       stops ahead of the vehicle and terminates at a slab of concrete,
       indicated by termination markings i.e. it doesn't run 'under the
       concrete'). If you can imagine the area as a square with four
       quadrants, the van is in the lower left, the bins and
       hardstanding in the lower right(no markings), the upper left is
       vacant road and the upper right is where the DYL and loading
       restriction end. Immediately to the left of the lower left
       quadrant is where DYL and no loading end.
       #Post#: 86277--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Havering - Notice to Owner following rejected appeal of PCN
       attached to vehicle
   DIR By: Naomi_Brooks
       Date: August 19, 2025, 6:56 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I understand now why your profile has hero status!  Thank you
       for your knowledge, time, and patience!
       #Post#: 86285--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Havering - Notice to Owner following rejected appeal of PCN
       attached to vehicle
   DIR By: Naomi_Brooks
       Date: August 19, 2025, 7:47 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Do you think this will suffice as a response?
       would like to appeal this PCN on the following grounds:
       1)
       The payment period of 28 days applies to moving traffic
       contraventions.
       2)
       The alleged contravention operates at right-angles to road
       markings.  There aren't any loading blips either to the
       immediate rear of the van or to its nearside (the restriction
       stops ahead of the vehicle and terminates at a slab of concrete,
       indicated by termination markings i.e. it doesn't run 'under the
       concrete')
       If the area was a square with four quadrants, the van is in the
       lower left, the bins and hardstanding in the lower right (no
       markings), the upper left is vacant road, and the upper right is
       where the double yellow lines and loading restrictions end.
       Immediately to the left of the lower left quadrant is where
       double yellow lines and no loading end.
       *****************************************************
       Page 2 of 2
   DIR Previous Page