DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 99640--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: November 24, 2025, 3:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Okay, so I think I’m definitely going to make the formal appeal.
Is the fact that no picture was taken of the offending signage a
slam dunk in itself? I’m also intrigued at the comment of a PPA
not having any proper standing?
I can definitely make an argument for signage being easily
missed due to poor placement, but wondering whether I should
focus on the other points?
#Post#: 106211--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: January 16, 2026, 12:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
Having received the NtO I have drafted a formal challenge to the
PCN.
I am of the assumption that the most appropriate grounds would
be “There has been a procedural impropriety by the enforcement
authority”? The next best option would appear to be “The Order
which is alleged to have been contravened in relation to the
vehicle concerned is invalid”.
I’d appreciate any feedback. I was unsure whether I should list
all my points of argument and how specific they expect me to be,
but I hope this is at least a good jumping-off point.
Here is is:
To whom it may concern,
I find it necessary to challenge PCN LV18607642 and outline 3
arguments as to why I believe this warrants cancellation:
1. None of the photographs provided with said PCN include a
traffic sign alluding to the contravention. Said photos
therefore prove only that the vehicle was stationary in the
road.
2. It is my understanding that there exists no such thing as a
“Permitted Parking Area” (PPA), as referred to in your response
to my informal challenge of 12 November 2025.
3. The signage on several of the roads leading into the “PPA”
are inadequate in size and visibility and could not knowingly be
sighted en route to parking in said area. I have taken images
and video of the entrances and note that some are obscured on
entrance, several are small and side-on to the driver, placed
poorly to ensure visibility on entry, and the signs at the foot
of several roads are at the front on the far side of a one-way
entrance, making them easily missed on turning into the area in
question. Ironically, these signs would otherwise be not just
the biggest, but the most visible of the lot. It is also worth
highlighting that many of the signs are poorly illuminated.
I would be happy to provide my video examining the roads and
their signage on request (filmed on 21 November 2025).
I trust that you will find my points valid and cancel the demand
for payment at your earliest opportunity.
Kind Regards,
#Post#: 106534--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: January 19, 2026, 10:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Is anyone able to advise on the above?
Many thanks,
Dan
#Post#: 106544--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: January 19, 2026, 11:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Whatever you write they will reject, as this is a money game for
them. If nobody else comments, I'd put it in as written.
#Post#: 108846--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: February 5, 2026, 1:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So I submitted my challenge to Liverpool City Council on 29
January whilst I was away visiting family. Upon arriving back
this week I saw I had received a charge certificate dated 22
January, which states that it was now too late to challenge.
I had no idea how long I had to challenge as the NtO and PCN
didn’t say. I’m concerned that if I don’t pay I could end up
with a CCJ but I have no idea - bar calling their office
tomorrow perhaps - whether they will consider my challenge.
Should I press ahead with my challenge or is too late?
#Post#: 108867--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: February 5, 2026, 7:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There is absolutely no possibility of a CCJ; the legal process
was carefully written to exclude this.
If you submitted reps, and got no reply and then a CC arrived,
you need to wait until the council register the debt at the
Traffic Enforcement Centre, (the "court" with no courtrooms or
judges). You can then submit a Witnss Statement that you
submitted reps but did not get a reply. TEC then revert the
process back to that stage and the council must then pass the
matter to the adjudicators.
#Post#: 119337--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: May 20, 2026, 11:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I was about to post again to ask how long they had to file this
with the TEC when I found the TE3 on the doormat yesterday.
The last comment suggested I submit a witness statement advising
I’d not received a response to my appeal. The statement form
predicates this on the fact that I did so within 28 days. As
advised previously, I believe my appeal fell a few days late of
that timeframe and the correspondence preceding that made no
reference to how long I had to lodge my appeal (and scant
details as to how I should).
Will this fall against my favour with the TEC?
#Post#: 119354--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: tincombe
Date: May 20, 2026, 4:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The date of posting of your NTO was *** (NOT when received but
when posted)?
By what means did you submit your formal reps?
#Post#: 119369--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: May 20, 2026, 7:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
NTO was posted 16/12/25. I sent my appeal on 29/01/26,
eventually via their website (wasn’t very clear). There was no
mention on the NTO I received that I had 28 days to appeal
though.
#Post#: 119392--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: tincombe
Date: May 21, 2026, 5:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You submitted reps well outside the 28-day period as you can
see.
I suspect there was reference to this period, couched in terms
such as 'representations made outside the 28-day payment period
may be disregarded' along with 'where representations have been
received within the 28-day period or received outside this
period but not disregarded we will respond to you within 56
days'..
If you post the NTO we can check.
As you say, strictly speaking you don't fit within the WS
grounds which is a shame because IMO unless the council have the
SoS's authorisation for their non-regulatory sign with its
purported restriction you have a strong case.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page