DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 119442--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: May 21, 2026, 1:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It might seem convenient (or inconvenient, depending on how you
look at it), but having grabbed hold of the NtO, I notice I only
have pages 1 and 3:
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/6JOMVtH#wU0Zzs8
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/6JOMVtH#D85gsG6
I don’t remember seeing a page 2 and I find it interesting that
their other letters have all been printed double-sided, but not
this.
The question is whether the original plan to refer back to the
unanswered appeal carries any weight, and whether bending the
rules on the WS would be permitted. I certainly had not received
the charge certificate before I sent my appeal, though they can
say with legitimacy that they posted it before I did (22/01/26).
Any further thoughts? I’m wary of taking this too far if the
case is essentially dead in the water in the eyes of the TEC.
#Post#: 119447--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: tincombe
Date: May 21, 2026, 4:02 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
At least Liverpool won.
#Post#: 119519--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: May 22, 2026, 11:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As much of a red as I am, are you recommending I fold my hand at
this point?
#Post#: 119753--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: May 26, 2026, 8:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Can anyone offer a second opinion? Absolutely no offence to
tincombe but [member=12]Incandescent[/member] offered a
different POV, presumably knowing I had appealed after more than
28 days…
#Post#: 119757--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: May 26, 2026, 8:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ThriftyParker link ---
>
> Can anyone offer a second opinion? Absolutely no offence to
tincombe but [member=12]Incandescent[/member] offered a
different POV, presumably knowing I had appealed after more than
28 days…
>
--- End Quote ---
I didnt know you submitted out of time. Form TE9 states the time
period 28 days for the box to tick that reps were submitted, but
there was no response.
#Post#: 119760--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: tincombe
Date: May 26, 2026, 9:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In short, according to you:
1. You did receive a form titled Notice to Owner;
2. You submitted reps.
You problem arises because, unbeknown to you before making reps,
your NTO was incomplete and did not carry any information on the
time limits for submitting reps. In consequence you missed the
28-day statutory deadline.
So, does this give you grounds to submit an out of time request
to TEC and which box should you tick.
IMO, yes and the box which states you did not receive the NTO
because you did not receive a NTO in its mandated form,
therefore a NTO was not served.
Wait for others.
#Post#: 129506--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: September 3, 2026, 11:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the last advice. I did manage to get the NtO reissued
and sent my formal appeal in (same as previously posted).
The response received a few days ago:
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/dITkZde
So they’ve rejected it once more. It may be that a cynical view
that they were always going to is true, but I would appreciate
any thoughts based on their response. I’m not sure whether it is
worth doubling down and challenging the TPT on the same
arguments, or whether I should adapt? Alternatively, if anyone
feels that they’ve adequately defended themselves and I should
fold I’d be very grateful of the advice.
Many thanks,
#Post#: 129514--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: tincombe
Date: September 3, 2026, 12:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the last advice. I did manage to get the NtO reissued
and sent my formal appeal in (same as previously posted)
So we helped you get the NTO reissued, but you didn't seek
advice regarding your reps which, IMO, would not have been the
'same as previously' but revised to target and challenge their
reasoning in the rejection of your informal reps.
As we cannot see how they would have dealt with these arguments
while still maintaining the discount, then your next opportunity
is with the full penalty.
An opportunity lost.
Your choice whether to accept their offer.
#Post#: 130107--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: ThriftyParker
Date: September 10, 2026, 11:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I’m sorry, I’m not sure I follow your logic.
I posted in this thread my draft formal challenge response to
the original NtO back on 16 January before I realised said NtO
was incomplete. Nobody advised me much other than to expect
rejection anyway and so I sent what I had drafted. As the
council believed I was out of time prior to the NtO being
reissued I got no response back then.
I don’t see what has changed since January? This wasn’t me
repeating my informal challenge from last November.
#Post#: 130116--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool, 30-Parked for longer than permitted, Love Lane
DIR By: tincombe
Date: September 10, 2026, 1:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Pl post your reps then we can keep everything together.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page