I didn't insinuate anything. I quoted you directly from your first post. And if I've misread what you wrote, it's only because it isn't written clearly. As for helping - that's what I have tried to do all along - for free, out of the goodness of my heart, for a total stranger - look at the paragraphs I've written for you above, with no expectation of anything in return.

I known you have stated you are not the owner and were only the driver at the time. You also put things like, "I was not the driver at the time" and "I have managed to obtain proof that this also states the I am the owner". That's where the confusion comes from, not from me. Anyway, the situation is unchanged - it's clear now your friend is the debtor, and if it's his repsonsibility. If you feel morally obliged to pay it for him, you can, but if not, I don't think he will have much success with an N244. Good luck, whatever you decide.

I am utterly confused by the above. Every post contains a new puzzle. One minute it seems like it's your car ("I am the owner"), the next it's someone else's ("I was using a friends car"), so one minute your're driving it, they next you aren't ("I was not the driver at the time")... It's so hard to give any advice without knowing the true facts. Your last post says, "he [your friend] never gave them any address. I did however but it is the same address as the dvla hold. No NTO was received at any of the addresses for this ticket." Your friend didn't give them an address, but you gave the same address held by DVLA [why??], which they will already have - and which neither of your live at? Or you in fact live there? And the Notice to Owner, the Charge Certificate, and the Order for Recovery all failed to arrive? You understand that this isn't normal by the way - 99 percent of people have their own car, registered to their home address and there are no complications. I will just give you some background details of how the process works. If a PCN is issued, the council ping off to DVLA to get the registered keeper's name and address, and by law, all correspondence goes there. Once the Order for Recovery is issued, a Witness Statement needs to be filed with a certain timeframe. I think it's 21 days. If it is not, then bailiffs are instructed. Since you received contact from bailiffs, your witness statement was definitely out of time - and so you needed to submit both a witness statement, and a separate form explaining why it was out of time. I don't know what you put by way of explanation for it being out of time. Your post hints you didn't understand this bit - "Did ask how it could be out of time if he only just received the letter ... We were both very confused by this." So I'm guessing you didn't provide a clear enough statement. An N244 now is a long shot, and you have to pay to file one anyway. My best advice - pay the balance now, and get rid.

That clause describes what should be done if the sign only covers am or pm. This sign doesn't cover only one of them - so the clause is not relevant.

He had no idea it was late? He would have needed to fill out a separate application explaining why he was filing it late. If he didn't do that, he's filed the wrong forms. Maybe he should file another one, an "out of time" one - but post here first for some advice on what to put before you send anything off. I don't know why the council might post something to your address in his name. Why would they do that if they are writing to him? Anyway, maybe you can confirm whether he filed the one-form "in time" witness statement or the two-form "out of time" one.

Your friend is the debtor, not you. I understand that morally you feel obliged to pay the parking ticket, but do you also feel responsible for his not soting this out sooner, not responding to the Charge Certificate or Order for Recovery, and also not filing his witness statement in time (which I'm guessing is what happened)? If so, you may just need to pay him what is owed. There is a mechanism for filing an N244 to challenge the rejection of the witness statement but he will need to have some solid grounds. Really he should have sought advice before he filed the witness statement, and then he might not have had it rejected. Do we know the ground he stated in his witness statement, the reason he gave for it being out of time, and why it was rejected?

The owner of the car will have to make the transfer of liability - you should check with them now that they are in agreement with this - otherwise, you may have to pay it in full. It means them ticking a box on the back of the Notice to Owner and filling in your name and address. Then a new Notice to Owner gets sent out to you instead by the Council, and you're in business. If you are fighting on, contact the council now and ask for a copy of the traffic order for that location. I would want to see the hours on the sign match what's written in the order, because it looks odd. Adjudication hearings aren't scary. You will sit at a table with someone from the council, and the adjudicator (who isn't a judge - he or she will just be in business dress) will ask questions to understand the issue and then decide who they think is correct. It could be a bit of fun if you look at it that way. Nothing to be intimidated by - worst possible outcome, you have to pay the PCN. The council don't like the hearings as they can affect many other PCNs they are processing (eg, all the ones they are continuing to issue right at that spot) and they will be more obedient and deferential than you need to be!

I agree the sign is ambiguous, and I think you will probably win this, if you fight it all the way. (That's 'probably'!) The sign must state the hours of no parking, and must be clear. So, the yellow sign says "No stopping 10 - 5am". Logically, that can't be 10am - 5am. So it must be 10pm - 5am. And then logically, it follows on, that you can stop to load after 5am, until 10am. If it means something other than that, it isn't clear. I don't read any restriction after 10am - which is itself odd, but you have 14 days to decide what to do, so I would start by contacting the Council and asking for a copy of the Parking Order for that location. This will tell you what the true restriction is, and I would not be surprised if it's 10am - 5pm - in which case, the sign is completely faulty and you should win. In any case, you can make formal representations once the Notice to Owner is issued, and this can be followed by adjudication. Incidentally, what was the contravention and contravention code printed on the PCN?

What would be the orders of the courts in this scenario? The only court involvement normally is the rubber-stamping of a bailiff warrant. What other court interest is there?

The sign tells you the hours the permit parking scheme is in force, and therefore applies to the perimt parking bays in the zone. It doesn't mean anyone can park where they like on Sundays. The single yellow line should have its own time plate, and that's the one you need to go by if you're parking on the yellow lines. I don't think you would win an appeal on confusing signage, as they would expect drivers to understand this. The yellow line not terminating correctly is unlikely to win an appeal either. It's usually considered trivial. I can see a break in the line, but again, that's not realistically going to lead to a misunderstanding of the regulations, so I wouldn't expect that to win either.

The OP should certainly ask the council about it - as I said, they routinely just accept the discount up until the NTO is issued. Why haven't they in this case? I'd want to find out, if it were me - then decide what to do.

I'm not sure of the relevance of the quote, Michael. What's the point you are making? It reads to me like the council accepted a reduced payment in the spirit it was offered, ie, as an offer of full payment - so they could not then insist on the other half being paid too. It supports my point above, "Normally, the discount is accepted any time before an NTO is issued, so it's 28 days in practice, if not in theory." I don't see it has anything to do with the definition of "the penalty exceeded the amount that applied in the circumstances" - if that's your point - but maybe you can explain further.

If the car is on finance, you don't own it and they can't clamp it. You should keep paperwork to hand, proving this, so if they did show up with a clamp or tow-truck, you can show them. If it's true there are no baliffs and no earnings, I don't know what their process will be. As I said above, they must have one. Maybe do some googling!

That's not what it means. The charge which is levied for a contravention depends on the type of contravention. One might bring a £50 charge, another an £80 charge. In this case, the charge levied is correct. Whether the Council should or should not accept the discounted payment as full and final settlement is a different issue. On what grounds could he go to adjudication? Well, he said in his first post, " The PCN was correctly issued". So I can only see adjudication as viable if he can prove he paid the discount inside the discounted period, and after asking the Council to reconsider, they say no. Normally, the discount is accepted any time before an NTO is issued, so it's 28 days in practice, if not in theory. That's why I would want to talk to someone in the office and find out what their position is.

When you buy a vehicle, the seller doesn't forward the V5 to the buyer. That's not how it works. They send it to DVLA with your details and DVLA issue a new one to you. Sounds like that step failed - but is it of any relevance now? Who owned the van when the PCNs was incurred? That's the important bit, which you've not mentioned. As for the name, it's trivial. They found you - you know it's you, and you know the vehicle the PCN was issued to is yours. The name issue is not significant. If they didn't get it from DVLA (since the vehicle wasn't registered) then it's no surprise it's not accurate. Your problem is, they may clamp your vehicle to force payment. They way to prevent that is to convince them it's essential for work purposes, but then you have accepted your responsibility for the debt and they may try to enforce by other means.

You could try calling them and discussing it. If that fails, you could apply for an adjudication hearing, but if it were me, I would want to be sure of the postmark, and if possible ask for a copy (they probably have a scan of it). It's your whole case, really. Without it, it's just late payment.

It won't be accepted on those grounds. The penalty is correct for the contravention - forfeiting the discount period doesn't affect that. Before we go any further - how do you know what the postmark said? I assume you never saw the envelope after you posted it.

I believe you are still liable. If they can't instruct bailiffs (which would surprise me) then they do have a problem enforcing. They might seek an attachment of earnings, although again there could be different rules. It would be amazing if there's no means of enforcement at all. What if an NI authority had issued it? What happens in those cases? There must be some way of enforcing?

You ARE the site team. What does this mean: If you can't find an appropriate forum for your problem then please post here. Whatever. Have it your way if you want to be right.

Well that's as maybe, but it's still nothing to do with council PCNs. I note the site does have General Motoring Issues If you can't find an appropriate forum for your problem then please post here. Maybe that would be better?

You could also tell your other half to stop opening your post and "filing it away". You have certain responsibilites in life, and this is a bad way to organise your affairs. Anything addressed to you - you open it and read it.

How was this "moved to the appropriate forum"? This forum is for UK council PCNs. This one is a fine issued by the Italian police!

There is confusion here, as this section of the site is for local authority issues. This is a police issue, and therefore has different rules and procedures. It needs to be asked elsewhere.

If you live in a decriminalised parking zone, it was probably the council who ordered it be towed. I agree with Ericsbrother that it's unusual for them to tow from a double yellow, although I don't see much point in asking for the traffic order. I would start by approaching the council with your case. Say from the outset that the damage was caused by the towing guys and include images, and see what they come back with. They may well have photographic images of their own, which they could show you, to defend their position. Or, they might concede the point. You don't know for sure who broke the mirror, but you can at least get them to look into it.

There's no option on taking a PCN to court. It's not a criminal mater.