I received a penalty charge notice ticket on the 07/02/2014 from NATIONAL PARKING CONTROL to pay £100 within 28 days for parking in an unauthorized location dated LAST YEAR 27/082013 for approximately 4min 1sec. I have written to them about this PCN on 2 occasions, challenging the parking charge notice due to not receivingtheir parking fine within 28 days (WHICH I BELIEVE IS THE LAW FROM THE ONLINE RESEARCH I DID) period starting from the day after the parking incident took place. First letter i sent to them was on 07/02/2014 which they ignored after singing and receiving it. Then on 07/03/2014 they sent me another parking fine letter ignoring my first letter of dispute i sent them. After receiving their second parking ticket fine I sent another another letter this time with a copy of my postage receipt to prove i recently sent a dispute letter, which i believe they have intentionally ignored. Now i have received a 3rd parking fine notice letter, this time it has increased by £40 now making it £140 which must be paid 09/04/2014. I have also kept all records of postage delivery receipts....PLEASE HELP!! THANKS IN ADVANCE

wfc cctv.pdfI received a PCN notice from Waltham Forest for driving into a pedestrian zone at 10pm. At the time I thought there was times where it wasn't restricted but having reviewed pictures of the sign (on google maps street view) I feel I was incorrect. But my query is that having researched I have found that the discount period for CCTV images is 21 days, whereas the letter states clearly 14 days. Is this a good enough reason for appeal? I have attached the PCN notice for viewing. Thanks in advance for your help.

A recent victory at PATAS will mean grounds for appeal for thousands of motorists caught by CCTV cars in Richmond! Drivers in one London borough were feeling a little less persecuted today after council chiefs took CCTV cars off the road following a blunder. Richmond upon Thames town hall bosses said Smart Cars that issue parking tickets could be out of use for up to a week, potentially losing thousands of pounds in revenue. The U-turn comes after a landmark ruling in which motorist Nigel Wise had a £100 fine thrown out by a parking appeal tribunal after he proved Richmond was using the wrong kind of cameras on its cars. The carer, 59, claims councils across the capital, which issue up to £10 million in tickets through Smart Cars every year, are making similar errors. Last week Richmond said that all its "CCTV camera cars are correctly licensed and were at the time of this (Mr Wise's) incident". But today, the authority admitted this was not the case and campaigners are demanding the authority refunds thousands of parking tickets issued by its two vehicles. A council spokesman said: "In light of Thursday's decision, we are looking at all documentation relating to camera cars. "Until the checks are complete, both cars have been taken off the road." Richmond earned more than £573,000 last year from 12,305 tickets issued through CCTV cars. Its parking services are contracted out to Vinci Park, but the final sign-off for camera licences rests with town hall officials. It had originally blamed the Vehicle Certification Agency, which issues licences, for typographical errors on the certificates. The traffic wardens who normally sit in the cars will instead patrol the borough on foot.

I recieved a PCN on saturday 5th Feb when parked in Southwark (London). I was taking my Mum out for a day at borough market. It was the first time I have used her blue badge. I was considering challenging it on two fronts. I was wondering what people thought of this approach? I would be grateful of any advice as I haven't had to do this before. This is my draft appeal: I had a valid blue badge clearly displayed and I checked the blue badge parking rules on your website before I set out on our journey to southwark. Your website (link provided) says "Where blue badge holders can park: in pay and display or shared-use (permit holders and pay and display) bays for an unlimited time". I was parked in a permit holders bay. Your website indicates that this is ok with a blue badge: "permit holders and pay and display bays". The text on your website is very unclear. Additionally, it would be much clearer if you said explicitly where you are NOT ALLOWED TO PARK like other borough websites do e.g. Wandsworth (link provided). It is only because the blue badge parking rules on your website are so unclear that we understood we were allowed to park in this bay. It was clearly unintentional on our part because there was plenty of alternative parking space available on the yellow lines on Union street at the time. Secondly, the parking contravention that has been accused on the PCN ticket does not apply. It says: "Parked in a resident's or shared use parking place or zone displaying an invalid permit, an invalid voucher or an invalid pay and display ticket" 1. I was NOT parked in a "resident's" or "shared use parking place or zone". On your Controlled Parking Zone maps on the Southwark council website the bay I was parked in is marked as a "Permit holder only" bay whereas "RESIDENT permit holder" bays and "shared use" bays are marked in different colours to the bay I was parked in. 2. I was NOT displaying an INVALID permit or an INVALID voucher or an INVALID pay and display ticket. I was displaying a VALID Blue Badge. Thanks, Paul

At this moment in time I am not 100% sure but I think my brother was driving the vehicle at the time which is owned by me, the 'contravention' occurred on 26/11/10, it is now 15/01/11 they "ticket" was issued one day earlier. The letter I have received from "PMSL PARKING" which is a joke in its self.. states I have received this ticket as a road "Legra Avenue" in Hoddesdon was "accessed" by my vehicle they also state that numerous signs and posters were placed there notifying the driver of the consequences, however after checking myself on Google maps street view I can see the makeshift signs which have been printed and strapped to lampposts. They then kindly included a photocopy of a newspaper cutting including a section from the Mirror about a person "caught" by a private eye camera which I find unrelated, unprofessional and this also makes me feel that this is some sort of fake company [problem]ming money out of people, they even decided to kindly keep in a advertisement about a cruise through Baltic capitals and St. Petersburg.. however I think its a bit late now as the newspaper is dated 2009:) They then included a A4 sized paged statement about this "private road" and that you cannot use it for access, if the so called contravention had occurred I do not understand why they need to give me this information, there is also no pictures or evidence attached and I would have to pay £5.00 if I wish to receive evidence, I am also practically not allowed to challenge it as they state if I appeal and it is not successful I would have to pay the full amount? I assumed that you would get another 14 days reduced rate?? Could anyone who has some knowledge in this area give me some advice on what I should do, I have scanned all the paperwork they have sent me and uploaded it to photobucket the link to my album is > http ://s1215.photobucket.com/albums/cc502/01emino/ Thanks in advance