Brighton council PCN - Pay and Display - Appeal Failed on Parking Ticket

[Guest Ting]

when i beat my one and only ever speeding ticket the Sunday mirror mentioned possibly 13 mio but i think they were forgetting a crucial element.

 

Waltham forest were forced to repay about £400 K re a yellow box after a campaign by another pepipoo member.

-

[robert_harper_2000]

whaaaaaaaaat? What is mio? the parking ticket or sth? What's all this about £400k ? lol sounds good!

[Guest Ting]

mio is millions. Did you think this was a game? well you're right in a way!

 

Apparently Sunday Mirror suggested that £13 mio was refundable after the revelations about one particular site (me a victim. lol) but I personally think that' might be an exaggeration as it would omly apply to tickets issued in the hours of darkness.

 

£400k. As I recall the figure quoted for refunds for a non compliant yekllow box junction in Leytonstone after a campaign by a PePiPoo member as I said.

Initially they agreed to refund all that applied but after continued prsessure - and big-up him- they agreed to refund all without the need for request.

 

£2.65 mio was another PePiPoo member (why anyone bothers with this site is starting to become beyond me). Scottish City; possibly Glasgow but he hasn't stopped and is tackling several more.

 

Someone is also having a go at your very own Brighton for 4 year old events - but you will stay - no I won't say it yet again.

 

Leeds are on very thin ice but surprised no one has gone for retribution yet. They've have been pulled up by DfT more than once i believe, widely media reported and also reported to the Police for fraud.

 

So when I first posted - did you think i was talking bollocks?

-

[robert_harper_2000]

I b...b.b.but... what ..I wanna get refunds!!! oh please tell me how. I would love to get millions back!!! ah better than sex! lol

[Guest Ting]

I b...b.b.but... what ..I wanna get refunds!!! oh please tell me how. I would love to get millions back!!! ah better than sex! lol

 

Basically by challenging the incompetence, intransigence and even malfeasance. Publicising probably helped for some of those.

 

Like i said, you're in the wrong place to hear these things.

 

For brighton, check this! Pay back time? - FightBack Forums

-

[Guest Ting]

WON WON WON

 

What happens if they continue to get wardens issuing tickets? Surely this would be a injustice, knowingly issuing tickets that shouldn't be issued?

 

Funny you should say that!

 

Check this! Brighton again and same person.

 

Nephew Again! - FightBack Forums

-

[robert_harper_2000]

OK I'll have a read through Fightback forums

 

I'll let you know, thinking of parking there tomor with a laminated copy of the letter so when they take a picture it will show an invalidated bay letter lol

[lamma]

nice !

[robert_harper_2000]

Couldn't you charge the council for issuing tickets that each appeal is accepted?

[Al27]

You can apply costs if it goes to the adjudicator, but that's about it.

[Steve__M]

Exemplary damages can be awarded for "oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional action by the servants of the government".

[bribri]

or you could just ask the council for money as an apology if you feel they messed you around as I did.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/167301-re-claiming-costs-when.html

[robert_harper_2000]

Well I've fought three tickets in my street and so far 1 appeal second stage was upheld after pointing out road markings and I have a feeling the other two will be accepted, but they continue to issue the tickets! So I feel compo for me posting and printing out appeals would be in order, they do in the end accept the appeal but how can I push for being messed around - literally just ask ? I couldn't see them turning round and saying oh ok I'm sorry. Is there any legislation that helps point them in the right direction?

[robert_harper_2000]

The loading bay displays a sign saying 9-6 loading only but when I contacted the council they sent a spreadsheet showing the loading bay as a 24 hour bay.

 

If I parked there and got a ticket would I be able to contest it on those grounds?

 

If I was towed - would I have to pay the ticket and then appeal it for a refund?

[green_and_mean]

Is the spreadsheet a part of the TRO?

[robert_harper_2000]

I asked for the TRO and they emailed the spreadsheet, the spreadsheet lists all the streets and the orders present on them...?

[robert_harper_2000]

Good post but it didn't give much info on what was said... plus they haven't put me through that much just having to send off appeal and now they said I can just email but having spent hours researching and going up to Town Hall to check TRO thought perhaps even just £20 for hassle. I've since checked that if the council knows about the markings being incorrect and continues to issue tickets then it is acting unlawfully! - surely this means something. More would love to get the council to give me something, they are always so useless and take the **** being so unhelpful!

[green_and_mean]

Good suggestion maybe the law should also allow Councils to sue people who constantly park in contravention and appeal every ticket just to be awkward! I know of a least one major uk company that employs staff to appeal every ticket, requesting every last detail from the TRO to photos just to be awkward and hope they get lucky. Whilst it is their right to appeal if they park in the same location to unload on a bus stop for example every day why should councils have to pay the costs of a supplying almost identical details on a daily basis? The whole point of the decriminalised process is that it is a low cost system that does not require expensive legal representation on both sides to decide on the validity of the PCN. If you start allowing claims for extra costs it would only be fair for Councils to claim against those that appeal on stupid grounds with no basis for cancellation.

[lookinforinfo]

I think when it comes to being awkward the public could do no better than to take a leaf out of TFLs and the Councils books, Green and Mean.

 

There was the case of the Baroness who paid for entering the congestion zone within the required time limit but inadvertently got her car registration wrong. In the end she had to take her case to the High Court where the Judge quite rightly remarked that the Law was put in place to penalise those who had not paid. rather than those who had made a mistake when they had paid.

 

And there are many occasions when the Councils are most reluctant to refund monies that are paid in error.

[green_and_mean]

I think when it comes to being awkward the public could do no better than to take a leaf out of TFLs and the Councils books, Green and Mean.

 

There was the case of the Baroness who paid for entering the congestion zone within the required time limit but inadvertently got her car registration wrong. In the end she had to take her case to the High Court where the Judge quite rightly remarked that the Law was put in place to penalise those who had not paid. rather than those who had made a mistake when they had paid.

 

And there are many occasions when the Councils are most reluctant to refund monies that are paid in error.

 

No doubt both sides are on occasions prone to not using common sense but that doesn't change the point that if monies could be awarded other than to cover basic costs it could be opened up to both parties. If you get off a PCN because of no T bar for example, if you choose to carry on parking there you will run the risk of more PCNs that is a choice you make.

[crem]

If you get off a PCN because of no T bar for example, if you choose to carry on parking there you will run the risk of more PCNs that is a choice you make.

 

..and they will be equally non-compliant and therefore unenforcable, (perhaps also vexatious as the council now know the markings are invalid). If they correct the markings and you continue to park there, then you do run the risk of receiving a valid payable PCN which it will be your own fault to have to pay.

[robert_harper_2000]

good point on both sides, me thinks

[Tony P]

I've recently "won" my 17th PCN in a row against my LA - all outside my home.

I did once apply for £18 Costs which the Adjudicator awarded me - and I got.

BUT, the way my car, and only my car, is so closely scrutinised by the daily visit by CEOs, I feel I am a marked man for being right. My car has a very short private number which is highly noticible, yet my motor bike has a 'normal' plate and has never received a PCN here!

More fool me for being flash. Maybe, but that is not how it should be.

[robert_harper_2000]

But you can only apply for costs if it goes to the adjudicator. I feel they tell you appeal within X days time frame but they can take as long as they like replying!

 

I also resent the way when I made a mistake and had paid for a ticket but it wasn't stuck to the window they didn't care but now it is my turn

[patdavies]

But you can only apply for costs if it goes to the adjudicator. I feel they tell you appeal within X days time frame but they can take as long as they like replying!

 

No they can't! They have 56 days in which to respond to an appeal with a latter of rejection. Otherwise the appeal is deemed accepted.

 

 

CEPC(E)RA regulations 2007 Reg.5 (my bold)

Duty of enforcement authority to which representations are made

 

5.—(1) The enforcement authority may disregard any representations which are received by it after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the relevant notice to owner was served.

(2) Where representations are made to an enforcement authority by virtue of regulation 4(1) and in accordance with regulation 4(2), it shall subject to paragraph (1) be the duty of the enforcement authority—

(a) to consider the representations and any supporting evidence which the person making them provides; and

(b) within the period of 56 days beginning with the date on which the representations were served on it, to serve on that person notice of its decision as to whether or not it accepts that—

(i) one or more of the grounds specified in regulation 4(4) applies; or

(ii) there are compelling reasons why, in the particular circumstances of the case, the notice to owner should be cancelled and any sum paid in respect of it should be refunded.

(3) Where the enforcement authority accepts that a ground specified in regulation 4(4) applies or that there are such compelling reasons it shall—

(a) cancel the notice to owner; and

(b) state in the notice served under paragraph (2)(b) that the notice to owner has been cancelled and at the same time refund any sum paid in relation to the notice.

(4) The cancellation of a notice to owner under this regulation shall not be taken to prevent the enforcement authority from serving, in accordance with the General Regulations, a fresh notice to owner on another person.

(5) If the enforcement authority fails to comply with paragraph (2)(b) within the period of 56 days there specified, it shall be deemed for the purposes of these Regulations to have accepted—

(a) that such of the grounds referred to in paragraph (2)(b)(i) as were relied upon in the representations apply; or

(b) in a case where paragraph (2)(b)(ii) is relied upon, that there are compelling reasons of the kind referred to in that paragraph,

and paragraph (3) shall apply accordingly.