City of London - Ticket upside down

[Andy7807]

Hi

 

A colleague parked in a bay in the City of London and paid £11 for a ticket by credit card. She got a ticket for failing to display. The ticket had turned upside down when the door was closed. We wrote sending the ticket and credit card receipt. They have replied saying that the CEO noted that there was a ticket in the window but the validity could not be verified and so a ticket was issued. They still want payment. If we appeal again they won't allow the reduced payment.

 

Does anyone think that going further may be worth it. It is a bit annoying since she paid a large amount for parking anyway, it's not as if she tried to get away with it, but still failure to display.

 

Cheers

[BankFodder]

Do you mean upside down so that the back of the ticket was on display - or upside down so that the ticket was visible but just that the writing was upside down?

[Andy7807]

Sorry, upside down, as the back of the ticket was on display

[BankFodder]

OK, that makes a little more sense.

 

It is very harsh. What concerns me is that they say that you will lose the discount if you appeal. I am almost sure that they can not do this. I think that you need to start by checking this up.

 

I have seen a few appeals where people have argued exactly on the same grounds as you and they have won

[BankFodder]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?719-Re-Valid-parking-ticket-not-displayed-correctly

[natalie]

If she still has the ticket and the credit card bill, then she can prove that she has paid.

 

Its a bit like paying for goods in a shop, having a receipt and being accused of shoplifting. They cant ignore the fact that you have proof that you have paid.

 

I would get on to your MP and get them to sort it out. I would refuse to pay this on principle.

 

Okay so maybe they couldnt verify the ticket at the time, but they can now.

[Jamberson]

If she still has the ticket and the credit card bill, then she can prove that she has paid.

 

Its a bit like paying for goods in a shop, having a receipt and being accused of shoplifting. They cant ignore the fact that you have proof that you have paid.

 

I would get on to your MP and get them to sort it out. I would refuse to pay this on principle.

 

Okay so maybe they couldnt verify the ticket at the time, but they can now.

 

It's not like purchasing something in a shop. When you buy a p&d ticket, you haven't just aquired property - you have to use it in a certain way: pay and display. If you don't fulfill your end of the bargain, the "display" bit, you are not permitted to park there.

 

An MP might be interested, but I doubt you will get far if you don't first pursue the appeals route.

 

As for just refusing to pay - not a good idea unless you want your car to get towed away! You need to go through the appeals system and fight your case.

[Jamberson]

What concerns me is that they say that you will lose the discount if you appeal. I am almost sure that they can not do this. I think that you need to start by checking this up.

 

Yes they can. Officially, the reduced rate lasts 14 days irrespective of appeals etc, to encourage prompt payment. However it is almost unheard of for them NOT to extend it voluntarily - but only until the NTO goes out.

[natalie]

I didnt mean ignore the appeals system, but I wouldnt pay it.

 

Similar happened to me, only my ticket fell down off the window, my MP contacted the council and asked for an explanation why they werent accepting the ticket as proof. The argument being, you wouldnt go to the trouble and expense of buying a ticket and then not display it. Therefore, it stands to reason that by buying a ticket, you had intended to display it correctly.

[Andy7807]

Thanks, we will wait for the NTO and take it from there

[Famous bean]

Hi, I would get over to peppipoo as well as here to cover all you grounds.

[nero12]

You can appeal as many times as you like at informal stage -- I normally go in twice before the NTO .

 

You have a coupe of angles to use. 1st would be the Traffic order for this area and contravention. You deffo need to have this sent along with all of the enabling paperwork

 

The second would be the discretion of the local authority.

 

You could go again and ask that they use the discretionary powers and cancell.

If they refuse your second appeal stating they do not have discretioinary powers you wil have them perusuant to

Walmsley v. Transport for London and Others

[2005] EWCA Civ. 1540

 

AND

 

NPAS case number BH 05063H (review by Clifton Barker and revoking the Binns decision)

 

You need to write a good second appeal to get this.

 

What did you go in with origionally and what was the reply. ???

 

BTW have they sorted these PCN's. Sure there was a fault. Can we see a scan of the PCN front and back minus your personal stuff.

[Andy7807]

Enclosed initial letter, their response and PCN

 

Cheers

COL Response.pdf

COL PCN.pdf

PCN Letter 18.03.pdf

[green_and_mean]

If she still has the ticket and the credit card bill, then she can prove that she has paid.

 

Its a bit like paying for goods in a shop, having a receipt and being accused of shoplifting. They cant ignore the fact that you have proof that you have paid.

 

 

So if I pay for an item in a shop and keep the receipt does that mean I can return to the shop several times the same day and walk out with the same item? Unless the VRM is recorded when paying there is no proof that car was actually paid for at all the ticket could have been in another car.

[Al27]

This has nothing to do with contract law ie. buying things in a shop.

 

I do think their letter amounts to a procedural impropriety though. They state the Adjudicator is unable to take mitigating circumstances into account, which is cobblers.

 

They also refer to the Registered Owner, whereas the only registered person is the keeper, who may not be the owner.

[Andy7807]

Fair point about the reg being on the ticket, but all the times on each match, ie the credit card reciept to the display ticket and the PCN issue between the times paid for. The CEO noted there was a ticket in the window but not the right way up and so couldn't be validated.

[mightymouse_69]

Although this is of little consolation to the OP, I must ask: Does no one, apart from me, check that the ticket is visible on the dashboard after shutting the door and before leaving the car?

[green_and_mean]

They also refer to the Registered Owner, whereas the only registered person is the keeper, who may not be the owner.

 

 

The TMA 2004 states that the registered keeper is the owner for the purposes of a PCN unless proven otherwise.

[nero12]

Mr XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX

and

Braintree District Council

 

Case No: BX 05006M

 

This was a case where the p & d ticket ended up facing downwards on the dash, the TRO deemed that the ticket must be in a 'cospicuous poistion'. Therefore an upside down ticket would not break the rulestherefore the contravention did not occur

 

You may get lucky if the TRO says something similar.

[nero12]

The TMA 2004 states that the registered keeper is the owner for the purposes of a PCN unless proven otherwise.

 

 

Shouldnt the PCN state the NTO will be issued to the person who 'appears to be the owner' of the vehicle. very tenuous argument I know but worth putting in ??

[green_and_mean]

Shouldnt the PCN state the NTO will be issued to the person who 'appears to be the owner' of the vehicle. very tenuous argument I know but worth putting in ??

 

Not really because the person who 'appears to be the owner' would be the registered keeper, who would then have the opportunity to tick the box I am not the owner.

[crem]

Although this is of little consolation to the OP, I must ask: Does no one, apart from me, check that the ticket is visible on the dashboard after shutting the door and before leaving the car?

 

Me

[green_and_mean]

These cost a couple of quid on ebay

 

http://www.motoring-into-europe.co.uk/product-ticket-clip.html

[Andy7807]

Mightymouse_69 - I agree with you, but the young lady was in a rush (no excuse I know) and failed to see what happened. I'm sure there are plenty of others who have done the same, simple but costly mistake, who hasn't been there...

[nero12]

simple but costly mistake, who hasn't been there...

 

 

 

This is the unfortunate side of DPE and way too much of this goes on. In my view the legislation should be changed to give adjudicators the powers of discretion as and when its called for.

 

As it stands we see many adjudicators directing that the councils should not in the light of mitigating circumstances and common sense take any money -- only for greedy authorities to ignore it as they dont have to abide by dicretionary rulings.

 

 

You need a technical out for these.