Finally, after many unsuccessful attempts we have managed to get an Adjudicator to rule on the wording of an Islington moving traffic PCN. The appeal was allowed. All Islington moving traffic PCNs issued since early December 2006 are unlawful.
The Adjudicator’s reasons were simple. If the legislation says something must be stated on the PCN then it is a mandatory requirement. Ignore it or modify it at your peril.
This was no snap decision either. The Adjudicator reserved his decision so that he could go away and think about it and, presumably, consult his colleagues.
The implication is that Islington, Hillingdon and Waltham Forest PCNs are unlawful and can be challenged on the basis of their wording. There may be other councils I am not aware of.
If you have a PCN that says it should be paid within 28 days of “date or service” or “date of delivery” then it is unlawful. What it should say is 28 days from the “date of the notice” i.e. the date it was issued (and hopefully posted first class).
So, if you have just received a PCN with the incorrect wording then challenge it quoting PATAS case 2070445427 Pulp Faction Recycling –v- Islington.
If you have a pending appeal hearing, then change your case to include this factor as grounds for cancellation of the PCN. You are allowed to change your appeal right up to the date of the hearing.
If you have recently lost an appeal then you can apply for a review on the grounds of new evidence. If you lost an appeal some time ago you can try to submit a late Statutory Declaration which may get the case back to PATAS for review.
If you paid the PCN then I’m sorry…
There is a lot of work going on behind the scenes in the courts to establish grounds for restitution (reimbursement for invalid PCNS). It is possible that councils have acted fraudulently or could be charged with malfeasance in public office, but both of those are large legal mountains to climb.
I will keep you apprised of developments.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: If Local Authorities want motorists to obey the law, then they must also obey the law. Simple init?
November 12, 2007 at 11:03 pm |
Hi again,
I posted earlier under Harassed of Hillingdon.
My PCN does state “£120 must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days, beginning with the date this Notice is served”
On the reverse, which of the 8 grounds can I use? What should I include to go with it, or should I wait for something else to happen first?
Thanks again.
POP – paul
January 19, 2008 at 6:43 pm |
Hi. I got a PCN for that box junction in drayton park islington. The main bummer is I moved to spain 2 days before it arrived so I dont know the exact wording on it. My old housemates just told me the number of the pcn. It was dated 31.oct.07. I emailed contact islington on 12.nov.07 asking for them to email me back details, when, where and photos as I did not have a postal address. They have just done this (12.jan.08) and are now saying that the fine stands at 180 instead of the £60. But I replied to them within the first 14 days. Im obviously going to have a gop at them for that, but what I also need to know is has the wording been corrected yet or would my PCN still have date of delivery or service which would make it invalid?
Cheers. Mark.
PS, can you guess why I moved to Spain!
February 6, 2008 at 7:35 am |
I gor a pcn at the same place as Mark who went to spain, Drayton Park must be a gold mine for islington.
This point applies to me the contavention date is 19.12.07 and the date of the notice is 31.01.08 this is 44 days well over the 28 days.
The PCN must be sent to you within 28 days of the date of the contravention
So if I appeal on the grounds that this pcn is invalid will they accept that or will they just ignore it and want the money anyway. I am on holiday in early March, so should I just pay the £60.00 and then appeal? I received the pcn on 04.02.08, the 14 days start from the 31.01.08.
May 22, 2008 at 3:55 pm |
[...] you live in Islington This may be useful Significant Adjudication Money Box Junction Or old and out of date! __________________ We can share the women, we can share the [...]
July 1, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
Hi,
My PCN states “The person on whom this notice is served may be entitled to make representations under paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 of the London Local Authorities & Transport for London Act 2003, using the form overleaf. The grounds on which you make representations are set out in the form. If you do not make representations and the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge of £180 may be payable. The Council of the London Borough of Ealing may disregard any such representations, which are received by them after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the penalty charge notice in question was served.”
Can I appeal against this PCN on the basis of PATAS case 2070445427 Pulp Faction Recycling –v- Islington ?
If yes then which one of the five grounds on the reverse of the PCN shall I use?
Following five ground for representation are there on the back of PCN –
I never was the owner of the vehicle in question/ I ceased to be its owner before the date on which the penalty charge was alleged to have become payable/ I became its owner after that date (1)
There was no contravention of a prescribed order/ failure to comply with an indication on a sign/ contravention of the lorry ban order (2)
That at the time the alleged contrvention or failure too place the person who was in control of the vehicle was in control of the vehicle without my consent (3)
We are hire firm and the vehicle in question was the material time hired under a vehicle hiring agreement and the prson hiring it had signed a statement of liability acknowledging his liability in respect of any penalty charge notice issued in respect of the vehicle during the currency of the hiring agreement (4)
The penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case (5)
Thanks
Vikas
July 19, 2008 at 9:53 am |
Hi there
My PCN (issued by Transport for London on 18th July) states under the heading “Do Not Ignore This Notice”: “A penalty charge of £120 is payable before the end of the 28 days beginning with the date of this notice”. Which appears to be leagal.
However in the same paragraph it goes on to state: “If you fail to pay the penalty charge notice or make representations before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice”. Now it appears to be liiegal in the same way Pulp Faction v Islington was.
Does the fact that it appears to contradict itself mean I am likely to win an appeal?
Thanks Dennis
September 10, 2008 at 12:28 pm |
I just received a PCN in the same place in Drayton park as Mark and Kuldip Binning. This is certainly a goldmine for Islington council and I personally cannot understand why the yellow junction box is there is the first place? It is actually not a junction – there is another yellow box after the lights going onto Holloway Road which is a valid junction box so why is that one there?
Unfortunately my PCN has been worded correctly – they obviously fixed up after their previous mistakes but I still can’t help feeling this was unlawful for two reasons.
1. As I expressed earlier no real valid reason for the box being there
2. The lights turned green and traffic began to move, so did I – but anyonw who knows that junction will understand that if someone is turning right into Holloway Road and other cars are coming across into Drayton park it causes a hold up. Therefore the lights turned red and left me sitting in the box. If the junction was actually organised properly this would not happen but failing that if noone had been turning right then I would have been passed the lights and clear of the box!
November 15, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
I’ve just got a PCN for stopping in the same box junction in Drayton Park. It’s clearly there for the sole purposes of making money. I am considering appealing to spite them.
December 19, 2008 at 1:37 am |
I have just received a PCN on the same Drayton Park junction, and it is dated over 3 months ago, can I appeal purely base on that?? I don’t think that yellow box is justified at all!!!
April 5, 2009 at 4:46 pm |
Hi,
I received a parking ticket in islington on eden grove, I arrived on the minute that my parking ticket expired, 13:19. The parking attendent was waiting by my car she argued with me and told me I was late and that I should check the time on the machine. The machine was about 50 meters from my car and with the time spend arguing when I got there it said 13:21. She said that means I’m late and issued the parking ticket. And then she carried on taking pictures of the car. I wrote and challenged the claim on these ground. They said that I was late and that I still had to pay the ticket.
My parking ticket says “A penalty charge of £80 is now payable and must be paid not later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which this penalty charge notice was served.”
Is this the correct wording because they said on “which this penalty charge notice was served”?