westminster council pcn code 27 - NOTICE OF REJECTION

RonFog

With the technical help of BogsDollocks and continued encouragement from Coblcris and Coupon-mad I wrote a second letter to Westminster and have now received a second letter of rejection from them.

My second letter read:

"I have received your letter of 20th March and am appalled at your response.

Apart from spelling my name incorrectly and addressing me incorrectly the letter is poorly written and difficult to read.

Without quoting the officer he is incorrect. Please can I draw the authority to section 3(2)(c) of S.I. 2007/2053. Perhaps your officer would like to review his opinion on S.86 of the TMA 2004 not yet being enacted.


http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content...filesize=26828


The PCN was issued under the provisions of the TMA 2004 and therefore it was s.86 TMA 2004 that was used to enforce the dropped kerb and as previously explained it requires to be signed. S.14 LLA&TfL Act 2003 is not applicable to a PCN served under the TMA 2004.

In his response your officer writes:
“I have rejected your challenge because while you have raised various points contesting this legislation under which it is enforced, I can confirm the PCN is valid.”
In fact he has not considered most of the points I had raised including the misprinting of the ticket. He is simply quoting inaccurate sections of the TMA.

I would like to remind you that the Secretary of State’s statutory guidance requires local authorities to ensure that their staff are fully conversant in the legislation they are paid to uphold. Clearly you are in breach of this and apart from seeking the opinion of an adjudicator I will be writing to the Ombudsman in this respect.

The response I have received reads:

“Thank you for your correspondence regarding the above PCN. I am sorry that you are unhappy with our response to your informal challenge.
In your correspondence you have stated that the PCN is not valid as the PCN was issued under Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA) and the contravention is enforced under London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 (LLA and TFL.) I can advise that clarification from our advisors has been received in which they have confirmed that the fact the PCN was issued under the TMA 2004 does not invalidate a contravention enforced under LLA and TFL 2003.
With regard to the Secretary of State’s statutory guidance I can advise that as the PCN was correctly issued and pursued the training received by Westminster City Council staff is correct.
Despite your additional comments I am unable to cancel the PCN for the reasons provided.
The next stage of the process requires the registered keeper to make a formal representation when receiving the Notice to Owner (NtO).
The NtO sets out the grounds for which a Representation can be made however the City Council will still consider a formal Representation made for any other reason.
I am again able to offer you a further 14 days, from the date of the letter, to pay the PCN at the discounted rate. You now have two options…”

I have three questions:
1. Has the provision in the Act changed are their advisors correct? Or as I suspect is this a bluff?
2. In their penultimate paragraph they say that "...the City Council will still consider a formal Representation made for any other reason." I don't want to make a formal appeal for any other reason, am I not allowed to make a formal appeal for this reason?
3. When I receive the NtO what are the grounds I am appealing? Would it be that the contravention did not occur or procedural error?

As ever very grateful for all your help with this.

Coblcris

The council will not dare let this case get to adjudication in my opinion.
The criticism from the adjudication would be non trivial.
Their response is horrific.
Await the NTO and post back when it is received.
Keep copies of all communications to date.
You should expect Westminster to pursue their 'case' until shorty before adjudication and then fail to contest it at the last hurdle.
Appalling behaviour from Westminster all round.

RonFog

Coblcris wrote: »

The council will not dare let this case get to adjudication in my opinion.
The criticism from the adjudication would be non trivial.
Their response is horrific.
Await the NTO and post back when it is received.
Keep copies of all communications to date.
You should expect Westminster to pursue their 'case' until shorty before adjudication and then fail to contest it at the last hurdle.
Appalling behaviour from Westminster all round.

Thank you think I would have folded at the first letter if it hadn't been for your encouragement. Can you let me know whether I should appeal the NtO on the basis that the contravention did not occur?

Coblcris

Always appeal on EVERY applicable ground.

Their response has given you another ground.

RonFog

Received letter this morning from Westminster saying:
"The decision has been taken to cancel the PCN because the dropped footway at this location is no longer enforced. I apoloise for any inconvenience caused"
Great result thanks to BogsDollocks, Coupon Mad and Coblcris. Am very much indebted to all of you.
RonFog

Coblcris

As poor as Westminster are, which is very poor in my opinion, they would have to be certifiably insane to have taken this to adjudication. As an interesting side point a large proportion of organisations are viewed as psychotic. or worse, when their action are examined from a psychological viewpoint.
They will keep sending out appalling responses.

Well won.

Michaeljon

Thank you RonFog for your determination and Coblcris for your superb guidance. I am just starting out on this path having received a PCN for Dropped Curb in St James Sq SW1 yesterday (Sun 18/12/11 at 3.00pm). Was equally stunned to receive a PCN for a single yellow line and also consider as entrapment. If a pedestrian wanted to cross at this point, it would lead them across a busy traffic corner straight into a motorcycle parking bay on the other side of the road!

Coupon-mad

This thread is 18 months old.

Please see my reply on the other thread you bumped:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/1769855

Good luck on pepipoo but please don't hijack threads over there.:)