PCN from Slough Borough Council

GinZ

Hi all,
I think it's best if I post the letter I am intending to send. Am not the best at this kind of thing and hope you can point out whether I have been too pushy or perhaps not pushy enough, or too wordy. Give me your thoughts please.

Oh and also thanks to Crabman for not allowing me to hijack the other thread. I'm a newbie and this is the first time I've posted to any forum.

Thanks to all for your guidance.

Here's the letter:

Mr

Slough Borough Council
PO Box 3839
Slough
SL1 0JA

Date:

Reference:

PCN No. SB

Registration No.

Date of incident:

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your letter relating to the PCN listed above. I am writing to explain why I sent the doctor’s note as I believe my initial letter may not have been referred to when receiving the doctor’s note. This may be due to the fact I did not send in a copy of my initial letter. The initial letter listed out points as to why the doctor’s note was evidence in relation to why the parking of my car had mitigating circumstances.

I had parked the car only for a few minutes to aid my passenger into her home as she has been taken ill and is currently being evaluated with the probability of having Meniere’s disease. One of the symptoms of this is unsteadiness which she was suffering from at the time.

After her appointment at Hospital, with , Ms was having one of the episodes of giddiness and was unable to walk without danger of falling over. I therefore saw it a necessary precaution to assist her into her home. Please feel free to contact on 07811 to verify Ms condition as well as refer to the doctor’s note included with this letter to confirm this.

I would therefore like to appeal against the PCN on the basis of the assisted alighting exemption as quoted in the London Borough of Southwark vs Mrs D Wanambwa case. This ticket should not be enforced as I was clearly assisting my passenger to alight from the vehicle and enter her home and ensure she was sat safely and securely. I was fully intending on moving the car within a few minutes as I pointed out to the CEOs and would have done so within 6 minutes had I not waited for the CEOs to issue the ticket.

Furthermore the issue of the CEOs behaviour in this circumstance has also not been addressed. I was assured by Mr (who has shown excellent customer service on most occasions when speaking to him) after speaking on the phone to him and explaining this situation that I would be contacted by him “by Friday at the earliest” after speaking to him on Monday 19th April 2010. I have tried to get through to the call centre on many occasions after that to attempt to have some information relating to this. One on of the many occasions, on 29th April 2010, I started the call at 12:43pm and waited for 171 minutes only for the phone line to go dead. It had obviously been cut off by somebody at the department.

Hence I would also like to point out that there seems to have been some procedural impropriety as some of my points from my original letter have still not been addressed. The most pertinent are highlighted in this letter but there are others still not recognised.

Particularly regarding the length of time for the CEOs to print off the ticket. It took several minutes for the ticket to be printed off thereby calling into question whether the ticket had been “issued already” as stated by CEO when I approached the car. According to point 8.77 of the Traffic Management Act (henceforth TMA) ‘If the driver returns before the CEO has started to issue the ticket, the CEO should establish whether the vehicle is parked in contravention (for example, if loading or unloading is taking place). If the vehicle is in contravention, the CEO should ask the driver to comply with the restrictions.’ Point 8.77 also states that ’A CEO has not started to issue a PCN if s/he is observing a vehicle or jotting down some details.’

Here it is quite clear as I explained to the CEO that I had helped my poorly passenger into her home and that stopping at the location was necessary due to this ill health. Furthermore we were about to move again as we had another appointment to attend to and that we had only stopped for a few minutes. The CEO could have seen that the passenger was poorly but refused to interact and assess the situation as is part of the procedural guidance in point 8.77 of the TMA, outlined above, states. This lack of understanding not only meant that the ticket should not have been issued but also that I was delayed to my next appointment and arrived late as a result of this incident.

On top of that the ticket took several minutes to be issued and I do remember the officer still looking at my car before typing things into the machine. This would then clearly also point out that all the details had not been taken down before starting to issue the PCN. Point 8.77 of the TMA also states that ’A CEO has not started to issue a PCN if s/he is observing a vehicle or jotting down some details.’

Moreover, on a behavioural point, the behaviour by the officers after placing the ticket upon my car was frankly rude, unprofessional and somewhat childish and delayed my departure further by them avoiding answering my questions clearly and promptly.

In conclusion this PCN should not have been issued and should not be enforced in the main due to the boarding/alighting ruling.

This matter has not been addressed properly as shown in earlier letters from the council and so this is also a matter of procedural impropriety.

I would hope under these specific circumstances you will on this occasion cancel the penalty charge.

Yours faithfully,






Mr


Enclosed: A copy of doctor’s note to show Ms ’s condition

Coupon-mad

See what others say as well. I say it's a little wordy but a good description of your situation which they should consider. Send it off and then they will probably still issue an NTO.

I think you know this is the likely scenario already. But I think your letter will help you with your formal appeal once you get that NTO.

Let us know and scan the NTO in here along with any rejection letter. Good luck!

GinZ

I persisted with the stance as was advised (above) using the case of London Borough of Southwark vs Mrs D Wanambwa to state my points.

Either way, in the end, Slough Borough Council (SBC) refused to turn up to the decision-making adjudictor meeting. I was called by the administrator on the day informing me of the situation, about 10 mins before I was about to leave to attend.

May I add that (prior to them withdrawing) SBC continued with very harsh language. Prior to me learning about more legal language, I would have felt I had no option but to do as they said (something I believe should be taught in school - how to handle grown-up legal issues).

They continued to not respond to requests I made relating to investigating the treatment of their CEOs (these were made both over the phone and via letter), even when they said they would (they only agreed over the phone) especially in regards to walking away and turning their back on me when I ask questions, and so on.

I would like to thank those that helped me out, particularly in advising me with legal points I could make, and apologise for such a late response (other issues, as always, get in the way).

I hope, although this response is late, that anyone else can be helped from being mistreated by CEOs and SBC as I was that day and thereafter.

To any of those who know how to chase up in future, I did enquire with the adjudicator's administrator as to how to follow up my complaint about how the CEOs treated car owners with such contempt and to how SBC continued to not hold up to their statements of investigating such issues.

They said I should take it up with SBC. I did once or twice, again, they said over the phone they would investigate, but then (admittedly I had other things get in the way) I did not know how to follow up with any weight and truly get them to do anything about it.

Good luck to all those who find themselves in such an infuriating position and boy do I so not regret taking the plunge and actually posting something on a forum! Thanks to all those who advised! :T

muckybutt

Good result in the end, thanks for the update :T

Coupon-mad

Yay! :T

Told you so (see below)! Well done for seeing it through, not everyone does and you can see why most people blindly pay up, even with dodgy PCNs which are initially contested most people accept the first rejection because that's what the people in this Country do. We do as we are told by Councils and officialdom which is all very well to a POINT...but PCNs issued unfairly are well worth digging your heels in over.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

IMHO if the Council still reject your formal appeal they will actually fold before the adjudicator gets a chance to tell them to revisit the PCN. That's what happened in the pepipoo thread above and is very common, it's a game a bluff to Councils.

Crabman

Congratulations. I wonder whether you could complain about the way the council behaved in intimidating you and handling your appeal as it does not seem to be appropriate behaviour for a country whose troops are going around the world telling other countries how to be democratic.

Isn't there a local government ombudsman for such issues?

taffy056

Crabman wrote: »

Isn't there a local government ombudsman for such issues?

Maybe this ?

http://www.lgo.org.uk/