Double ticketing

CATHYY_2

:money. Is there a fixed length of time before a traffic warden can place a second parking ticket on top of an old one, if you have not moved your car.

Reason I ask is that I received a Notice to Owner telling me I now owed £120 for a ticket I didn't get f 2/11/10 at 17.08. However, I had received and promptly paid one for 3/11/10 at 12.18.

My offence was to be parked on my own driveway. However, the car was parked behind another and one wheel was on what was considered to be the pavement, though there was no question of any obstruction to pedestrians.

It occurred to me that one traffic warden may have removed the earlier warden's ticket to replace it with their own, as there was no sign of the earlier one. To put this forward as a possibility, I need to know what the time lapse between first, second, third and so-on, tickets needs to be. This is borough of Camden btw.

Any advice on appeal possibilities?

caz74

Hi

They will not normally issue a second PCN for the same contravention on the same day, however as yours were on different dates, they would both stand. Can't give you specific advice on appealing, however I expect someone will be along soon to help you

HO87

The issuing of second ticket (or even a third, on occasions) hinges on what is regarded as a "continuing offence". Many councils take the stance that each day creates another offence although that is a very simplistic approach and has been hung out to dry several times at Tribunal. Although I have no specific knowledge of Camden in this regard that they also take the same view would not surprise me. If you moved your vehicle between times then the offence would not be continuing and two tickets could properly have been issued. If, however, you could show that you had not moved your car before the issuing of the second ticket then you should appeal. Others will undoubtedly guide you in more detail.

I recommend that you also post your case on the Parking & Decriminalised Notices forum on pepipoo.com for far more detail guidance.

caz74

HO87

That doesn't sound quite right to me - Does that mean that if I go on holiday for a fortnight by train I should park on the double yellow lines outside the station as the one PCN the Council could issue would be cheaper than paying to park in the station car park? I would be interested to know how the OP gets on with this one.

HO87

caz74 wrote: »

HO87

That doesn't sound quite right to me - Does that mean that if I go on holiday for a fortnight by train I should park on the double yellow lines outside the station as the one PCN the Council could issue would be cheaper than paying to park in the station car park? I would be interested to know how the OP gets on with this one.

An entirely fair comment. By the same token, were the OP to have had a ticket issued at 23.55 on Thursday, would it be fair for a second to be issued ten minutes later at 00.05 on Friday simply because it was then a second day?

If another was to park in a restricted street at a time when it was lawful to do so and was rushed to hospital shortly thereafter not to return to their car for two weeks only to find 14 PCN's, would that be fair?

The principle of "continuing offence" is one that should properly be decided on a case-by-case basis not subject to an arbitrary definition. When looking at any contravention one should look at the "guilty act" (actus reus) and how many such acts there have been. In general, a single actus reus = a single contravention.

In the case you have outlined there is a single guilty act - the act of parking on double yellow lines - and theoretically a single contravention. Were, of course, you to disclose your reasons for parking in this way this may well disclose a more serious offence given that it would seem that to do so would have entailed the formation of a dishonest intent.

Examining each case on its merits, rather than applying a restrictive yardstick is an essential component of natural justice. Another concept that some authorities have difficulty not only in understanding but applying.

Besides, I doubt very much that were you to park on the DY's in the way you suggest that it would still be there on your return.

CATHYY_2

Many thanks for your replies. I guess I have little to lose by writing in without paying anything, as I am already theoretically past the reduced payment phase.

When I get a reply from Camden, I will let you know.

Coupon-mad

CATHYY wrote: »

Many thanks for your replies. I guess I have little to lose by writing in without paying anything, as I am already theoretically past the reduced payment phase.

When I get a reply from Camden, I will let you know.

You will have nothing at all to lose if pepipoo help you with advice, as you'll probably get off both:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=30

Don't overlook posting there, they help get almost every poster off almost every Council PCN and the wealth of knowledge and willingness to help is second to none IMHO.

If you just write in I predict you will get a rejection, then you will still end up posting on pepipoo for help with a formal appeal - so you may as well start a thread now and get the PCN looked at from the outset. Read their FAQs and stickies about how to post pics, and register, then you will be amazed at the info they will give you.

Do not assume you will 'have' to pay one of these. Many on there, including me, would always appeal every PCN as far as the adjudicator as almost every Council PCN and paperwork has grounds for appeal. Camden are not very well thought of, let's say they are not called SCamden for nothing...