Westminster dropped kerb PCN - Code 27

usignuolo

My OH got a Notice to Owner today telling us he had not paid a PCN issued in Westminster (London) on 13 January for "Contravention Code 27: Parking in a special enforcement area adjacent to a dropped kerbway."

Two things: 1. he is adamant there was no notice on his car when he returned to it and
2. he was not parked in front of the dropped kerb obstructing it, he was just beyond it next to it.

I have looked at the Westminster website and this shows that he was parked just the other side of the dropped kerb, wheels behind it, small amount of bonnet beyond where kerb dropped. Is this really an obstruction?

(For non Londoners, you should be aware that in Westminster there are plenty of areas marked with a single yellow line where you can park outside zoned hours. Lots of the dropped kerbs also have a single yellow line continuous from the rest of the street, and no additional markings to distinguish them. Motorists are supposed to know they cannot park there. My OH did indeed know this which is why he parked just beyond it.)

The other issue is this is not the first time he has received a letter from a London authority saying he was issued with a PCN which he never found on the car. Hence double fine when the reminder arrives. Is it really the case that mischievous locals go around removing these, or is something a bit more sinister at work?

Is it worth an appeal either on grounds was not obstructing dropped kerb, or that the photo does not clearly show a parking ticket, just a white blurred piece of paper tucked under his wipers?

peter_the_piper

Absolutely appeal, its almost certainly de minimis at best. Try also posting on pepipoo.com as they will be able to give you other reasons for an appeal.

usignuolo

have posted onto pepipoo - awaiting their comments.

Just to add the photo of the windscreen is a joke - it is completely out of focus and all you can see is a blurry piece of white paper tucked under the passenger side wiper which could be anything.

Also the NTO says "A PCN was served by CEO WS99999 with respect to the above vehicle on the grounds of..." etc.

Does it have to say HOW the PCN was served, either in person to the driver or attached to the vehicle? Or is it assumed it is attached to the vehicle ?

(Interesting on Pepipoo the increasing number of drivers saying they never received the original PCN, which they would have paid if they had, and wondering if this is a way of boosting the take....)

peter_the_piper

I've noticed this also along with increasingly minor tickets. I suppose they have got to make up the shortfall from somewhere.

usignuolo

To pick up an earlier point, does the NTO or PCN have to say HOW the notice was issued ie if it was given to driver or attached to windscreen? My NTO says neither merely stating that the notice was "served" by Civil Enforcement Officer x.

Coupon-mad

usignuolo wrote: »

To pick up an earlier point, does the NTO or PCN have to say HOW the notice was issued ie if it was given to driver or attached to windscreen? My NTO says neither merely stating that the notice was "served" by Civil Enforcement Officer x.

Hi usignuolo, :j

I think it does have to say something different if it was a drive-away. But maybe the Council believes the notice was served. You could ask for the CEO's notes as part of your appeal.

But take pepipoo's advice over it and keep asking another question on your thread over there if you find your thread falls to page 2. It's a fast-moving forum and most people normally concentrate on the most recent posts.

Good luck, you have the odds in your favour.