Incorrect VRN on PCN

Insert_User_Name_Here

Hi everyone,
My wife managed to bag herself two PCN's today. The second one, hopefully, I can deal with on my own, but the first one I would like some advice on please. She parked at the station in a row of parallel spaces as she normally does, but the car directly behind her was a little too far forward in her space, leading her to do the same (it's a big car). The PCN she received states the reason for issue as 'not parked wholly within the markings of a designated parking bay'. The front of the car was covering a small hatched area between her space and the next but didn't extend into the actual space. Of course, it was sods law that by the time the pictures were taken the car behind her had gone leaving her with no evidence of this.

However, my question to you is more to do with admin rather than the case itself. When searching for the pictures on the myparkingcharge website I could not initially find the case. My wife's VRN is an older style one using the format A99AAA but the parking operator has entered this incorrectly and the system could not find the PCN. Once I worked this out and entered the incorrect VRN in a AAAAAA format it came up..

What is the legal standing on this? If they have recorded the incorrect VRN onto the PCN is it automatically null and void and can be ignored? Or are they allowed human error and I should treat it like any other PCN?

Coupon-mad

What is the legal standing on this? If they have recorded the incorrect VRN onto the PCN is it automatically null and void and can be ignored?

If it was a real Council PCN then it would be void, but not in the la-la land of private parking scams.

Is it VCS at a station or is it SABA?

Is it headed 'PENALTY CHARGE' or just 'PARKING CHARGE'?

As long as this is NOT a company/hire/lease car, due to the incorrect VRN, do not appeal this ticket, instead wait for the Notice to Keeper.

luxardo

Agree with above comment, pity it's not a penalty charge or you'd get off on a technicality.
However, she can't defend it (IF it goes to court) by stating the car behind forced her to stray over the markings because they will simply state she should not have parked in the space if she could not fit into it.

Insert_User_Name_Here

It's from Vehicle Control Services and it's a 'Parking Charge Notice'

Coupon-mad

So my original advice stands:

As long as this is NOT a company/hire/lease car, due to the incorrect VRN, do not appeal this ticket, instead wait for the Notice to Keeper.

Insert_User_Name_Here

And it's not a lease/ hire car etc. She is the registered keeper

Umkomaas

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Of course it could be defended but if it is a 'penalty' then it will time out after just 6 months and there will be no court.

Insert_User_Name_Here wrote: »

It's from Vehicle Control Services and it's a 'Parking Charge Notice'

luxardo wrote: »

But it's not a penalty notice is it ? It's a parking charge. Anything can be defended, I just said it could not be defended on those grounds. Please keep up because you are clearly not qualified to give advice.

But CM's advice was given before the OP confirmed it was a Parking Charge Notice. I don't think it's CM who needs to 'keep up'.

The_Deep

However, she can't defend it (IF it goes to court) by stating the car behind forced her to stray over the markings

Of course she can, our resident cuckoo is talking rubbish again.

Many/most judges regard these claims as trifling, a waste of court time, and de minimis.

Luxardo, this is the second time I have had to call you out this month for giving misleading advice. Please do us all a favour and go forth and multiply.

BTW, I spent five years in the Legal Department of the Foreign Office, am I qualified?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_minimis