Statutory grounds to make representations
Important note:
The following policy takes into consideration the nine Statutory Grounds for making representations, however in accordance with a directive issued by the Local Government Ombudsman, full consideration will be given and account taken of all representations received, whether or not they fall within the description of “Statutory Grounds”. It is for this reason that a tenth Ground (mitigation) encompassing any other information the motorist or owner/keeper would like the Council to consider has been included
S1 The contravention did not occur:
S1.1 Where the motorist claims that a pay & display machine was faulty
May accept representations:
If service records confirm a fault or that the machine had been taken out of service at the time of the contravention. If there is reasonable doubt because evidence not available to confirm that a machine was working at the time (test ticket) and there was not another ticket machine nearby which was operating correctly.
May reject representations:
If there was another ticket machine nearby that was working correctly at the time. If there is no record of the machine being faulty or taken out of service. If there is reasonable doubt because evidence confirms that other visitors had been able to purchase tickets during the relevant period.
S1.2 Where motorist claims that the car park is not clearly signed or marked
May accept representations:
If signs and/or markings are missing or unclear. If signs and markings are inconsistent with each other and/or Traffic Order or legislation (TSRGD 2016).
May reject representations:
If site visit records or photographs establish that signs and/or markings are correct and consistent with each other and the Traffic Regulation Order.
S1.3 Where the motorist claims that snow, foliage, fallen leaves or flooding covered the signs or markings
May accept representations:
If it can be established that such conditions prevailed and it is likely that signs and markings were obscured as claimed and there was no alternative indication of the restriction.
May reject representations:
If it can be established that such conditions did not cause lines and signs to be obscured as claimed. If the CEO’s notes photographic evidence etc. directly contradict the motorist’s version of events. If any reasonable alternative indication of the restriction was available to the motorist. If the location of the contravention was unlikely to be subject to the natural conditions described by the motorist, i.e. it was under cover.
S1.4 Where motorist was carrying out building works
May accept representations:
If valid dispensation to park at the location in question had been issued and was on display in the vehicle. If works are of a statutory nature or are exempt from restrictions by a Traffic Order or legislation. If it can be proven that works were an emergency.
May reject representations:
In all other circumstances, unless other compelling reasons are raised.
S1.5 Where motorist claims that PCN was not served (i.e. PCN not found attached to vehicle or handed to driver)
May accept representations:
If the CEO’s evidence confirms that the vehicle drove away before a PCN could be served, and not issued as a VDA i.e. PCN not handed to the driver or fixed to the vehicle.
May reject representations:
If the CEO’s evidence or photographs confirm that a PCN was correctly served, i.e. handed to the motorist or fixed to their vehicle.
May allow discounted rate to be applied.
S1.6 Where the motorist claims that their vehicle was not parked in the location at the time and on the date alleged on the PCN which was issued
May accept representations:
Following consideration of all available evidence available. If the motorist provides a copy of their log book and the vehicle details differ. If confirmation is received from the police that the VRM has been ‘cloned’.
May reject representations:
If the motorist does not provide a copy of their log book, as requested. Or If the details of the log book are the same as noted by the CEO. Or If there is no evidence or if the evidence presented does not support the claim or is inconclusive.
S1.7 Where motorist claims that a valid authorisation to park, had been issued
May accept representations:
If records show that the motorist holds a valid authorisation to park.
May reject representations:
If the motorist cannot provide a copy of the valid authorisation to park or if there is no record of any issue of the authorisation. If the motorist did not park in accordance with the authorisation requirements.
S1.8 Where the motorist claims that a pay and display ticket or phone payment was purchased and displayed
May accept representations:
If evidence shows that the pay and display ticket or payment by phone has been purchased and displayed correctly.
Where a valid ticket is supplied for the time period. Note: we have a policy of one cancellation where a motorist fails to correctly display a pay and display ticket.
May reject representations:
In all other circumstances, unless compelling reasons are raised.
S1.9 Where the motorist claims that their vehicle had broken down
May accept representations:
If the motorist is able to provide evidence of a breakdown, i.e. proof of vehicle recovery or a bill of sale for repair or parts.
May reject representations:
If the motorist is unable to provide evidence of any kind that their vehicle had broken down. If the cause of the vehicle “breaking down” was due to negligence on the part of the motorist, i.e. the vehicle had not been properly maintained, had run out of petrol or water or a similar reason. If the CEO’s notes contradict the motorist’s version of events. If the driver has not attempted to have vehicle removed in a timely manner.
S1.10 Where the motorist is a Blue Badge holder/transporting a Blue Badge holder and they did not have their Blue Badge and/or clock on display or could not be read or had expired
May accept representations:
If evidence shows that the blue badge had been displayed correctly for the use on an appropriate restriction.
Where a valid blue badge has been provided. Note: we have a policy of one cancellation where a motorist fails to correctly display a blue badge.
May reject representations:
In all other circumstances, unless compelling reasons are raised.
S1.11 Where the motorist claims that they were attending an emergency or another vehicle that had broken down
May accept representations:
If the motorist is able to provide reasonable proof of the emergency, i.e. a credible report of an accident or incident, or that they were attending to another vehicle that had broken down.
May reject representations:
If the motorist is unable to provide evidence of any kind that they were attending an emergency or another vehicle which had broken down. If the CEO’s notes contradict the motorist’s version of events, i.e. the motorist was not seen attending an emergency or another vehicle which was broken down.
S1.12 Where the vehicle in question was on police, fire brigade or ambulance duties
May accept representations:
If a senior officer of the service concerned supports the representations and there is no reason to doubt that the vehicle was engaged on operational activities.
May reject representations:
In all other circumstances, unless compelling reasons are raised.
S1.13 Where the motorist stopped to drop off someone
May accept representations:
If the circumstances are seen by the CEO. If in exceptional circumstances and subject to observation times, the motorist had to escort a passenger (child, elderly or disabled person) to home, or school.
May reject representations:
If motorist was parked/stopped out of a bay in a manner that obstructed other users.
S1.14 Where the motorist was delayed in returning to their vehicle and parking time purchased or maximum stay had expired
May accept representations:
If supported by appropriate evidence, the motorist’s representations claims that the delay in returning to the vehicle was caused by circumstances that were entirely unforeseen, unavoidable and exceptional. If the motorist was unable to drive, since parking the vehicle.
The motorist had been detained and/or charged by the police.
May reject representations:
If the delay described by the motorist was entirely avoidable, i.e. queuing in a shop, waiting in Doctors surgery. If the motorist simply underestimated the time needed and could have reasonably purchased more time, i.e. when conducting business, shopping or commuting. If the motorist was unable to drive since parking due to excess alcohol in the body.
S1.15 Where motorist states they were in police custody when PCN issued
May accept representations:
If proof (from the Police) has been provided that the police had instructed the motorist to leave the vehicle. If the time of arrest (proof required from the Police) provides confirmation that motorist was legally parked and was unable to move vehicle before the restriction started.
May reject representations:
If no proof provided. If vehicle could have been legally parked before arrest.
S2 The penalty exceeded the relevant amount
May accept representations:
If the PCN and/or Notice to Owner showed the incorrect amount of penalty charge, i.e. the wrong contravention code used or error with the amount. Procedural Impropriety.
May reject representations:
If the PCN or Notice to Owner showed the correct amount of penalty charge or the correct contravention code was used.
S3 The Traffic Order was invalid
May accept representations:
If the Traffic Regulation Order which prescribes the restrictions that the vehicle was parked in contravention of was either not constructed correctly, i.e. is beyond the authorities’ legal power, or was not made correctly, i.e. not consulted on properly.
If the restrictions conflict with what is prescribed in the TRO.
May reject representations:
If the Traffic Regulation Order which prescribes the restrictions that the vehicle was parked in contravention or was constructed and made correctly.
If the motorist merely considers the restrictions to be unfair.
S4 The motorist was not the owner/keeper of the vehicle at the time of the contravention:
S4.1 Where the current registered keeper claims that the vehicle was disposed of before the contravention occurred
May accept representations:
If the current registered keeper is able to provide proof that the vehicle was disposed of before the contravention, i.e. a bill of sale, registration documents, insurance documents or a letter from the DVLA; and/or if the current registered keeper is able to provide the full name and address of the person to whom they disposed of the vehicle.
Action - send a Notice of Acceptance to the person who made the representation and then send a new Notice to Owner to the person named by the current registered keeper.
May reject representations:
If the current registered keeper is unable to prove that they disposed of the vehicle before the contravention nor provide the name and address of the person to whom they disposed of the vehicle. If the person named by the current registered keeper as the person to whom they disposed of the vehicle, either does not exist, cannot be traced or is for some other reason not considered to be bona fide.
S4.2 Where the current registered keeper claims that the vehicle was purchased after the contravention occurred
May accept representations:
If the current registered keeper is able to provide proof that the vehicle was purchased after the contravention, i.e. an invoice, registration documents, insurance documents or a letter from the DVLA; and/or If the current registered keeper is able to provide the full name and address of the person from whom they purchased the vehicle.
Action - send a Notice of Acceptance to the person who made the representation and then send a new Notice to Owner to the person named by the current registered keeper.
May reject representations:
If the current registered keeper is unable to prove that they neither purchased the vehicle after the contravention nor provide the name and address of the person from whom they bought the vehicle. If the person named by the current registered keeper as the person to whom they disposed of the vehicle, either does not exist, cannot be traced or is for some other reason not considered to be bona fide.
S4.3 Where the current registered keeper claims that a contracted third party was responsible for the vehicle at the time of the contravention
May accept representations:
Only when a hire agreement exists (see policy S6, below).
May reject representations:
In all other circumstances because the registered keeper is always liable, including where the vehicle was left in the care of a garage.
S4.4 Where the motorist claims that they never owned the vehicle
May accept representations:
If the DVLA confirm that the motorist was not the registered keeper at the time of the contravention.
May reject representations:
If the DVLA confirms that the motorist was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the contravention. If the previous registered keeper provides proof that the motorist bought the vehicle before the contravention, or the subsequent registered keeper provides proof that the motorist sold the vehicle after the contravention. If the motorist is proven to have hired the vehicle for the day on which the contravention occurred and signed an agreement to take responsibility for PCNs incurred, subject to the time of hire (see policy S6, below).
S5 The vehicle had been taken without owner’s consent
S5.1 Where the current registered keeper claims that the vehicle had been stolen
May accept representations:
If the registered keeper provides a valid police crime report reference number and confirmed by the police.
May reject representations:
If the current registered keeper is unable to provide any proof of theft. If the police crime report reference number provided by the current registered keeper does not exist or it does not match the theft or date of the theft alleged.
S5.2 Where the current registered keeper claims that the vehicle was driven by a third party (i.e. a friend, relative or estranged partner)
May accept representations:
In no circumstance, unless compelling reasons are raised.
May reject representations:
In all circumstances because the registered keeper is always liable, except when a hire agreement exists (see policy S6, below).
S6 The owner is a hire company and have supplied the name of the hirer
May accept representations:
If the hire company are able to provide proof that the vehicle was hired at the time of the contravention, i.e. a signed agreement. If the hire company are able to provide the full name and address of the person to whom they hired the vehicle. This is related to where the vehicle was on hire for 6 months or less.
Where a vehicle is on hire for more than 6 months the hire/lease firm just need to provide confirmation of the vehicle and the length the vehicle has been on hire/leased, with the hirers full details.
Action - send a Notice of Acceptance to the hirer firm making the representation and then send a new Notice to Owner to the person named by the hire company.
May reject representations:
If the hire company are unable to prove that they hired out the vehicle on the date of the contravention nor provide the name and address of the person to whom they hired the vehicle. If the person named by the hire company as the person to whom they hired the vehicle, without proof, either does not exist, cannot be traced or denies responsibility for the contravention. If the vehicle was being as a courtesy car without an agreement signed to accept responsibility for Penalty Charge Notices issued.
S7 Where the motorist is claiming procedural impropriety
S7.1 Where the motorist is claiming that the Council has not followed the correct statutory process
May accept representations:
If it found that statutory documents have been sent out before or after statutory timescales. If it found that the statutory documentation wording is incorrect as stated by legislation. If it is found that the Council have not provided a reasoned response to received correspondence.
May reject representations:
If it found that the statutory process has been followed correctly by the Council.
S7.2 Where the motorist is claiming that the CEO collected incorrect evidence at the time of the contravention
May accept representations:
If it found that the statutory evidence collected by the CEO at the time of the contravention was incorrect, this includes:
- VRM
- Contravention description
- Time and Date of contravention
- Location
May reject representations:
If it is found that the statutory evidence collected was correct. Note: vehicle make and colour is only advisory evidence and therefore if incorrect does not require the Council to cancel the PCN.
S8 Already paid
May accept representations:
If it is found that the PCN has already been paid. If payment evidence is provided.
May reject representations:
In all other circumstances, unless other compelling reasons are raised.
S9 The CEO was not prevented from serving the PCN
May accept representations:
Where it is found that the CEO was not at the vehicle at the time of the contravention. Or the evidence does not prove that an assault or fear of violence took place.
May reject representations:
Where evidence proves that the Officer had been assaulted or threatened with violence.
In all other circumstances, unless other compelling reasons are raised.