Mr Mustard's client challenged a Brent Council PCN on the grounds that the ball joint had failed and so he left his car in a residents bay for a short while until a mobile mechanic came and fixed it, the car not being drivable.
A copy of the repair invoice was sent to Brent Council and contained the following detail.
Brent Council have rejected the challenge, as follows:
How could they make a decision based upon a false factual statement?
Ball joints get inspected annually as part of the MOT.
Toyota only require them to be inspected every 15,000 miles.
The council have not got the maintenance record to refer to.
There is no actual maintenance schedule, only an inspection schedule.
Brent don't know their ball joints from their hose elbows.
PCN clerks are probably not mechanically qualified. Clearly they all have cars which never breakdown when they least expect and none of them are therefore members of the RAC or AA (other breakdown services are available).
Anyone would think that they were trying to put the motorist off the idea of challenging the PCN. Mr Mustard will see you Brent, in due course, at London Tribunals (formerly PATAS).