Mr Mustard decides at the beginning if he is going to fight a PCN to the end. If he isn't, the client pays the 50% of the PCN's full value. If he decides to fight he fights to the end, through 3 challenges if necessary, and ignores any re-offers of a 50% discount.
This is the informal challenge (made in response to a PCN placed on a vehicle) recently.
The response was as follows
so that's a clear 'no', the PCN is still valid. There are no signs telling you about leaving your car if you have insufficient change (Mr Mustard recommends that you keep a bag of change in your car for this very purpose though as it isn't a valid defence to a PCN for non-payment) nor is there a council parking meter anywhere in the borough which takes cash, that is an NSL employee waxing lyrical and/or writing trite nonsense.
Mr Mustard isn't one to give in so he waited until his client had the Notice to Owner and then sent in the following representations which, you will notice, are identical to the earlier ones. You need to tell a consistent story and it doesn't matter that the council have already rejection your challenge, they have to consider it afresh.
Suddenly the council changed its tune.
So an unacceptable challenge is suddenly acceptable due to technical error (a meaningless phrase). What if Mr Green had paid when first rejected, he would have paid in error. The council need to think more carefully about the initial challenge. Whichever stage he is rejected at Mr Mustard will take the council to London Tribunals (ex PATAS) which costs them £33 win or lose. They need to learn to save time and money by noticing their technical errors at an early stage.
The council are correct that Mr Musatrd should have said code 5. That requires a 5 minutes observation, code 11 only requires 3 except that thanks to Eric Pickles MP you have to be 10 minutes past the paid for time before you can be given a PCN.
Please don't be easily put off. Fight to the end.