Why we need a parking ombudsman - #4

 

Mr Mustard does not know Mr Corrigan, he just happened to read this tribunal decision.

So what we have here is an innocent person forced to defend 15 PCNs of which 14 were quite properly cancelled by other enforcement authorities as Mr Corrigan has clearly reported the cloning added to which the van has never been to London. An RF registration is a Stoke-on-Trent one and although that doesn't mean necessarily that the vehicle is from that area it probably is, it certainly isn't from Barnet.

Barnet are abusing their powers in not cancelling like everybody else as there is nothing to differentiate their PCN from the others. In fact they have even less information as it isn't a parking PCN which offers the opportunity to take a photo of the VIN. I have seen this stubbornness from barnet Council before in the absence of any facts to show that the vehicle the council saw on cctv is the one to which the registration plate properly belongs.

As it happens you can fix this type of PCN fairly easily. As well as providing photos of your vehicle from the front, back and both sides and prove you have reported the cloning you can then put the ball into the council's court by pointing out tribunal decision number 22201717836 from which the following is an extract.

In Mr Corrigan's case his problems may be at an end as the road fund expired on 28 February 26 and the MOT on 12 May 26 and the van had done 132,015 miles at the May 2025 MOT so may have been taken off the road.

Don't let Barnet Council bully you, make them work for their money. Mr Corrigan was given extra unwarranted stress, it is hard enough to keep up with the paperwork for 15 erroneous PCNs (about two grand's worth) as it is without a bovine response from Barnet Council.

The end.