Showing posts with label cockup. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cockup. Show all posts

17 August 2025

Councils need to watch out for enthusiastic amateurs - Philip Morgan in this case

Mr Mustard first encountered Phillip Morgan over a decade ago when Mr Mustard was new to 'parking tickets' (Penalty charge notices) having been given one for the wrong reason. Mr Mustard's thoughts, as a former civil servant and local government temp himself, was that councils wouldn't be doing much wrong. That naivety is long gone. Councils make lots of errors and have not stopped doing so for a decade. Sometimes they correct one error only to introduce a different one.

Parking, bus lane and moving traffic PCNs are all based on different laws and the minutia of the additional Regulations, Orders and Acts set traps for the unwary. For years there were only a couple of individuals who helped the public to fight back and the famous/infamous Barrie Segal has now retired from the fray.

There are now a dozen or more self taught experts who have little time for socialising being as they are, under the burden of hundreds of PCNs at any one time. Lots of them give their time for free on this website.

Until this year there was the choice at London Tribunals, the home of the independent adjudicators of having a postal hearing based on the papers alone (a bad a choice as the single justice procedure in the Magistrates Courts) or, if you really wanted to win, an in person hearing in Furnival St in the Chancery Lane area (the legal district of London) where you basically sat across the desk from the adjudicator and argued your case (techncially you assist the adjudicator to make his/her decision).

After the hearings were concluded & if another expert happened to be there on the same day and you both had finished you might repair to a local hostelry and toast your successess and drown your failures. Thus it was that Mr Mustard would sit and chat with Phillip and talk about PCNs and anything else in the world. Nowadays with all hearings by video there is less opportunity.

Sometimes experts don't agree and you try to dissuade them from their chosen course but all the experts are headstrong and likely to stick to their guns.

Phillip Morgan though was spot on when he noticed that Southwark Council's bus lane PCNs were issued under the wrong legislation.


Bus Lane enforcement in London came about with The London Local Authorities Act 1996 (as amended since then). The 2003 Act relied upon by Southwark is the primary legislation for alleged moving traffic contraventions (turning left where you shouldn't, stopping in yellow box junctions etc) and the 1991 Act whilst relating to traffic matters and driving penalties wasn't do do with bus lanes and was 5 years too early.

Phillip obtained the penalty income data using the Freedom of Information legislation:

The pedantic answer to Q1 could have been zero but that would have been a silly answer and just caused more work in dealing with the follow up reworded question.

The council was under the threat of a Judicial Review their hand and rather than spend tens of thousands on defending a legal action they wisely decided to refund everyone, a decision doubless helped by their contractor picking up the bill.


 

Mr Mustard thinks the contractor is APCOA, who are about to take over in Barnet as it happens. Mr Mustard will be looking out for their errors.

There is lots of profit in parking. The last published results for Apcoa Parking (UK) Ltd* showed turnover of £124,947,119 a gross profit of £33,982,300 and a profit before tax of £7,438,686 (*not sure if this is the correct APCOA identity but the underlying message is they aren't small and can afford to pay out half a million for a cockup). Mr Mustard wonders if councils generally are driving a hard enough bargain?

Well done Phillip.

The end. 

8 July 2021

Charging ahead

 

Mr Mustard sees quite a few Charge Certificates but not normally if over two years ago Barnet Council wrote to him to cancel the PCN. That is a bit odd and very worring for the recipient.


Mr Mustard tried a PCN enquiry to check the status which returned this answer which means either a typing error was made (Mr Mustard didn't) or the PCN is over.

Finally he tried to pay the PCN as if the PCN was cancelled you do get told in that screen. Mr Mustard thinks you should be given that information if you do an enquiry in order to avoid uncertainty and as the council keep the data on file for years, they just hide if from you, the person who the data is about.


So what has happened? A gargantuan cockup that's for sure although what and how Mr Mustard can't work out as this PCN shouldn't be able to have a Charge Certificate printed when we know the balance is zero. The balance within the PCN software though is probably calculated by taking the full PCN balance and subtracting any discount that is due and any payments made and then adding any charge certificate uplift or court registration fees. There should be a flag that says if the PCN is completed or not and somehow somewhere it has gone wrong.

It can't be the case that only one PCN has gone wrong which happens to be for a person represented by Mr Mustard as he only touches about 0.01% of the PCNs issued in a year.

Mr Mustard will find out.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Here is the council's explanation. Management are to be commended to almost always responding to Mr Mustard's enquiries within 24 hours.

I have looked into this PCN and can advise that it is closed and no enforcement action had been taken on these cases since 20/12/2018, when a Notice of Acceptance had been issued . It was noted that an action was undertaken on the 06/07/2021 to clear up our case records, which inadvertently re opened the case and issued a Charge Certificate and would like to apologise for this. I can confirm that this notice was immediately cancelled and should not have been posted. This has been raised with the relevant supervisor to look into as a matter of priority.

I noted that you had asked how many incorrect documents have been issued and what has been done about them in the way of sending follow up letters telling the recipients that the erroneous document should be ignored as it has been reversed. This matter is currently being looked into and a letter should be sent to any identified customers that had been affected by this matter, to advise that no action should be taken and that their penalty is closed.

I hope that this information has been of help to you and would like to reassure you that no further action is being taken regarding this penalty.


30 July 2012

We know where you live

http://www.zazzle.co.uk/

Introducing iCasework - the Freedom of Information Case Management System
Tuesday, 10 July 2012 15:08 Schroder, Johnathan

In April 2012 the council began using a new system for managing Freedom of Information (FOI) and Subject Access (SAR) requests. iCasework, the new system, allows for better case management, more consistent responses and greater analysis of statistics. What it wasn't meant to do was to publish the home address of Mr Mustard, cue panic, and the turning off of the publication scheme. You can try it here (click "disclosure log"), is it still unobtainable? Information wasn't meant to be so free.

In conjunction with the new system we have also recently published an FOI Policy, Redaction Policy and FOI Staff Guidance, all available in the Information Governance section of the intranet. Mr Mustard hasn't seen the redaction policy but can paraphrase it for you "Cross out anything useful to the requestor".

FOI Link Officers in each directorate manage the requests but all staff are required to assist with providing appropriate responses. We ask you to read through the policies and make sure you understand your responsibilities. Poor old FOI officers suffer because staff in services often don't give a fig about those pesky blogger requests.

As well as being a statutory requirement, responding to FOI requests is a corporate performance indicator which is reported on quarterly. Link Officers and Assistant Directors meet regularly to analyse the response times and look at ways of improving our responses to customers. Barnet Council frequently fail to meet statutory requirements.

If you receive a request for information that is not just 'business as usual' refer to the policies, speak to your Link Officer or contact the Standards and Information Rights Team for further guidance. What is Business as Usual exactly?

Improvements to the council's information governance mentioned in this newsletter, such as data quality and records management will all help the council to provide better responses to FOI requests more quickly. You can't send a better response to a FOI request. You should simply answer it exactly; there is no room for spin in FOI. The format of the response could be improved. Stop the nonsense of putting the answer in a Word document and instead put it directly into the email.

By the end of this month, the council will also be in a position to publish FOI responses on service-specific sections of the website. Somehow this might now be late.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

24 June 2011

Council Tax - collection failure

Back in March, Mr Mustard blogged about the new Council tax system - he observed that, following a chat with one of his neighbours, he had the suspicion that a number of Council Tax bills had not been issued at all.

I expect you will recall that a number of bills were issued twice


and now Mr Mustard has confirmation that a number of bills were not issued at all, and some have possibly still not been issued but the answer cannot currently be established. Software problems don't you know.
The first rule of credit control, Mr Mustard's specialist subject, is that if you don't send an invoice out it won't get paid. Now this may seem like absolute commonsense to you dear reader but then your brain isn't full of that fluffy OneBarnet nonsense that leaves no room for day to day rational thinking. 

So 138,424 bills should have been issued.

Only 128,380 bills were issued by 31 March 2011 ( that is just under 93% of them )

So that's 10,044 bills not sent out on time. At an average band charge ( D ) of £1,423 that could be £14million of cash flow in jeopardy.

The Council won't know for 2 more weeks how many bills have still not been sent out.

Sadly, many of the ones that have not been issued relate to benefit claimants. Those are the very bills which should be sorted out on time because the affected people, by virtue of their status of being benefit claimants, won't have spare cash with which to catch up with any arrears that build up that they don't know about.

So there we are: "OneBarnet - NoBrain"

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Nick Walkley