Showing posts with label vague locus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label vague locus. Show all posts

12 February 2026

Barnet Council - your number's up

 

Older readers will get the reference to 'come in number x'

This was an odd case although Mr Mustard has now seen a second instance of it in a different borough.

For starters the PCN was for the wrong contravention, it was for code 01 but should have been for code 02 as loading was also banned.

The motorist, Mr D, sent Mr Mustard a copy of the PCN placed on his car windscreen which ended with the numbers 6618. That could not be found on the council computer and so Mr Mustard just kept an eye out to see what would happen next.

A month later Mr D received a Notice to Owner bearing a number ending 6607 for the same set of facts (date, vehicle, location etc).

What you need to know now is that PCNs are issued in sequential series by individual traffic wardens and that the last digit of a PCN is a check digit so the PCNs in this case were 660-7 and 661-8 and thus they had been consecutively issued at the same time.

What had therefore happened was that the traffic warden had decided something was wrong with 660-7 and issued a fresh PCN 661-8 intended to cancel 660-7 but accidentally cancelled 661-8 (or the computer took over and did it).

It was therefore an easy win as 661-8 was never served and Mr Mustard had proof that 660-7 was served.

Mr Mustard made out three arguments in his formal representations to the council.

1    Finchley Road as a description of the location is too vague (the keeper and driver may be different).

2    Loading is banned so the alleged contravention is incorrect.

3    The PCN was not served.

The Notice of Rejection didn't tackle points 1 and 2 and said that the PCN was either placed on the windscreen or given to the driver. It also waffled on about CPZ entry signage which was irrelevant as there was a local sign.

Thus it was an easy decision to start an Appeal at London Tribunals at which time a fourth Ground of Appeal was added which was the Notice of Rejection dated 14 August offered a 50% discount for 14 days from service and 2 days earlier it had already been removed. A council must be as good as their word.

There was no need for a hearing. Faced with an opponent with 4 straight arrows in his quiver the council cancelled the PCN.

The end. 

16 December 2024

City of Westminster: No, No, Yes.

Mr Mustard's client parked in the West End on 8 April 24. Mr Mustard hasn't asked but you really do need a good reason for it to make sense to drive into central London given that we have lots of public transport choices.

He parked in the bay on the right, where the grey van is.


There was a suspension sign in the bay.

Having looked straight across the road the driver could see that he was not opposite the Comedy Store so he stayed where he was and received a PCN.

There isn't a bay opposite the comedy store, only yellow lines.


It was 17 May before Mr Mustard made the informal challenge. The Notice to Owner had not yet been sent and any challenge sent up until then is known as an informal one. The discount had gone but given the factual error Mr Mustard expected a swift cancellation.

He was wrong, the challenge was rejected 4 days later in full denial of the facts. 

Mr Mustard went into standby mode. On 24 June the Notice to Owner was sent.

On 28 June 24 Mr Mustard made the formal representations on the grounds of the vague location.

It took a month, until 28 July 24, for Westminster to again close their eyes to the facts and issue a formal Notice of Rejection which opens the door to the tribunal.

On 18 August 24 Mr Mustard started an Appeal at London Tribunals.

On 19 August Westminster issued a charge certificate rasing the penalty by 50% to £195. That document could not by law be issued until 28 days after service of the 28 July rejection and only then if the penalty is not paid nor an Appeal started.

On 20 August Westminster noted the start of an Appeal.

On 21 August Westminster threw in the towel and cancelled the PCN.

Whether that was because the PCN was without merit or because of the procedural impropriety is not known but Mr Mustard expected to win on the vague location point in any event.

What this history tells you is that if you want to win you need to set your stall out clearly and dig in for the long haul, don't fret about the discount if you have a decent argument. Councils do stuff wrong all of the time.

The end.