Reply With QuoteYou'd wish.
If the ticket is otherwise valid I'd counsel paying it... Before they fold your defence into an 'illegal display of registration mark'!
Mike.
My sister-in-law has a private reg on her car. She has an "A" in her surname and the private reg contains her surname but with the "A" substituted for a "4".
She got a parking ticket the other day but the warden input her reg with the "4" as an "A".
Therefore the registration on the PCN is incorrect. Albeit only by one character but it's still wrong.
Where does she stand on it? Surely that makes the PCN invalid?
You'd wish.
If the ticket is otherwise valid I'd counsel paying it... Before they fold your defence into an 'illegal display of registration mark'!
Mike.
I would think it's invalid, unless she's messed with the number plate (spacing/characters) so that the '4' looks like an 'A'.
If she has I'd just pay up, could be further trouble and presumably she is guilty after all.
edit - as Mike said!
Originally Posted by miked10270
Sorry, I didn't explain particularly clearly. Her reg is valid, basically her surname is CA*** and her reg is C4***.
So yes, clearly the ticket was intended for her but the parking attendant input it as CA***. Which is the wrong registration.
As said if the reg plate has been messed about with then pay it.
If not the the ticket is invalid as my friend who had a red Mitsubishi FTO (with a rather garish body kit on it) received a ticket and the car was described as a ferrari.
He challenged it and was told as long as the plate was correct them the ticket stood, so from that we took it that if the plate is incorrect then the ticket is invalid.
Was she parked illegally? If so, she should pay up.
*IMHO*
The registration plate might not be illegally displayed, in which case I'd be inclined to expect that the ticket would be invalid.
Surely the issuer would always check the reg. on the tax disk anyway, and that means they got it wrong. The DVLA check will bring up a different vehicle/owner etc, if it's run through the way the issuer wrote it out (or typed it out).
I know it's not my ticket and I've nothing to lose by offering an opinion, but I personally would think there's a case for ignoring it.
Good luck, whatever you decide to do...
Last edited by pinpull; 6th March 2013 at 12:03.
Ticket is invalid and should be cancelled. 5 mins on google should chuck up chapter and verse from pepipoo.com
If they can find the registered owner (how I wonder!) then the notice to owner will arrive in due course and you can challenge it on basis of invalidity.
Ignore the suggestions that you have some moral duty to pay it. Theresa no moral duty to assist the council in its ruthless fund raising. They got it wrong: their problem.
She was parked on double yellows! But it was in a place where lots of people park 99% of the time with no tickets issued. Also no one likes paying parking tickets so she was just hoping this was a "get out of jail free" card!!
My feeling also is there is probably a case for ignoring it.
The registration plate is displayed correctly and is legal.
So she was either singled out (unlikely) or she just got unlucky, if the plate hasnt been messed with then the warden has made an error, however if you dont pay up a reminder will probably drop thru the letter box anyhow, so if/when that happens, then payup.
Will they be able to trace her easily?
So you are saying that the PCN states a different registration to the car it was attached to?
Ignore it.
I would be inclined to put the reg No on the ticket into, say we buy any car and see what car it relates to, if any.
When the ticket is not payed someone will input the reg into Swansea to trace the owner of said car and send them a letter.
very unfortunate but I doubt you will hear another thing and some poor unsuspecting sole with the reg on your ticket will have to explain that its not their car, as it will not match the description on the ticket.
Cheers,
Ben
..... for I have become the Jedi of flippers
" an extravagance is anything you buy that is of no earthly use to your wife "
Dunno?
Lifes a bit of a gamble sometimes.
If its a council issued ticket, they will find you and demand payment - it'll take ages and they'll probably get their money in the end (or just re-issue the ticket with the corrected plate?).
Sheesh. There's no shortage of authoritative ignorance around.
If you are in England: A PCN is required by law to state the registration number of the offending vehicle. See: The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 para 1 c of the Schedule:Contents of a penalty charge notice served under regulation 9
1. A penalty charge notice served under regulation 9 must, in addition to the matters required to be included in it by regulation 3(2) of the Representations and Appeals Regulations, state—
(a)the date on which the notice is served;
(b)the name of the enforcement authority;
(c)the registration mark of the vehicle involved in the alleged contravention;
(d)the date and the time at which the alleged contravention occurred;
(e)the grounds on which the civil enforcement officer serving the notice believes that a penalty charge is payable;
(f)the amount of the penalty charge;
(g)that the penalty charge must be paid not later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the penalty charge notice was served;
(h)that if the penalty charge is paid not later than the last day of the period of 14 days beginning with the date on which the notice is served, the penalty charge will be reduced by the amount of any applicable discount;
(i)the manner in which the penalty charge must be paid; and
(j)that if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the period of 28 days referred to in subparagraph (g), a notice to owner may be served by the enforcement authority on the owner of the vehicle.
The council cannot rectify its mistake by serving another PCN which has the correct number because this is not one of the lawful reasons available to the council to serve a PCN by post.
Accordingly, keep the original PCN safe and produce it before the adjudicator if the council wants to take it all the way. You will win.
Edit: link to the legislation if you want it: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2.../contents/made
Last edited by Josh B; 6th March 2013 at 13:36.
Slightly different, but a friend of mine avoided paying a parking fine because the make/model of the vehicle was incorrect on the notice.
In this case, if it was me, I’d ignore it and see what happens. I think the chances of being traced are very slim.
So what? She was parked illegally..if she doesn't like paying parking tickets she shouldn't have parked there. Just 'cause others get away with it doesn't make it ok.
See that's the thing about the law - she wasn't obeying it but neither was the council. Now go moralise down in the bear pit eh?
She broke the law, the council made a mistake.
no. the facts of both are identical. the law was not complied with. your comment goes to intention.
i know many councils ruthlessly use parking law to rake in money and instruct wardens to ticket relentlessly safe in the knowledge that most people just pay up. so frankly if you want to get into intentions there is every chance that the council's are a damn sight more cynical than parking as described. furthermore, the council wishes to extract money from a citizen - the obligation therefore lies on them not the other way round.
now watch out for splinters. i hear high horses can be dangerous.
Are you able to interact with anyone at all in a non confrontational,ie polite, way? Don't bother with a reply. I already know the answer plus i'm not at all interested.
Perhaps the warden/council decided to play along with her silly game and misrepresent the letters and numbers on her ticket.
A lot of wardens take photos of the cars these days, if they did then they will see the error and amend.
Cheers..
Jase
I've noticed the wardens in my area taking photos of late.
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
The council did not break any law by making a mistake on a form.
says he while having a sanctimonous go at the OPs sister in law a couple posts up.
parker did not park where she should have. warden did not fill in form as he should have. both actions require compliance with law. arguably warden's act is worse as he broke the law in seeking to enforce it. we could pedant this out all afternoon!
^ What Josh has said...over, and over and over again, the mind boggles, it really does!
The motorist chose to deliberately flout the law by parking on double yellow lines, probably because other people do/were. The warden made a mistake filling a form. Can't see how the first is worse than the second.
What law has the warden broken anyway - if he 'broke the law' presumably he could be prosecuted?
So are you suggesting that s/he doesn't have to adhere to the same law s/he is employed to enforce?!?!
Not every breach of law opens one to prosecution. In this case the consequence is that the ticket is unenforceable. that's what the law says and its there to protect the motorist.
You are apparently imputing an intention to the OP's sister in law that i'm not sure can be done fairly (although the OP does explain that many people do in fact park there that does not an intention make.)
If we want to impute intentions I copuld suggest that the warden was in a rush to hit his quota or ticket the next guy so did not take the care that is required.
the law says put the correct details in. he did not do so. now lets not get daft about this - i can see the point you are making which is that the parking appears (but may not have been) a deliberate act whereas the warden's failure was presumably a failure to act with the requisite care and attention. Negligence van be worse than a deliberate act - its all about context rather than a concrete rule whereby acts are always worse than ommissions.
Remarkable that there are judgments being made on the driver for a car parking infringement.
And then also calling into the question the 'legality' of a parking warden who made an honest mistake writing the said ticket.
The mind boggles!!!
Not at all, I'm just arguing that the warden has not broken the law. Probably has not been properly enforced but that is not the same.
Leaving aside the morality of unlawful parking there is a simple choice.
1. Pay parking fine; cost £30 and five minutes on council website.
2. Ignore ticket. Spend hours in correspondence & with solicitor defending same along with unlawful registration mark display. Lose parking case when Magistrate says the car was parked there. Cost £60 full fine, risk of registration mark fine, plus solicitors bill and hours in correspondence and court appearances.
Traffic Wardens departments and local authorities have A LOT more experience fighting this stuff than you do.
Mike.
I appreciate that and despite what I've said I'm sure it's not something you'd advocate; my statement was somewhat rhetorical, but the fact is s/he has not complied with one of, if not THE key piece of legislation that is required for him or her to do their job:
Irrespective of decency, ethics, morality...etc. this loophole, a word which wrongly suggests that there is some kind of underhanded trickery involved, exists to be used by all until such time as the powers that be see fit to amend the legislation...END OF.The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 para 1 c of the Schedule:Contents of a penalty charge notice served under regulation 9
1. A penalty charge notice served under regulation 9 must, in addition to the matters required to be included in it by regulation 3(2) of the Representations and Appeals Regulations, state—
(a) the date on which the notice is served;
(b) the name of the enforcement authority;
(c) the registration mark of the vehicle involved in the alleged contravention;
(d) the date and the time at which the alleged contravention occurred;
(e) the grounds on which the civil enforcement officer serving the notice believes that a penalty charge is payable;
(f) the amount of the penalty charge;
(g) that the penalty charge must be paid not later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the penalty charge notice was served;
(h) that if the penalty charge is paid not later than the last day of the period of 14 days beginning with the date on which the notice is served, the penalty charge will be reduced by the amount of any applicable discount;
(i) the manner in which the penalty charge must be paid; and
(j) that if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the period of 28 days referred to in subparagraph (g), a notice to owner may be served by the enforcement authority on the owner of the vehicle.
this is the attitude that many people adopt and it's perfectly understandable. Councils rely on it in not training wardens properly, outsourcing to the cheapest contractor and generally acting with complete disregard for the tax payers who park in their boroughs.
Ordinary tickets (not issued by the police) do not go to court to fight but rather to an adjudicator. One does not need a solicitor. Just the ability to read and the will not to be screwed.
Now I'm not advocating illegal parking. I'm very careful and try to be considerate of all other road users. I reckon one or two tickets a year is just part if the cost if motoring. If I'm genuinely wrong then sure, just pay up and move on. But if there's even a hint of a way out its generally worth fighting purely for entertainment and the satisfaction of beating the b***tards at their own game.
Have a look at this very helpful website which may well assist you
Really...
If (assuming it goes that far) the adjudicator does not find in your favor the worst that can happen at this point is that you'll be asked to pay the full charge outlined on the original PCN.
...?
Last edited by MST; 6th March 2013 at 18:33.
I dont know about parking tickets, but I think I read on PePiPoo that if 'the establishment' make a error of this nature for a speeding nip and similar is does NOT invalidate the ticket and they can amend it at a future date... I would imagine this might be the same scenario ...
I dont think you have got much to lose by not paying it until if and when they amend the reg number on some future correspondence.......
Cheers..
Jase
I'm pretty sure that all they have to do is officially contest the ticket in writing to the issuing authority within a certain amount of time stating their reasons why it is invalid.
Good point well made!
What he said. The only thing to add to the above post in order to finally put this to bed is that the first paragraph clearly stated "A. Penalty charge served under regulation 9 MUST"
The OP's sister-in-law's registration was not on the ticket therefore the ticket is invalid.
The rights and wrongs of parking on a double yellow line are irrelevant!
Unless they have a photo, they won't be able to send follow up correspondence to your sis in law as the registration number will lead to a different car....
Cheers..
Jase
If the counsel are in the wrong then your sister should not pay. If the roles were reversed and your sister had been given a PCN incorrectly the council would do everything they could to screw your sister.
Sod them. If they made a mistake, that's their problem.
I don't follow. What silly game?
I think some people have misunderstood the number plate issue and think your sis in law has altered spacing and tweaked the letters to make it look like something it's not.. Which you have pointed out she hasn't..
Last edited by JasonM; 7th March 2013 at 08:32.
Cheers..
Jase
I got a parking ticket in my wife's 2005 Mini Cooper S. The ticket said something like "Manufacturer : BMW. Model : Mini Cooper S" on it.
I disputed the ticket on the grounds that the manufacturer was "Mini" and not "BMW". I also quoted the V5 and my VED renewal paperwork (neither of which mention BMW anywhere).
My appeal was successful and I didn't have to pay for the ticket.
(Obligatory watch content: I was parked while I went to meet somebody who had advertised a watch for sale on Gumtree. The watch was, unfortunately, an obvious fake!)
Right, I see.
Just to clarify, the number plate is completely kosher. Unlike my use of the English language to describe it!
Anyway, thanks for all the comments. Mostly useful. My advice to her was, based on what seems like the majority here, is that she will probably get some kind of reminder based on the fact that the attendant did take pictures of the car, but that she would probably get away with it if it went all the way to arbitration because the ticket is ultimately incorrect. That is if she can be bothered with the hassle if it does come back to her.
Suggests that the ticketing system needs to be simplified. No need for so much detail and scope for human error. More of those roving number-plate recognition cars?
Posting Permissions
