Annual Parking Report 2022

PCNs will normally only be cancelled in response to a challenge or appeal, although some may be cancelled if the council realises straight away that they were wrongly issued. The reasons for cancelling PCNs fall into three broad categories: 

• those which were incorrectly issued in the first place;  
• those where evidence has come to light later that circumstances existed when the PCN was issued which were entirely beyond the driver's control and which forced them to park where they did; or  
• those where the council is satisfied, based on satisfactory evidence provided by the person making the appeal, that there were mitigating circumstances sufficient to justify the cancelling the PCN, even though it was correctly issued. 

There is a right of appeal in respect of every PCN the Council issues, but there is a process to follow. Any such challenge or appeal must be submitted in writing (letter or email).

There are effectively three opportunities to challenge a PCN:

• an informal challenge, prior to the issue of a "Notice to Owner"
• a formal challenge (or "Representations") after the issue of a Notice to Owner (which cannot be sent out until at least 28 days after the PCN was issued)
• an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT) against a "Notice of Rejection of Representations" issued by the council.

(In relation to PCNs issued by post, the first of these stages does not apply because the PCN takes the place of the Notice to Owner.)

The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 set out the grounds upon which the council must cancel a PCN where it is satisfied that one or more of the grounds applies. To maintain the integrity of the process, the Council will expect the person making the appeal to submit acceptable supporting documentary evidence where such grounds of appeal are relied upon. A summary of those grounds follows, but it necessarily does not contain all of the information set out in the law. For the actual legal grounds, please consult the regulations: 

• The alleged contravention did not occur; 
• You were not the owner of the vehicle in question at the time;  
• The vehicle had been taken and parked there without your consent;  
• You are a vehicle-hire firm and the hirer acknowledged liability for any Penalty Charge Notice issued during the hiring period;  
• The penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances;  
• There has been a procedural impropriety by Gateshead Council;  
• The Traffic Regulation Order was invalid;  
• The penalty charge due has already been paid.

In addition, the Council will consider any other compelling reasons submitted to it in support of an appeal. Once again, we would expect to see acceptable documentary evidence in support of such reasons.  

Whilst Representations to the Council and Appeals to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal are statutory processes, informal challenges are not. The council introduced informal challenges to deal more speedily with PCNs which we agree were obviously incorrectly issued, or where we accept that there were circumstances entirely beyond the driver's control. However, the informal challenge process is not intended to deal with special circumstances or arguments involving mitigation; these are intended to be dealt with during formal Representations or Appeals.  

By definition, CPE operates under civil law, not criminal law. Cases are therefore decided "on the balance of probabilities" based on the available evidence (as opposed to "beyond reasonable doubt", which is the standard of evidence required in criminal cases).  

In all cases where the Traffic Penalty Tribunal has ruled against the Council (and sometimes when their decisions are in our favour) a review is conducted to see what lessons can be learned from the decision. We are particularly keen to learn whether the decisions were specific to the case concerned or whether they have wider implications for the council (such as lines or signs at a particular location needing to be changed).  

However, unlike the decisions of the Courts, Tribunal decisions are not binding on Adjudicators in subsequent cases. It is not always easy, therefore, to apply the lessons of one case to future ones. The Parking Adjudicators who decide appeals are qualified lawyers appointed by the Lord Chancellor and are totally independent of local authorities.  

Further information about the work of the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, including the appeals process, example cases and various reports and statistics, can be found on the Tribunal's website.