Challenging a council issued PCN

[Noodle1982]

about 4 weeks ago i got a ticket for overstaying in a parking bay. 1 hour max with no return within an hour.

On that morning at around 9am i visited the parents and then ran some errands etc and got back around 10.20am

On the ticket it said that my car had been observed from 8.40am to 10.30am. At both times my car was in the parking bay but had been used for over an hour during these two times.

I phoned the council pretty much straight away and was told i can contest it but there will be photographic evidence of tyre valve location to prove that the car hadnt moved. I fancied my odds of the valves being in different locations so lodged a dispute.

I had an email today saying that i was unsuccessful with my dispute and they attached a copy of the parking attendants notes of the day which they are using as proof of the valve locations. No photographic evidence.

One part of me is saying just pay the £25 and be done with it while the stubborn side of me is saying not to give in to the fkers.

If i did carry on contesting it and lost in the long run, i.e court case (if thats the route it goes?) what penalty would i be looking at?

[StuTheGrouch]

Can you prove otherwise?

[Exige77]

I hate people trying to wriggle out of paying their dues, but if it was as you stated, I would definitely pursue it.

[Mandat]

At what time was the PCN issued, as this might be the crux of the case?

[Noodle1982]

As it stands it is my word against theirs and their parking attendant's notes. They originally told me they would have photographic evidence which i was more than happy to view knowing that my car had been used. As of now no photographic evidence has been put forward by themselves.

I've had parking tickets in the past and none of which have i contested as i know that i've been in the wrong. £25 for this ticket isnt going to break the bank but it's more an issue of principle.

The PCN was issued at 10.30am.

[Jimmyarm]

I'm curious as to what a parking attendant uses to measure valve locations and even if they had some contraption to do so it is entirely possible to move the car and for them to be in the same position.

Sounds like bks to me.

Will prove funny if you have some concrete proof the other way OP but I can't see how they could possibly rely on something like that to justify the ticket. The traffic warden should have come back an hour after he first visited !

[Noodle1982]

In his notes it states 'RV5, FV10' which im assuming is rear valve 5 'o'clock, front valve 10 o'clock.

If there was photographic evidence, which i was hoping there was, then id have no issue pursuing this but if it's just my word against theirs there's potential of me coming off a lot worse than the current £25 they are asking for.

[Nasty Doorman]

have a look...i have used this....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gkiw7zpULo

[mel]

Buy an Alpina and mess with their heads.

[mikeveal]

That's not proof. Using that notation scheme there's a 1 in 144 (12*12) chance that the valves will be in the same location, which probably translates to one or two erroneous tickets per day per warden.

[hacksaw]

Is there anywhere you went to run errands that could vouch for you? A receipt perhaps from somewhere else to prove you were not there at the time?

[mikeN54]

Can you not get any evidence / CCTV of your vehicle being elsewhere during the time in question?

I'ts only £25 but worth the effort if you're not guilty.

[speedking31]

mikeveal said:

That's not proof. Using that notation scheme there's a 1 in 144 (12*12) chance that the valves will be in the same location, which probably translates to one or two erroneous tickets per day per warden.

Why make it so complicated? He might as well have written that the car was in the same position relative to the white lines, or the same distance from the kerb. Just because he's written "No change" means nothing.