Is double dating necessary? The recent debate over the need to include a 'date of issue' on PCNs is worthwhile, but councils, adjudicators and legislators should not lose their sense of perspective

摘要

Three London boroughs saw appeals against penalties their attendants had issued upheld by independent adjudicators after it was decided that the tickets did not make the date of issue clear. The Parking and Traffic Appeals Service (PATAS) found in favour of motorists who had challenged penalty charge notice (PCNs) issued by Barnet, Lambeth and Tower Hamlets. The PaTAS adjudicators noted that that the absence of the words "Date of issue" on the PCNs meant that drivers might not know how long they had left to pay the ticket. Lambeth, Tower Hamlets and others are revising the design of their PCNs to include both a date of contravention and of issue. However, Barnet has said it wants a review of the adjudicator's decision. There is thus much interest among other boughs as to whether or not 'the date of issue' has to appear on a PCN or not. It thus seems timely to consider some of the key issues involved. The law is clear in that the 'date of issue' is not specifically mentioned in Road Traffic Act 1991 (RTA 91), where the terminology is 'date of notice'. Barnet has drawn attention to a judgment by Martin Woods, the chief adjudicator of Parking and Traffic Appeals Service (PATAS), who undertook an extremely lengthy analysis of the wording in the case of Al's Bar and Restaurant vs London Borough of Wandsworth. Woods did not apparently specifically state that the words "Date of issue" needed to be included.