‘Municipal functions are used as a means to collect funds from the public, to the benefit of the council and its agents, disguised as parking or traffic control’

• ON June 27 2021 I parked on Cloudesley Road Zone B.

— I was issued PCN, penalty charge notice, [number provided].

— The alleged offence was code 01, parking in a restricted street.

— Islington Council’s website shows that parking on that road at that time and day of the week is not restricted.

I asked for the PCN to be cancelled.

— Weeks later I received a letter from Islington Council, with a photo that showed the tail of my car overhanging a yellow line.

According to them, this validated the PCN.

— I replied that there are several contravention codes for that offence, but 01, the only code on the PCN, was not one of them.

The same PCN can’t be extended to cover two separate offences, several weeks after the alleged event.

— I wrote to the councillors in my ward, and to the leader of Islington Council, including copies of the evidence on their website confirming that the penalty had been incorrectly issued. They refused to act.

— In the course of these exchanges Islington failed to reply within the period they set. Their reason was that Covid-19 had delayed their correspondence.

— My objection was eventually rejected, so I referred the case to London Tribunals, which has now confirmed the PCN.

I had no option but to pay the fine, otherwise, I would have to apply to the High Court for a judicial review, which would cost me tens of thousands of pounds.

— The tribunal acknowledges I made many representations at different times against the PCN, but I did not follow the correct procedure. I was supposed to reply to a Notice of Rejection (which I did not receive) within a limited period.

— It would seem that Islington Council is therefore free to issue PCNs that grossly fail to comply with the rules without affecting their right to profit from that error (that could well be intentional), while any error by the applicant when appealing against a manifest breach of rights, invalidates their case.

Islington’s failures in their communications, their delays or lack of reply, are not relevant.

Because of demographics and civic laziness, Islington has become a one-party system, with a self-perpetuating clique in power, effectively invulnerable to democratic control.

Municipal functions are used as a means to collect funds from the public, to the benefit of the council and its agents, disguised as parking or traffic control.

GUILL GIL, N1