City of Sunderland Council Reply

Mr N Heron
48 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NF

Dear Sir

Penalty Charge Notice SX06021491

I refer to your letter of 24 January regarding the above matter. My colleague Ms Waugh who has conduct of this matter is currently on leave and I have therefore personally looked into the situation.

In relation to PCN SX06021491. The Head of Transport and Engineering has advised me that the facts are as follows:

You failed to appeal against the issue of the PCN and as a consequence a Notice to Owner was automatically issued on 25 May 2004 that allows the registered keeper to either pay the charge or challenge the reason why the PCN was issued. No communication was received from you. As a consequence, a charge Certificate was issued on 16 July 2004 informing you that the charge had now automatically increased to £90 and if the charge remained outstanding for a further period of 14 days it could be registered at the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court as a debt and ultimately could be recovered by Bailiffs.

The Charge Certificate was sent out on 16th July 2004 by recorded delivery, reference DT025472425GB. It would appear that the Charge Certificate was not served. Upon checking the history of the recorded delivery via the Royal Mail is confirmed that the Charge Certificate is to be returned to the Council. The Head of Transport and Engineering has requested an explanation from Royal Mail as to why it was unable to be served and why they have delayed in returning this unserved correspondence to the Council. Generally, unless Royal Mail informs the Council to the contrary, all correspondence posted is considered duly served. (I am also informed that Royal Mail labelled “not called for” has returned other notices sent to you).

So far as the legality of the notice is concerned, I would reiterate that the Council is satisfied that it may properly exercise its powers under the Road Traffic Act 1991, without contravening the guarantees in the Bill of Rights 1689, for the reasons set out in my letter of 13 August 2004. I have nothing to add to my previous letter. If you do not accept the Council’s view, it is a matter for you to decide what further action, if any, you wish to take. It is not for me to advise you upon the legal processes available for challenging the Council’s action.

Finally, with regard to your request for information under the Freedom of information Act 2000 the advice was obtained by the Council from Eleanor Sharpston QC of Hailsham Chambers. Your request for a copy of this advice is declined on the ground of legal professional privilege. In this connection due regard has been given to the public interest and it has been concluded that the public interest in maintaining the exemption contained in section 42 of the Act outweighs the public interest in disclosure of the advice. In particular it is considered that: -

The Council has already provided you with a summary of the legal arguments sufficient for you to understand its reasoning.

There is a need in the public interest to ensure that the council is not reluctant to seek legal advice on the proper performance of its functions and to take fully informed decisions on sensitive and difficult issues. If such advice was released into the public domain, this may make the Council reluctant to seek advice and have a full and frank exchange of information with its legal adviser.

The public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of lawyer/client communications is judicially recognised. The House of Lords has said that legal professional privilege is a “fundamental condition on which the administration of justice as a whole operates”.

If you are dissatisfied with the Council’s response to your request for information, you can ask for a review under the Council’s Customer Services Procedure in reply to this letter, or alternatively you may wish to refer to the Council’s Customer Services Manager direct, at PO Box 100, Civic Centre, Sunderland, SR2 7DN, if this fails to resolve your concerns then you have the right to apply to the Information Commissioner for a decision.

Yours faithfully


City Solicitor

c.c Director of Development and Regeneration
Head of Transport and Engineering