Rochdale's ship ready to sink

12 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NA

14th October 2005
Mr. Kevin Mayor,
Parking Enforcement,
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council,
PO Box 39,
Municipal Offices,
Smith Street,
Rochdale
OL16 1LQ Email: council@rochdale.gov.uk Copy also by Recorded Delivery

Re: Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council:Decriminalised Parking Enforcement (DPE) Regime

Dear Mr. Mayor,

Further to our telephone conversation 12.30pm Friday 14th October 2005 I would be grateful if you can confirm and clarify the following:

1. You stated that (regarding the incorrect wording on the Penalty Charge Notices) that you had taken advice from consultants, Argonaut on the matter and that there was nothing wrong with the PCNs which contained the wording 'To the Driver of the Vehicle'. You then stated that it was not a written opinion on the legality of the PCNs but an informal opinion. When questioned further you stated that the opinion was not from Argonaut but from someone whose name you refused to disclose.
Can you please advise as to whose informal opinion you were referring to regarding the legality of the PCNs and under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 can you please provide any records of that opinion?
Or can you confirm that no such opinion exists? If it is the latter, I would be grateful for a written apology for making a misleading statement.

2. You inform me that you have no website informing the public as to the nature, location and extent of Rochdale Council's DPE regime, and it will not be in place for possibly another six months. Can you please advise as to why this was not considered necessary prior to the commencement of DPE and confirm that this is an unacceptable state of affairs?

3. Can you please supply a copy of the Audit Report you referred to detailing this failure to provide information?

I would be grateful for the answers to a number of further questions (please treat as a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 wherever necessary):

4. Can you please advise as to the exact date when Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council began their Decriminalised Parking Enforcement Regime?

5. Can you please advise as to when and how it was brought to your attention that Rochdale Borough Council's Penalty Charge Notices were incorrectly worded?

6. How many Penalty Charge Notices have been issued from the inception to date?

7. How many PCNs were issued with the incorrect wording:
"TO: THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE SHOWN BELOW"
and can you please confirm the amount of income derived from these unlawful PCNs?

8. How many of these incorrectly worded PCNs have ended with enforcement action by bailiffs?

10. Have you now changed the wording? If so, can you please advise as to when and please supply a copy of both pre and post decision PCNs?

11. Can you please confirm that all of the PCNs issued with the above incorrect wording are 'void and unenforceable'?
In order to assist you with this I have copied below an NPAS decision from 25th May 2000

Mr. C v Hastings Borough Council Case Number: HS0013

The effect of a Council disregarding the statutory providsions set down in the Road Traffic Act 1991 for notices and time limits was considered in Moulder v Sutton London Borough Council (1994 LPAS 1940113243). The Adjudicator, G.R. Hickinbottom, following Sedley J.'s (as he then was) judgment in R -v- The London Borough of Tower Hamlets and the Tower Hamlets Combined Traders Association, (1993 unreported) determined where the Road Traffic Act 1991 stipulated that (in the Moulder case) a Penalty Charge Notice "must state certain requirements (Section 66(3)), those requirements are mandatory. Therefore a Penalty Charge Notice failing to contain each of the requirements set down in section 66(3) is void and unenforceable.

Since Paragraph 1(2) of Schedule 6 of the Acts sets out the requirements to be contained in a Notice to Owner in the identical words, namely,
"A notice to owner must state",
it follows that the requirements are mandatory.
Any Notice to Owner that does not comply with those requirements is void and unenforceable.

12. In the Rochdale Observer (4th October 2005) you were quoted as saying, "Since DPE was introduced in Rochdale, the ultimate liability has always been with the registered keeper of the vehicle. There has never been a fixed legal wording of notices." (my emphasis).
Can you confirm that this statement in bold type is incorrect?

13. You then go on to say, "Penalty Charge Notices issued before this time have been accepted by the National Parking Adjudication Service."
Can you please provide details of the following:
(i) The number of PCNs which have been appealed to NPAS and their outcomes?
(ii) Whether the incorrect PCN was included in the evidence bundle from Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
(iii) Can you please confirm that Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council received the 'Recommendations/Guidelines’ that NPAS have issued to all local authorities since the inception of NPAS, and can you please provide a copy?
(iv) Can you please confirm how many tickets have been refunded to date and the amount?

14. Can you confirm that steps will now be taken to immediately refund all the money obtained unlawfully by contacting the motorists directly and issuing notices to the press and media?

15. Can you please confirm that Rochdale Metropolitan Borough's Treasurer will be informed that there are unlawful items of income contained in the Council's accounts, and confirm the amount, and provision will be made to ring-fence this unlawful income in order to protect the monies to be refunded?

16. Can you please advise as to whether the DPE application made to the Department for Transport to create Statutory Instrument 2004 No. 1402 'The Road Traffic (Permitted Parking Area and Special Parking Area) (Metropolitan Borough of Rochdale) Order 2004' included a copy of the proposed PCN?

17. Can you confirm whether there was an inspection carried out of all the relevant Traffic Regulation Orders, signs lines and plates and proposed PCNs prior to the implementation of Decriminalised Parking Enforcement? If so by whom, and were all the recommendations acted upon?

18. Can you please confirm receipt of this e-mail and confirm that you will provide the Chief Executive, Treasurer, Head of Legal Services and the Leader of the Council with a copy along with all of Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council's councillors?

I hope that Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council accepts full responsibility for its actions without the need for a protracted internal or external investigation involving the expenditure of more public money and look forward to Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council doing 'the decent thing.'

I look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely,

Neil Herron

cc. Andrew Barfoot, Tribunals Manager NPAS
cc. Katie Hopton / Bethan Dorset, Rochdale Observer
cc. Christopher Booker, Sunday Telegraph
cc. Joseph McHugh, Deputy News Editor, Public Finance