We received two Bailiff correspondences for PCNs that were issued more than 3-years ago in Hammersmith & Fulham. Although we have successfully appealed and have been granted the cancellation of these charges by the Northampton Clearing Court due to the fact that we both moved house and changed car more than three years ago and never received any further correspondence from H&F even though we were paying for a mail re-direction service, H&F have now issued new notice to owner certificates without the opportunity to pay at the discounted rate.
Is it legal for H&F to re-open a PCN after such an unreasonable long period of time?
H&F have conceded that they have not pursued this matter in the interim and the reason that it went to bailiff was that when they re-opened the case earlier this year, they were writing to an old address for a vehicle that we have not owned for more than 3-years.
We had some charges that were overturned by Northampton from other Councils for PCNs issued a few months before who either cancelled the PCN altogether or re-issued the original charge allowing the discounted rate.
There appears to be a wholly inconsistent approach by the individual Councils
Is it legal for H&F to re-open a PCN after such an unreasonable long period of time?
H&F have conceded that they have not pursued this matter in the interim and the reason that it went to bailiff was that when they re-opened the case earlier this year, they were writing to an old address for a vehicle that we have not owned for more than 3-years.
We had some charges that were overturned by Northampton from other Councils for PCNs issued a few months before who either cancelled the PCN altogether or re-issued the original charge allowing the discounted rate.
There appears to be a wholly inconsistent approach by the individual Councils
Comment