PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Traffic adjudicators , Split from original thread
4101
post Sun, 4 Feb 2018 - 15:50
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (Neil B @ Sun, 4 Feb 2018 - 13:38) *
QUOTE (Optima_5123 @ Sun, 4 Feb 2018 - 01:12) *
Guys please I would really appreciate some specific replies

That coming immediately after #29 and #30 I'm so glad I didn't reply in the early
hours when I read it.

If you don't understand points made or what you might glean from previous Tribunal cases
then ask questions.

QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sun, 4 Feb 2018 - 11:16) *
I suggest otherwise. 4101 is probably right the council will not cancel, but adjudicators like to see consistence so your reps should cover all points you intend to appeal on, even if only briefly

+1 and he's not right: See post #24.

The only exception I've found so far is hugely in OP's favour.

and there are further implications (Mick?) where they routinely issue the two and almost always only contest
one.
No, it must be only reject one because I'm not seeing DNCs in Register.



So what not write the reps. for him? You have all the answers to assure acceptance it seems.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 38)
Advertisement
post Sun, 4 Feb 2018 - 15:50
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
4101
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 16:46
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 16:28) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 16:22) *
.......I have done over 30 personal hearings. I doubt you have done any judging by your attitude. Adjs. are not children.


But they are human and quite capable of being peed off.
My record at hearings is simple, been there, done it, got the tee shirt and not lost.
But I have never gone in with a strategy that is guaranteed to wind up an adjudicator.

Ad Hominem.... ain't started yet.
But will if you want to make accusations of that nature.

My suggestion stands.
If you want to test obtuse points, get your own PCN to test with.
But stop risking and confusing other people's cases. Along with their chances of winning and their money.



Adjs. hear appeals all day, they dont get 'peed off', its their job. Can you name a single case where this has happened?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 17:52
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,817
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 16:46) *
........Adjs. hear appeals all day, they dont get 'peed off', its their job. Can you name a single case where this has happened?


Yes
But you are diverting from your own point.
Assuming that you (or anyone) persuades an adjudicator that they have no power to hear a case or make a decision relating to a PCN, what happens next?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 17:58
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,872
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



Keep it civil folks.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 18:23
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,746
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 16:22) *
I have done over 30 personal hearings.

Apart it having been clear for ages that you never learnt anything from them, presumably
these were necessary because you followed your own erroneous advice, that you've
frequently spouted here: That all cases can only be resolved at Tribunal?
Ppprrrhhhhww. You really are hopeless. Must try harder.

Meanwhile; Mods can you possibly split this off into the Flame Pit ?

We've seemingly lost the OP through this nonsense and bang on their deadline day to make
reps if they want to preserve the discount.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 19:54
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 17:52) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 16:46) *
........Adjs. hear appeals all day, they dont get 'peed off', its their job. Can you name a single case where this has happened?


Yes
But you are diverting from your own point.
Assuming that you (or anyone) persuades an adjudicator that they have no power to hear a case or make a decision relating to a PCN, what happens next?



I am not diverting from anything, if there is no adj. then there can be no appeal, therefore the charges cannot be collected. I would have thought that much is obvious. If the charges had been paid then there OP would have a problem.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/...raph/10/enacted
10(1)Functions of traffic adjudicators under this Schedule shall be discharged by the persons who are appointed as parking adjudicators under section 73 of the Road Traffic Act 1991.

As that section has been repealed, how are TAs appointed? Simple question, do you have any answer? Seems not.

I expect there is a provision somewhere else which no one knows about.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 20:16
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,367
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



All you do is direct to section 73 of the 91 act where does it say its repealed?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 20:24
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,872
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



Ss. 69-74A repealed (E.W.) (31.3.2008) by Traffic Management Act 2004 (c. 18), s. 99(1), Sch. 12 Pt. 1; S.I. 2007/2053, arts. 1(2), 3(1)(2)(h)(ii) (with arts. 4-8) (as amended (17.3.2008) by S.I. 2008/757, arts. 3, 5); S.I. 2007/3174, art. 2, Sch.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 20:42
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,367
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



Think this is what is needed please advise if I'm wrong

he Traffic Management Act 2004 (Commencement No. 5 and Transitional Provisions) (England) (Amendment) Order 2008

8(4)(b) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/757/article/5/made
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 21:14
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,817
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 19:54) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 17:52) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 16:46) *
........Adjs. hear appeals all day, they dont get 'peed off', its their job. Can you name a single case where this has happened?


Yes
But you are diverting from your own point.
Assuming that you (or anyone) persuades an adjudicator that they have no power to hear a case or make a decision relating to a PCN, what happens next?



I am not diverting from anything, if there is no adj. then there can be no appeal, therefore the charges cannot be collected. .........


Agreed the charges cannot be collected.
But, this does not cancel the PCN or remove liability from the applicant, it simply leaves the PCN in limbo until such a time as the situation is rectified.
Which I suspect would be fairly quickly should your point be valid.
So I ask again, what happens next ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 23:31
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 20:24) *
Ss. 69-74A repealed (E.W.) (31.3.2008) by Traffic Management Act 2004 (c. 18), s. 99(1), Sch. 12 Pt. 1; S.I. 2007/2053, arts. 1(2), 3(1)(2)(h)(ii) (with arts. 4-8) (as amended (17.3.2008) by S.I. 2008/757, arts. 3, 5); S.I. 2007/3174, art. 2, Sch.



This is correct.

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 21:14) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 19:54) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 17:52) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 16:46) *
........Adjs. hear appeals all day, they dont get 'peed off', its their job. Can you name a single case where this has happened?


Yes
But you are diverting from your own point.
Assuming that you (or anyone) persuades an adjudicator that they have no power to hear a case or make a decision relating to a PCN, what happens next?



I am not diverting from anything, if there is no adj. then there can be no appeal, therefore the charges cannot be collected. .........


Agreed the charges cannot be collected.
But, this does not cancel the PCN or remove liability from the applicant, it simply leaves the PCN in limbo until such a time as the situation is rectified.
Which I suspect would be fairly quickly should your point be valid.
So I ask again, what happens next ?



What happens next is that reps. are made and if rejected he lodges an appeal. The appeal would then proceed as normal.

The first ground of appeal is to RESPECTFULLY question the jurisdiction of a TA to hear the appeal. No doubt the TA would answer this with a stroke of the pen and my argument would collapse. I repeat that there is probably a transitional SI which covers this. However, this is not mentioned on the LT website.

If you know what it is, Im all ears. Try to keep you comments civil, or I will simply withdraw. Thank you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 23:50
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 20:42) *
Think this is what is needed please advise if I'm wrong

he Traffic Management Act 2004 (Commencement No. 5 and Transitional Provisions) (England) (Amendment) Order 2008

8(4)(b) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/757/article/5/made



I think you are right,

Traffic Adjudicators
10(1)Functions of traffic adjudicators under this Schedule shall be discharged by the persons who are appointed as adjudicators under regulation 17 of the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 (S.I. 2007/3483).
“(2) The Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators) (London) Regulations 1993 shall (despite the repeal of section 73(11) and (12) of the Road Traffic Act 1991, under which the Regulations were made) continue in force for the purpose of applying to proceedings before traffic adjudicators under this Act, and for that purpose section 73(11) to (13) shall continue to have effect.
(3)Regulations 12(6) and (7) (reports by adjudicators and joint committee), 19 (power to require attendance and production of documents) and 25 (recovery of amount payable under an adjudication) of the Bus Lane Contraventions (Penalty Charges, Adjudication and Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2005 shall apply—
(a)to traffic adjudicators as they apply to adjudicators appointed under those Regulations; and
(b)to the Joint Committee as they apply to the Joint Committee appointed pursuant to those Regulations,
but regulation 25 of those Regulations shall not apply to a penalty charge under section 4 of this Act which remains payable following an adjudication under this Schedule


When is the transitional period?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 09:00
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,872
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 23:31) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 20:24) *
Ss. 69-74A repealed (E.W.) (31.3.2008) by Traffic Management Act 2004 (c. 18), s. 99(1), Sch. 12 Pt. 1; S.I. 2007/2053, arts. 1(2), 3(1)(2)(h)(ii) (with arts. 4-8) (as amended (17.3.2008) by S.I. 2008/757, arts. 3, 5); S.I. 2007/3174, art. 2, Sch.



This is correct


I know.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 09:13
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,746
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 09:00) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 23:31) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 20:24) *
Ss. 69-74A repealed (E.W.) (31.3.2008) by Traffic Management Act 2004 (c. 18), s. 99(1), Sch. 12 Pt. 1; S.I. 2007/2053, arts. 1(2), 3(1)(2)(h)(ii) (with arts. 4-8) (as amended (17.3.2008) by S.I. 2008/757, arts. 3, 5); S.I. 2007/3174, art. 2, Sch.



This is correct


I know.

Oddly, 4101 said it wasn't when previously posted.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 10:13
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,817
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 23:31) *
.......What happens next is that reps. are made and if rejected he lodges an appeal. The appeal would then proceed as normal.

The first ground of appeal is to RESPECTFULLY question the jurisdiction of a TA to hear the appeal. No doubt the TA would answer this with a stroke of the pen and my argument would collapse. I repeat that there is probably a transitional SI which covers this. However, this is not mentioned on the LT website.

If you know what it is, Im all ears. Try to keep you comments civil, or I will simply withdraw. Thank you.


If I have been uncivil, I am sure the mods here will pull me on it.
Of course you may think that I am being uncivil and withdraw, that is your right.
However, disagreeing with you is not as far as I know, uncivil

However again, you are diverting from your original premise.
That started with that adjudicators have no lawful standing.
So when at appeal, the adjudicator presumably disbars themselves.
Leaving the PCN in limbo.

Or, as you say, at a stroke of a pen, declines your point and finds on the PCN on other grounds.

So again I ask, what happens next ?

There are two scenarios, one where the adjudicator agrees with you, one where they don't.

What happens next in each scenario ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wretched Rectum
post Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 16:02
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 117
Joined: 4 Mar 2014
Member No.: 69,189



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 23:50) *
When is the transitional period?


It is defined here
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Sat, 10 Feb 2018 - 01:04
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (Neil B @ Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 09:13) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 09:00) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 23:31) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 20:24) *
Ss. 69-74A repealed (E.W.) (31.3.2008) by Traffic Management Act 2004 (c. 18), s. 99(1), Sch. 12 Pt. 1; S.I. 2007/2053, arts. 1(2), 3(1)(2)(h)(ii) (with arts. 4-8) (as amended (17.3.2008) by S.I. 2008/757, arts. 3, 5); S.I. 2007/3174, art. 2, Sch.



This is correct


I know.

Oddly, 4101 said it wasn't when previously posted.



Where was that, NielB?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 10 Feb 2018 - 20:03
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,746
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (4101 @ Sat, 10 Feb 2018 - 01:04) *
QUOTE (Neil B @ Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 09:13) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 09:00) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 23:31) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 6 Feb 2018 - 20:24) *
Ss. 69-74A repealed (E.W.) (31.3.2008) by Traffic Management Act 2004 (c. 18), s. 99(1), Sch. 12 Pt. 1; S.I. 2007/2053, arts. 1(2), 3(1)(2)(h)(ii) (with arts. 4-8) (as amended (17.3.2008) by S.I. 2008/757, arts. 3, 5); S.I. 2007/3174, art. 2, Sch.



This is correct


I know.

Oddly, 4101 said it wasn't when previously posted.



Where was that, NielB?

It must be a bit worrying forgetting things?
No good asking me; I'm not gonna help you understand your mistakes.

Isn't there an outstanding question posed to you?
I think DD may be waiting for another good laugh.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Sat, 10 Feb 2018 - 21:23
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



In other words you were wrong. Nice one.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 10 Feb 2018 - 21:32
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,872
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



Christ this is boring. Knock it off, or I’ll temporarily relieve my boredom by banning people.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Saturday, 15th December 2018 - 03:26
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.