Bus Lane PCN |
Bus Lane PCN |
Mon, 4 Jul 2016 - 20:29
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41 Joined: 4 Jul 2016 Member No.: 85,403 |
Can anyone help sport any flaws etc. in the bus lane PCN below or at least help me try to construct an appeal?
This wasn't the only one received. There was another from 13 June, which I haven't scanned etc. (it's pretty much identical) |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 4 Jul 2016 - 20:29
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Wed, 10 Aug 2016 - 22:21
Post
#61
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
The first page of this key case should explain it for you, if not ask http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/de...d%20version.pdf Yes, that last paragraph seems to be the key text. This was the text that I highlighted after printing and labelling the attachment as 'exhibit 1' before sending to the TPT. "I do not agree with his analysis. The circumstances seem to me to fall within ground (f) in paragraph 2(4) of Schedule 6 to the 1991 Act: that the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. If the PCN was not served, the penalty payable would be nil and therefore would exceed the penalty claimed by the Council. Even if this were not so, the issue raised by Mr Flannery would be a collateral challenge and therefore justiciable by the Adjudicator: R v Parking Adjudicator Ex p. Bexley LBC QBD 29 July 1997." So by omitting in the circumstances of the case, they seek to deny you this remedy or at the very least fail to inform you that it is available if they fail to follow procedure -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Thu, 11 Aug 2016 - 19:44
Post
#62
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41 Joined: 4 Jul 2016 Member No.: 85,403 |
The first page of this key case should explain it for you, if not ask http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/de...d%20version.pdf Yes, that last paragraph seems to be the key text. This was the text that I highlighted after printing and labelling the attachment as 'exhibit 1' before sending to the TPT. "I do not agree with his analysis. The circumstances seem to me to fall within ground (f) in paragraph 2(4) of Schedule 6 to the 1991 Act: that the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. If the PCN was not served, the penalty payable would be nil and therefore would exceed the penalty claimed by the Council. Even if this were not so, the issue raised by Mr Flannery would be a collateral challenge and therefore justiciable by the Adjudicator: R v Parking Adjudicator Ex p. Bexley LBC QBD 29 July 1997." So by omitting in the circumstances of the case, they seek to deny you this remedy or at the very least fail to inform you that it is available if they fail to follow procedure OK, so they seek to deny me the remedy for the official regulatory appeal ground defined in, "9.--(2)(f) that the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case" because of their omission of key text, "in the circumstances of the case". By omitting these words it alters the meaning of the ground to being only applicable if the council demand more as a penalty than allowed by statute and tries to remove the ability to challenge the council where they are in error...... The TPT form with the appeal etc. arrived at Springfield House early this morning. Several hours later my appeal submissions were acknowledged in an email. I've changed the hearing type requested also for a face to face engagement. This post has been edited by Ignatius1: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 - 22:05 |
|
|
Sat, 3 Sep 2016 - 16:06
Post
#63
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41 Joined: 4 Jul 2016 Member No.: 85,403 |
Good news! Today, I received something from the council... A 'With Compliments' slip which reads, "Further to your appeal to the Tribunal against two penalty charge notices please find attached a copy of the council's submissions which you will find self-explanatory."
The attachment is a one-sided A4 document with heading, "Notice that Appeal Not Contested by the Enforcement Authority". Below this are 'Appeal Details' followed by 'PCN Details'. Printed below these details are words: "The Enforcement Authority does not intend to contest this case further because: whilst the council believes that the contraventions occurred and that it was perfectly appropriate that the charge notices were issued and that many of the reasons given by the appellant in the submissions have no foundation that in the circumstances the council does not wish to proceed pursuing payment of the penalty charges and so does not wish to contest the appeals further." Excellent. Many many thanks to everyone who has contributed, in particular @PASTMYBEST. To be thoroughly honest, I am a little disappointed that they're no longer contesting because I was, in a strange way, looking forward to attending a hearing to rebut their submissions to the Tribunal, [and for the experience]! This post has been edited by Ignatius1: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 - 16:08 |
|
|
Sat, 3 Sep 2016 - 17:57
Post
#64
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Good news! Today, I received something from the council... A 'With Compliments' slip which reads, "Further to your appeal to the Tribunal against two penalty charge notices please find attached a copy of the council's submissions which you will find self-explanatory." The attachment is a one-sided A4 document with heading, "Notice that Appeal Not Contested by the Enforcement Authority". Below this are 'Appeal Details' followed by 'PCN Details'. Printed below these details are words: "The Enforcement Authority does not intend to contest this case further because: whilst the council believes that the contraventions occurred and that it was perfectly appropriate that the charge notices were issued and that many of the reasons given by the appellant in the submissions have no foundation that in the circumstances the council does not wish to proceed pursuing payment of the penalty charges and so does not wish to contest the appeals further." Excellent. Many many thanks to everyone who has contributed, in particular @PASTMYBEST. To be thoroughly honest, I am a little disappointed that they're no longer contesting because I was, in a strange way, looking forward to attending a hearing to rebut their submissions to the Tribunal, [and for the experience]! Good result take a win any way you can, adjudicators can be a capricious lot -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 22:39 |