PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

statutory declarations, referal to tribunal
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 22:16
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,018
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



Page 23 of this document entitled

) Statutory Declaration and Witness Statement referrals

http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/de...-16%20final.pdf

Reading this a couple of things occur.

1/ the authority must consider its position, as should the appellant, (we have seen this done the authority offer another chance to pay) This effectively removes the 56 day deadline for the authority to respond

2/ First thing an adjudicator is going to do is consider the reason for the SD taking effectively the roll of the court by making a payment direction if the find no compelling reason for the SD

If an appellant cannot prove they made representations, the presumption of service could also be undermined

An appellant is only allowed 14 days to perfect their appeal (providing an adjudicator finds that the reps have substance) The 28 days to register being lost. Nothing in the procedure even requires a NOR



What do people feel is the best advice we can give in light of this?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 6)
Advertisement
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 22:16
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 02:11
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,542
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



The document you linked is from April 2016, is this the correct version?


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 10:34
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,626
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 02:11) *
The document you linked is from April 2016, is this the correct version?

Do you mean or suggest that it no longer applies?

It's the only version of that detail.


--------------------
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 Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 11:10
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,544
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 02:11) *
The document you linked is from April 2016, is this the correct version?


AS far as the guide for dealing with SDs (or Witness Statements) I believe so.
There was a guide circulated to London Councils IIRC but cannot find it at moment.

@PMB
Which 56 days are you thinking of ?
If for authority to respond to a formal challenge, then I don't see this changes anything.
It has long been accepted that things get lost in post so onus would be on council to show they wrote something and posted or that they didn't receive the original reps.
But doesn't stop the claim being made simply because there has been some faffing around with letters. Or should I say attempts to resolve.

2. I don't see this as being any different then before.
If a case is referred that seems to have no substance, as long as they have given parties the chance to have their say, they can make a decision without a full hearing.
The first part is whether or not the SD (WS) was valid.
What I would not like to see is this being treated the same way as TEC treat OOT applications. ie Council say they sent the notice(s) to the proper address so we will reject the application.
There have been cases I've read where when asked for a copy of the reps made, the appellant supplied nothing, no copy, no hastily written reps, what else is the adjudicator supposed to think except this is a try on ?

Not sure where the 14 days comes from for making full submissions.
I don't see this changes anything except create a deadline for the appellant to supply something.
They can always submit further details up to the time of hearing.

My major concern on it is how councils deal with it.
Seen some reasonable letters following a TEC order. And some dire ones.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 12:05
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,018
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 11:10) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 02:11) *
The document you linked is from April 2016, is this the correct version?


AS far as the guide for dealing with SDs (or Witness Statements) I believe so.
There was a guide circulated to London Councils IIRC but cannot find it at moment.

@PMB
Which 56 days are you thinking of ?
If for authority to respond to a formal challenge, then I don't see this changes anything.
It has long been accepted that things get lost in post so onus would be on council to show they wrote something and posted or that they didn't receive the original reps.
But doesn't stop the claim being made simply because there has been some faffing around with letters. Or should I say attempts to resolve.

2. I don't see this as being any different then before.
If a case is referred that seems to have no substance, as long as they have given parties the chance to have their say, they can make a decision without a full hearing.
The first part is whether or not the SD (WS) was valid.
What I would not like to see is this being treated the same way as TEC treat OOT applications. ie Council say they sent the notice(s) to the proper address so we will reject the application.
There have been cases I've read where when asked for a copy of the reps made, the appellant supplied nothing, no copy, no hastily written reps, what else is the adjudicator supposed to think except this is a try on ?

Not sure where the 14 days comes from for making full submissions.
I don't see this changes anything except create a deadline for the appellant to supply something.
They can always submit further details up to the time of hearing.

My major concern on it is how councils deal with it.
Seen some reasonable letters following a TEC order. And some dire ones.


I seem t recall one where the authorities response was another CC.

An appellant makes reps to a notice to owner. It is responded to within 56 days (or should be) Tardy councils who fail to respond issue a CC. Ok probably happens more than we would like to think. But lets say all is kosher and the response goes missing.
The council could and should IMO re send this with a further 28 days to respond by payment or appeal

many appeal points are based on the NOR so by restricting to only 14 days or even removing the need for a full response from the council all PI's at NOR stage are no able to be appealed against
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 12:13
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,626
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 11:10) *
Not sure where the 14 days comes from for making full submissions.
I don't see this changes anything except create a deadline for the appellant to supply something.
They can always submit further details up to the time of hearing.

My major concern on it is how councils deal with it.
Seen some reasonable letters following a TEC order. And some dire ones.

Same here.
We're about to see an example (if a certain OP pulls their finger out) of a Council, presumably
claiming not to have received reps, asking for a copy and applying that 14 day deadline to that request?

(this is post-revoking order: refer to adj. as discussed)

This post has been edited by Neil B: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 12:15


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

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lashes1984
post Wed, 17 Jan 2018 - 22:10
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 151
Joined: 10 May 2017
Member No.: 91,884



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 11:10) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 13 Jan 2018 - 02:11) *
The document you linked is from April 2016, is this the correct version?


AS far as the guide for dealing with SDs (or Witness Statements) I believe so.
There was a guide circulated to London Councils IIRC but cannot find it at moment.


Post #18 on this thread has the guidance circulated to the London Councils.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=113696

Regardless of London Tribunals guidance the Adjudicator allowed an appeal as the EA didn't refer the matter to the Adjudicator after a Statutory Declaration was made. Case Number: 2170317559
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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: Tuesday, 13th November 2018 - 23:21
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.