PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Barnet - stopped in a YBJ, Can you help my sister?
MrChips
post Thu, 12 Apr 2018 - 10:22
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



Hello - you kindly helped one of my sisters a few months ago when she parked with two wheels on the pavement in Barnet (won at tribunal with assistance from Mr Mustard). Now another sister has been in touch with me as she has had a penalty letter through the post in respect of stopping in a yellow box junction, also in Barnet.

So far all I have is a link to the video which I have posted on youtube:

https://youtu.be/BeA-e5ctnK8

According to my sister, she was waiting in the side road for the traffic to start moving. She then pulled in only when this starts to occur (you can see the brake lights of the traffic queuing ahead go off supporting this). Arguably she might have been poking slightly into the YBJ for a few seconds had she got there, however at the same time a van on the other side of the junction makes the same manoeuvre. They both head for the right hand lane and there is only space for one of them and she gives way to the van (I can only assume out of courtesy, or because it was a bigger more imposing vehicle than hers!). This is a mistake as she is then forced to stop in the box junction, although ironically she was blocking nobody in doing so while the van would have blocked the other carriageway for longer if she had been more assertive. In hindsight she could also have taken the spot in the first lane which would have avoided stopping in the YBJ, but perhaps she needed to be in the right hand lane (I don't know).

I saw another thread on here not that long ago, in Hammersmith I think, where the OP got caught in a box junction turning in from a side road which seemed to be designed to prevent cars on the main road blocking the side road entrance, a little like this one. Surely (one of) the function(s) of this box junction is to give cars turning left a chance to turn onto this busy road? Had my sister not turned in when she did, she would have struggled to get into that lane at all as by the time the white van had completed its turn the traffic queued up behind the box junction on the main road would have started moving forward. This pattern could be repeated ad infinitum if there is always a vehicle on the other side of the junction wanting to turn right into that lane.

I've asked her to send me the correspondence from Barnet and I'll post it up as soon as I get it. In the meantime I would value any thoughts on the likelihood of winning based on the video evidence.

She has told me she has 14 days from 6 April to pay at the reduced £65 rate.

Many thanks.

This post has been edited by MrChips: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 - 09:40
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 >  
Start new topic
Replies (60 - 79)
Advertisement
post Thu, 12 Apr 2018 - 10:22
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
MrChips
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 12:04
Post #61


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



16 May was my original take - but the letter says within 14 days of date of service (which I take to be 3 May). Not 14 days starting with date of service.

Paying within 1 day of 3 May would be by 4 May (wouldn't it?), so I deduce within 14 days of 3 May would be 17 May - no?

This post has been edited by MrChips: Tue, 8 May 2018 - 12:52
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 13:50
Post #62


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (MrChips @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 13:04) *
16 May was my original take - but the letter says within 14 days of date of service (which I take to be 3 May). Not 14 days starting with date of service.

Paying within 1 day of 3 May would be by 4 May (wouldn't it?), so I deduce within 14 days of 3 May would be 17 May - no?


Well it would certainly add to the strength of your argument if the would not take the discount on the 17th


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 19:58
Post #63


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,055
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



Mr. M, IMO this is not just a CC issue, it is an appeals issue.

The law states that the recipient of a NOR is to be informed in that notice that they have a legal right to register an appeal subject to conditions, the relevant one here being that it is made no later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning on the date of service. Appeals made outside this period MAY be registered at the discretion of the adjudicator.

But this is not what the NOR says, it states that there is a legal right to have an appeal registered provided it is made up to 28 days from the date of service. Subsequently at the discretion of the adjudicator. This is absolutely incorrect.

I don't care whether the NOR is one day out or 10, it is required to convey the law and it doesn't. Speculation on the part of an adjudicator about the possible effects of this error are IMO irrelevant.

As they like to say: we find facts and apply the law.

Well do it then.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Mustard
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 23:32
Post #64


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,021
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,932



That could work in front of a receptive adjudicator.

Taking the Notice of Rejection, the Notice of Appeal form and the guidance notes 'Your right to appeal' as a whole, the tribunal's own notes aren't clear as they say 'You have 28 days to Appeal' and 'If you do not send the form within 28 days...' (sending isn't the question, starting the appeal on line /or serving the Notice of Appeal form by day 28 is what matters).

How receptive will an adjudicator be to being told the tribunal has got it wrong?

(To be fair to the tribunal they usually accept Appeals which are marginally late, I think they accept them up to 35 days without question)


--------------------
All advice given by me on PePiPoo is on a pro bono basis (i.e. free). PePiPoo relies on Donations so do donate if you can. Sometimes I will, in addition, personally offer to represent you at London Tribunals (i.e. within greater London only) & if you wish me to I will ask you to make a voluntary donation, if the Appeal is won, directly to the North London Hospice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Wed, 9 May 2018 - 00:18
Post #65


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



OK - here's a first bash. Given the hour, I've not gone through to tidy up typos etc. I'll do that later.

I know most others on here aren't a fan of the "turning right" argument so I've taken a slightly different tack and put it up front and asked the Authority to confirm the car didn't turn right (and ticked them off for not considering this point in my original representations in the process). I'm taking a gamble they won't have the extended footage available and therefore put some doubt in the adjudicator's mind, and even if they do I'm not putting any reliance on it for the remainder of the appeal.

Appeal wording:

I am registered keeper of vehicle in question. The contravention alleged is causing a vehicle to enter a box junction and stopping due to the presence of stationary vehicles (other than when turning right and prevented from doing so by oncoming traffic or other vehicles waiting to turn right).

1) Having viewed the video footage provided by the authority, it unfortunately stops just as the driver is about to exit from the box junction. As such I cannot be 100% sure whether the driver continued straight down High Road or turned right out of the box into Avenue Road (the same road that the white van emerges from). If the driver was intending to turn right out of the box junction into Avenue Road, then clearly no contravention occurred as it is permitted to wait in the box while turning right and prevented from doing so by a vehicle waiting to turn right (the white van in this case). I did point this out in my representations but the matter was not considered or addressed in the Authority’s Notice of Rejection (other than to confirm that turning right is an exemption). I kindly request that the Authority provides an extended video clip to clearly establish that the contravention as alleged did occur as this is rather fundamental.

The remainder of my appeal is based on the assumption that the extended video footage shows the vehicle leaving the box by continuing straight down High Road.

2) I do not dispute that the vehicle stopped within the box junction, although the period of stopping is so short (on the footage provided the vehicle stops at 9 seconds and starts to move again at 13 seconds so there is around 4 seconds of continuous stopping in total) that I would suggest the stop could be deemed to be de minimis, particularly as it is evident that no obstruction was being caused to any other vehicle.

3) Due to the layout of the junction, during busy periods it is the norm that a vehicle waiting to turn onto High Road from Ravensdale Avenue will need to pull out in slight anticipation of a space emerging on the far side of the box. If a driver waits until a full car length space is available beyond the box before commencing a manoeuvre the chances are that traffic queuing behind the box on High Road, which has right of way over vehicles coming from the side road, will cross the box to take it leaving the driver trapped indefinitely. In this instance the driver only begins to enter the box when the traffic further down High Road begins to move on (evidenced by brake lights switching off on the cars in view and the cars starting to move shortly thereafter). Unfortunately just as the driver does so a white van simultaneously moves forward from Avenue Road on the other side of the box and slightly further up High Road. But for the presence of the van (which does not commence its manoeuvre until after the driver of my car has already started to enter the box) the driver would have been able to creep forward continuously (albeit at a very slow pace) without stopping, or in a worst case scenario stop for only one to two seconds rather than the four seconds it does. The van stations itself in front of my car and starts to move off at around 11 seconds on the video which evidences that, but for the presence of the van, my car would have been able to do the same thus indicating a maximum stopping time of only 2 seconds (i.e. between 9 seconds and 11 seconds on the video) and less time than this had the driver not been prevented from moving forward slowly. Thus I argue that the stop was not caused by stationary vehicles beyond the end of the box but due to the white van moving forward and blocking my car’s smooth exit from the box after the driver had already started to enter the box.

4) Notwithstanding the above points, there are material errors with the Penalty Charge Notice and Notice of Rejection such that they misinform the recipient and do not comply with the relevant legislation:

a. The law states that a Charge Certificate may be served where the penalty charge has not been paid before the end of a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the PCN (where no representations are made). The Authority’s PCN states that they may issue a Charge Certificate within 28 days of the date of the PCN itself. In my case, this would deprive me of four days (date of PCN was 6 April 2018, the deemed date of service was 10 April 2018).
b. The law states that the recipient of a Notice of Rejection is to be informed in that notice that they have a legal right to register an appeal subject to conditions, the relevant one here being that it is made no later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning on the date of service. Appeals made outside this period MAY be registered at the discretion of the adjudicator. However, the Authority’s Notice of Rejection states that there is a legal right to have an appeal registered provided it is made up to 28 days from the date of service and subsequently at the discretion of the adjudicator (my emphasis). This is absolutely incorrect.
c. The payment slip on the PCN states that the reduced charge of £65 is available if payment is made no later than the last day of the period of 14 days beginning with the date on which the PCN was served. Under the legislation, the discount period only runs for 14 days beginning with the date of the PCN, i.e. 4 days earlier in this case. The Authority confirms that this earlier deadline is in force elsewhere in the PCN and so a recipient cutting off the payment slip and relying on that would be potentially disadvantaged.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Mustard
post Wed, 9 May 2018 - 07:08
Post #66


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,021
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,932



The payment slip is not part of the PCN but leave the point in as it goes to show how confused the document is as a whole.

Is fine to start an Appeal with as will give the council the chance to put you in the too difficult pile & call it a day.

There won’t be more cctv footage.


--------------------
All advice given by me on PePiPoo is on a pro bono basis (i.e. free). PePiPoo relies on Donations so do donate if you can. Sometimes I will, in addition, personally offer to represent you at London Tribunals (i.e. within greater London only) & if you wish me to I will ask you to make a voluntary donation, if the Appeal is won, directly to the North London Hospice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Wed, 9 May 2018 - 14:59
Post #67


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



Thanks Mr M. Interesting on the no further footage angle. Is it all done by automatically? In which case is the computer programmed to stop recording once the car starts moving again and would never capture footage of a vehicle turning right out of the box? Seems highly dodgy if so and prejudicial on all those who do turn right.

Anyway...I'm just thinking about the technicalities on the PCN and NoR. Surely they can't have it both ways:

- if the Authority argue that the docs are substantially compliant, I can argue that so was the driver (the stop is very short);
- if the Authority argue that there is a zero tolerance approach to any contravention no matter how short, applying a consistent approach to their PCN and NoR means they fall short also.

Simples!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 14:00
Post #68


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



Me again. I've tried to finesse the draft appeal slightly since the first draft above. Would appreciate any comments over the weekend following which we will register the appeal.

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. The contravention alleged is that the driver:

- caused the vehicle to enter the box junction; and
- so that the vehicle had to stop within the box junction; and
- that the stop was due to the presence of stationary vehicles; and
- that the driver was not entering for the purpose of turning right and prevented from completing the right turn by oncoming traffic or other vehicles which were stationary whilst waiting to complete a right turn.

I appeal on the grounds that the contravention alleged by the Authority on the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) did not occur.

1) Having viewed the video footage provided by the Authority, it unfortunately stops just as the driver is about to exit from the box junction. As such the evidence does not show whether the driver continued straight down High Road or turned right out of the box into Avenue Road (the same road that the white van emerges from, adjacent with the far end of the box). If the driver entered the box for the purpose of turning right out of the box junction into Avenue Road, then no contravention occurred as the contravention does not apply to vehicles waiting in the box while intending to turn right and prevented from doing so by a vehicle waiting to turn right (the white van in this case). I did point this out in my representations but it appears this matter was not considered by the Authority as it was not addressed in the Notice of Rejection (although it did separately confirm that there is no contravention if turning right in these circumstances). This issue is fundamental to the alleged contravention as without it the final limb of the contravention is not proven. I kindly request that the Authority provides an extended video clip prior to the adjudication to resolve this point.

The remainder of my appeal is based on the assumption that the extended video footage does show the vehicle leaving the box by continuing straight down High Road.

2) I do not dispute that the driver caused the vehicle to enter the box junction or that it had to stop in the box junction (the first two limbs of the contravention). However I do dispute that the stop was due to the presence of stationary vehicles. Due to the layout of the junction, during busy periods it is the norm that a vehicle waiting to turn onto High Road from Ravensdale Avenue will need to pull out in slight anticipation of a space emerging on the far side of the box. If a driver waits until a full car length space is available beyond the box before commencing a manoeuvre the chances are that traffic queuing behind the box on High Road, which has right of way over vehicles coming from the side road, will cross the box to take it leaving the driver trapped indefinitely. In this instance the driver only begins to enter the box when the traffic further down High Road begins to move on (evidenced by brake lights switching off on the cars in view and the cars starting to move shortly thereafter). Unfortunately just as the driver does so a white van simultaneously moves forward from Avenue Road on the other side of the box and slightly further up High Road. It is the realisation that the van's course will take it across my vehicle's path that causes the driver to slow to a stop (between 9 and 10 seconds into the video). But for the sudden and unexpected presence of the van (which does not commence its manoeuvre until after the driver of my car has already started to enter the box) the driver of my vehicle would have been able to either:

- creep forward continuously without stopping (albeit at a very slow pace, noting that the cars beyond the box move forward at around 13 seconds on the video - only 3-4 seconds later); or
- make it substantially through the box junction such that any encroachment would have been de minimis (noting that there is about half a car's length space on the far side of the box junction and the box junction extends a few feet beyond the junction, as marked by the striped white lines, so that stopping on the edge of would not strictly be a contravention); or
- in a worst case scenario stop very briefly (to a de minimis extent). The van stations itself in front of my car and starts to move off at around 13 seconds on the video which evidences that, but for the presence of the van, my car would have been able to do the same thus indicating a maximum stopping time of only 3-4 seconds and less time than this had the driver not been prevented from moving forward slowly between 10 seconds and 13 seconds on the video.

Thus I argue that the stop was not caused by stationary vehicles beyond the end of the box but due to the white van moving forward across my car's path then and blocking my car’s smooth exit from the box after the driver had already started to enter the box.

3) Notwithstanding the above points, there are material errors with the PCN and Notice of Rejection (NoR) such that they misinform the recipient and do not comply with the relevant legislation:

a. The law states that a Charge Certificate may be served where the penalty charge has not been paid before the end of a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the PCN (where no representations are made). The Authority’s PCN states that they may issue a Charge Certificate within 28 days of the date of the PCN itself. In my case, this would deprive me of four days (date of PCN was 6 April 2018, the deemed date of service was 10 April 2018).
b. The law states that the recipient of a Notice of Rejection is to be informed in that notice that they have a legal right to register an appeal subject to conditions, the relevant one here being that it is made no later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning on the date of service. Appeals made outside this period MAY be registered at the discretion of the adjudicator. However, the Authority’s Notice of Rejection states that there is a legal right to have an appeal registered provided it is made up to 28 days FROM the date of service and subsequently at the discretion of the adjudicator (my emphasis). This is absolutely incorrect.
c. The payment slip on the PCN states that the reduced charge of £65 is available if payment is made no later than the last day of the period of 14 days beginning with the date on which the PCN was served. Under the legislation, the discount period only runs for 14 days beginning with the date of the PCN, i.e. 4 days earlier in this case. The Authority confirms that this earlier deadline is in force elsewhere in the PCN and so a recipient cutting off the payment slip and relying on that would be potentially disadvantaged.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 14:59
Post #69


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,055
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



OP, it's nonsense, I'm afraid. You cannot change the exemption to suit your sister's dilemma. The exemption applies as follows:

(a)causes a vehicle to enter the box junction for the purpose of turning right; and
(b)stops the vehicle within the box junction for so long as the vehicle is prevented from completing the right turn by an oncoming vehicle or other vehicle which is stationary whilst waiting to complete a right turn.


It's an AND. And the vehicle entered the box in order to turn left, not right. What happens after exiting the box is neither here nor there, I'm afraid.

Leave out the hopeless and frivolous and concentrate on points with merit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 15:17
Post #70


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



I do get that point HCA. In this case a driver coming out of Ravensdale Avenue wishing to turn into Avenue Road, you have to first turn left onto the main road (into the box junction), advance a few metres towards the far end of the box and then turn right into Avenue Road. It isn't a crossroad and the position of Avenue Road is such that you would have to wait in the box while waiting to do so (i.e. the box extends all the way up to the Avenue Road turn).

This GSV from the point of view of looking out from Avenue Road might explain better than I can.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.6182056,-...3312!8i6656

Unless I'm missing something, would completing such a manoeuvre not give the driver the turning right exemption after they have entered the box and while they are waiting to turn right into Avenue Road?

The vehicle did not enter the box in order to turn left, it turned left in order to enter the box. It's the directional intention once the driver is in the box that's relevant here surely?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Mon, 14 May 2018 - 21:21
Post #71


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



OK only a couple of days left before the discount runs out. Let's park the turning right point for now! How does the rest of the appeal stack up?

Appeal wording:

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. As I understand it, the contravention alleged by the Authority is that the driver:

(1) caused the vehicle to enter a box junction;
(2) so that the vehicle had to stop within the box junction;
(3) due to the presence of stationary vehicles; and
(4) that it was not the case that the driver:
- caused the vehicle to enter the box junction for the purpose of turning right; and
- stopped the vehicle within the box junction for so long as the vehicle was prevented from completing the right turn by an oncoming vehicle or other vehicle which was stationary whilst waiting to complete a right turn.

I appeal on the grounds that the contravention alleged by the Authority on the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) did not occur.


2) I do not dispute that the driver caused the vehicle to enter the box junction or that it had to stop in the box junction (the first two limbs of the contravention). However I do dispute that the stop was due to the presence of stationary vehicles. Due to the layout of the junction, during busy periods it is an unfortunate reality that a vehicle waiting to turn onto High Road from Ravensdale Avenue will need to exercise judgement as to when to pull out. If a driver waits until a full car length space is available beyond the box before commencing the manoeuvre, it is highly likely that traffic queuing behind the box on High Road, which has right of way over vehicles coming from the side road, will have started to cross the box to take it leaving the driver trapped indefinitely. The driver therefore has to time his/her entry into the box junction very carefully and to slightly anticipate space becoming available. In this instance the driver only begins to enter the box when the traffic further down High Road begins to move on (evidenced by brake lights switching off on the cars in view and the cars starting to move shortly thereafter). Unfortunately just as the driver does so a white van simultaneously moves forward from Avenue Road on the other side of the box and slightly further up High Road. It is the realisation that the van's course will take it across my vehicle's path that causes the driver to slow to a stop (between 9 and 10 seconds into the video) – and not the stationary vehicles ahead. But for the sudden and unexpected presence of the van (which does not commence its manoeuvre until after the driver of my car has already started to enter the box) the driver of my vehicle would have been able to either:

- creep forward continuously without stopping (albeit at a slow walking pace, noting that the cars beyond the box move forward at around 13 seconds on the video - only 3-4 seconds later); or
- make it substantially through the box junction such that any encroachment would have been de minimis (noting that there is about half a car's length space on the far side of the box junction and the box junction extends a few feet beyond the junction, as marked by the striped white lines, so that stopping on the edge of would arguably not be in contravention); or
- in a worst case scenario stop very briefly (to a de minimis extent). The van stations itself in front of my car and starts to move off at around 13 seconds on the video which evidences that, but for the presence of the van, my car would have been able to do the same thus indicating a maximum stopping time of only 3-4 seconds and less time than this had the driver not been prevented from moving forward slowly between 10 seconds and 13 seconds on the video.

Thus I argue that the stop was not caused by stationary vehicles beyond the end of the box but due to the white van moving forward across my car's path then and blocking my car’s smooth exit from the box after the driver had already started to enter the box.

3) Notwithstanding the above points, there are material errors with the PCN and Notice of Rejection (NoR) such that they misinform the recipient and do not comply with the relevant legislation:

a. The law states that a Charge Certificate may be served where the penalty charge has not been paid before the end of a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the PCN (where no representations are made). The Authority’s PCN states that they may issue a Charge Certificate within 28 days of the date of the PCN itself. In my case, this would deprive me of four days (date of PCN was 6 April 2018, the deemed date of service was 10 April 2018).
b. The law states that the recipient of a Notice of Rejection is to be informed in that notice that they have a legal right to register an appeal subject to conditions, the relevant one here being that it is made no later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning on the date of service. Appeals made outside this period MAY be registered at the discretion of the adjudicator. However, the Authority’s Notice of Rejection states that there is a legal right to have an appeal registered provided it is made up to 28 days FROM the date of service and subsequently at the discretion of the adjudicator (my emphasis). This is absolutely incorrect.
c. The payment slip on the PCN states that the reduced charge of £65 is available if payment is made no later than the last day of the period of 14 days beginning with the date on which the PCN was served. Under the legislation, the discount period only runs for 14 days beginning with the date of the PCN, i.e. 4 days earlier in this case. The Authority confirms that this earlier deadline is in force elsewhere in the PCN and so a recipient cutting off the payment slip and relying on that would be potentially disadvantaged.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Wed, 16 May 2018 - 09:41
Post #72


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



Just logged into the PCN payment portal and the charge has increased to £130 already - I think this is two days early.

Am I right? Is that an almost guaranteed winner? I've taken a screen print.

It was still £65 when I checked yesterday.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Mustard
post Wed, 16 May 2018 - 10:00
Post #73


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,021
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,932



Fantastic. You have been prejudiced by the council taking away the discount early. You have until midnight tonight to pay if the Notice of Rejection arrived on the second day as it is deemed to do in default of any evidence to the contrary (which you or your sister won't be providing) in accordance with the offer the council made. There isn't an Appeal ground of procedural impropriety in moving traffic but the council do have a general duty at law to be fair.

I would make my Appeal on the grounds that the council has failed to honour its offer which is procedurally unfair and prejudicial followed by the other grounds which are set out earlier in this thread.

I have an identical case coming up next week and so the problem I think has been caused by the council setting the 14th day wrongly within its processing software.


--------------------
All advice given by me on PePiPoo is on a pro bono basis (i.e. free). PePiPoo relies on Donations so do donate if you can. Sometimes I will, in addition, personally offer to represent you at London Tribunals (i.e. within greater London only) & if you wish me to I will ask you to make a voluntary donation, if the Appeal is won, directly to the North London Hospice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Wed, 16 May 2018 - 10:05
Post #74


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



Thanks Mr M (again!). There is an appeal ground listed as penalty charge exceeds the amount applicable in the circumstances of this case. We can use that (on top of the other ones I've already drafted - would hate those hours of work to be thrown away! And I'm genuinely curious what the adjudicator would have to say on the turning right point...).

Just to make sure I understand, I thought the final day of the discount was tomorrow? The discount was extended if we paid "within" 14 days of date of service. Date of letter is 1 May, assumed date of service is 3 May. Within 1 day of that is 4 May, within 10 days is 13 May, within 14 days is 17 May. Of have I been misusing the word "within" my entire life?

Also is a screen shot sufficient - is there anything else I can/should do to demonstrate they've tried to overcharge? I guess someone more skilled than me could photoshop a screen shot to make it look like they've overcharged so will it be accepted by the adjudicator?

This post has been edited by MrChips: Wed, 16 May 2018 - 10:07
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 16 May 2018 - 15:16
Post #75


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (MrChips @ Wed, 16 May 2018 - 11:05) *
Also is a screen shot sufficient - is there anything else I can/should do to demonstrate they've tried to overcharge? I guess someone more skilled than me could photoshop a screen shot to make it look like they've overcharged so will it be accepted by the adjudicator?

You could use your phone to take a photo of the computer screen as well. But bear in mind the adjudicator only needs to decide on the balance of probabilities, he will not accept that you have fabricated evidence, unless there is positive evidence to show that you did.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 21:31
Post #76


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



It's coming up to the time when we need to register our appeal.

I've been on the London Tribunals website - it asks if my sister has a legal representative. I'd like to attend the tribunal either together with, or instead of, my sister. Does it matter what we put here?

Will we need to put my name down here if I wish to represent her?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Mustard
post Sun, 27 May 2018 - 13:05
Post #77


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,021
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,932



Yes, put yourself down as 'legal representative' as you don't have to be legally qualified. That way either or both of you can attend the Appeal.


--------------------
All advice given by me on PePiPoo is on a pro bono basis (i.e. free). PePiPoo relies on Donations so do donate if you can. Sometimes I will, in addition, personally offer to represent you at London Tribunals (i.e. within greater London only) & if you wish me to I will ask you to make a voluntary donation, if the Appeal is won, directly to the North London Hospice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chimpta
post Mon, 28 May 2018 - 01:51
Post #78


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Member No.: 69,003



QUOTE (Mr Mustard @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 06:50) *
The burden of proving an exemption falls on the person claiming it, the registered keeper. Even if you convince an adjudicator that you went from Ravensdale Avenue into Avenue Road and you turned right out of the box to do so you turned left into it at the start of the box and overall you went a kinked left turn. I don't think there is a hope in hell of that argument working.

There are two possible ways of winning.

1. You start an Appeal and the council decide to 'do not contest' the Appeal as they are too busy to fight them all. About a 1 in 5 chance.

2. You start an Appeal and it gets listed in front of Mr Greenslade who first allowed the 28 day charge certificate argument. About a 1 in 10 chance of being allocated him as the adjudicator.

The PCN at an Appeal will be at full value. The odds don't look great but they could come to pass. (I can't handle the Appeal as I am always listed in front of the same adjudicator who currently refuses the 28 day point).

Entirely a matter for the OP what to do.



Why dothey always give you the same Adjudicator, cant you not refuse and requesta another one due to him being against you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Mustard
post Mon, 28 May 2018 - 07:25
Post #79


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,021
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,932



Last Wednesday I won 5 lost 2. I know in general what I will win or lose on. If I was scheduled with random adjudicators at 30 minutes I would be there for 3.5 hours and this way I will be done in 2.

I prefer the current method.


--------------------
All advice given by me on PePiPoo is on a pro bono basis (i.e. free). PePiPoo relies on Donations so do donate if you can. Sometimes I will, in addition, personally offer to represent you at London Tribunals (i.e. within greater London only) & if you wish me to I will ask you to make a voluntary donation, if the Appeal is won, directly to the North London Hospice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 23:19
Post #80


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,120
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Member No.: 30,237



Quick update on this one - the hearing is scheduled for 2 July. I submitted evidence earlier today (Monday)...fingers crossed for a positive outcome.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 >
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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 14:16
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here