Hackney, Shared parking Space PCN then Towing |
Hackney, Shared parking Space PCN then Towing |
Fri, 20 Apr 2018 - 15:06
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: 20 Apr 2018 Member No.: 97,605 |
Hi All,
I hope you will be able to give me some advise. A couple months ago I was renting out car in London, It was difficult to find parking space and I was forced to use "Shared Parking Space" on Laburnum Street in London. Maximum stay was 4 hours on that parking - from this what I saw from the sign on the street. I purchase the ticket from "Ringo App" but unfortunately I didn't notice(I was in the rush) that I pay for the wrong car(I was renting this car previously) I left the car not knowing that I didn't pay for the correct license plate. I come back after the 90 minutes and I see the PCN from Hackney Council for parking without the ticket. This was really frustrating as my intentions were good. Because I have been fined I was thinking - Now I can live my car anyway, since I am going to pay 65£. I am coming back again after 4 hours and my car is gone... My car been towed away. There was no obvious information on the PCN or signs around if I will not move my car - car will be towed away. Can you please advise on which grounds I can appeal as tomorrow I am going to independent adjudicator. - So far I my grounds of appeal are that I made genuine mistake(paying for wrong license plate) and there was no obvious information that my car will be towed away. Sorry for my language I hope I am making some sense. Thank you in advance for advise. |
|
|
Advertisement |
Fri, 20 Apr 2018 - 15:06
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 1 May 2018 - 22:43
Post
#41
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
To my mind. make point two your first point so point one then for your point one, remove all of it it comes across as critical of the tribunal and the adjudicator. Replace it with a simple. "The adjudicator misdirected themselves as to their vires in relation to the proportionality of removal"
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Wed, 2 May 2018 - 00:10
Post
#42
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
To my mind. make point two your first point so point one then for your point one, remove all of it it comes across as critical of the tribunal and the adjudicator. Replace it with a simple. "The adjudicator misdirected themselves as to their vires in relation to the proportionality of removal" +1 -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Thu, 10 May 2018 - 09:26
Post
#43
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: 20 Apr 2018 Member No.: 97,605 |
|
|
|
Thu, 10 May 2018 - 12:48
Post
#44
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,915 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
I suspect CP8759 knows the legal basis, but normally for these reviews they don't want a lot of legal jargon. The basic and quite simple point to make is that when establishing the statutory grounds for an appeal, Parliament included one that recognises the circumstances of a case can affect the penalty demanded. The adjudicator in your case has not recognised this in his adjudication.
"the penalty exceeded the relevant amount in the circumstances of the case" In your case the issue is one of proportionality of the towing bearing in mind the circumstances. Others will no doubt chime in as well. |
|
|
Thu, 10 May 2018 - 21:41
Post
#45
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
I'm bumping this. Obviously great news that it's been referred for review.
|
|
|
Thu, 10 May 2018 - 23:07
Post
#46
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
The key issue is actually very simple. The adjudicator stated "If the exercise of discretion is averred to be ... unlawful then that is in reality a matter for the Administrative Division of the High Court.", this, as a matter of law, is wrong. The tribunal has a power to allow an appeal if the enforcement authority has acted unlawfully at any stage, the adjudicator misinterpreted his powers and therefore his decision cannot stand.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 20:02
Post
#47
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: 20 Apr 2018 Member No.: 97,605 |
Hello Everyone,
Tomorrow is my appeal court case. Any last word of advise to make sure we have not wasted time and effort? Thank you |
|
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 20:21
Post
#48
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I would submit the following two cases and argue that in removal cases the burden to show that removal was a proportionate interference with your property rights under Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights rests with the council:
https://www.scribd.com/document/374695358/B...t-Protocol-ECHR (It is for the council to establish the removal was proportionate) https://www.scribd.com/document/374695480/R...ol-City-Council (Caroline Sheppard endorsing the above case and confirming there is a principles of “fair balance” between the severity of the parking infringement and the citizen’s right to quiet enjoyment of their property) Where the authority exercises its discretion unlawfully, the above cases show the tribunal does have a power to intervene and the previous adjudicator in your case made an error in law in finding that the only proper recourse in such instances is to the High Court. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 20:54
Post
#49
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Good luck tomorrow. I think CP has summarised the key points, and also Incand:
Adjudicators have ruled on proportionality many times and are entitled to do so under the statutory grounds of "the penalty exceeded the relevant amount in the circumstances of the case" There is absolutely nothing in the statute that defines what "circumstances of the case" are, or even could be. Not only does the statute have nothing to say on the circumstances surrounding a case, there is nothing in any guidance either. So for an adjudicator to say he is constrained by the statute, whilst true, shows that he is either (1), being disingenuous, or (2) is woefully ignorant of his adjudication powers, because there is a statutory ground available that would cover proportionality. A review is essential on grounds of law, surely ? |
|
|
Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 08:52
Post
#50
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: 20 Apr 2018 Member No.: 97,605 |
Guys I stand here defeated. I have lost all hope in the justice system. The adjudicator even couldnt answer my question that why are we here if he cannot make a decision. Basically his hands are tied. He agreed with the previous adjudicator and said there was no new evidence and that the council's policy was available to us in the first appeal. He left the room in a huff when I asked why are we here if you can't decide. He also said the Bristol case presented to him was wrong and the adjudicator was wrong. He dismissed everything basically.
It seemed to us he had already made up his mind anyways. We felt he was biased and my girlfriend says he also looked down on us because maybe we are foreigners. Truly his behaviour was dispicable. its not about the money anymore it's about his discriminatory behaviour and his refusal to take its time and speak to us like humans. Tempted to go to the high court but anyone know the cost involved ? Thanks again for your time and sorry it didn't lead anywhere. |
|
|
Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 10:25
Post
#51
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Post the adjudicators decision in full.
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 20:59
Post
#52
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Tempted to go to the high court but anyone know the cost involved ? I’ve just taken £10k on account of fees for one. As an aside, I’ve deleted a lot of posts that were simply bickering again. It seems to happen a lot in this forum. Please don’t. -------------------- Moderator
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. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 13:13 |