Parking NTO/K |
Parking NTO/K |
Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 18:04
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 76 Joined: 21 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,078 |
Hello,
I think that I was the driver at the time of the alleged parking, but I have not had anything stuck to the windscreen. A NTO/K was recently received. I've scanned both sides of the paper, removed personal details and uploaded it to Tinypic. I'm not sure if anyone can see any flaws in their documentation. I know that it states that the car was parked in a disabled bay, and I know that this is no defence whatsoever, but I truly didn't know that it was a disabled bay. I think I was visiting an orthodontist for a review appointment, running slightly late and was then kept waiting. I am sorry that I put the car in a disabled bay, because I would never knowingly do that. This post has been edited by Octavia: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 - 15:00 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 21 Jan 2018 - 18:04
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Fri, 1 Jun 2018 - 22:20
Post
#141
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,071 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
I’m most concerned about this aspect:
The direction to appeal “within 28 days” actually gave ********* an additional day to make her appeal because using that formula the day of service would not be counted. Idiot. The time frames which apply to the authority, the appellant and adj must be the same, but they’re not. Who cares about whether the authority count 28 days from, the adjudicator is not bound to and that’s the key. Even if we agree that the date of service may be established as being different, the authority still cannot change the period during which the adjudicator must register an appeal correctly formatted. Even if we all agree on the date of service, when you go from ‘beginning on’ to ‘within’ or ‘from’ the appellant IS MISLED into thinking that day 28 is a right when in fact it’s at the discretion of the adjudicator. Reason for lateness: the authority told me I could. Even worse, an appellant would not feel required to submit a reason for lateness: If the notice of appeal is delivered to the proper officer later than the time limit specified in regulation 7(1)(a), 10(1)(a) or 13(1)(a) (as the case may be), the appellant must include in the notice a statement of the reasons on which he relies for justifying the delay, and the adjudicator shall treat any such statement of reasons for delay as a request for extending that time limit. When, and it is when, this point arises again any appeal must lead the adjudicator step by step and anticipate and counter any ‘compliance’ nonsense. This post has been edited by hcandersen: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 - 22:20 |
|
|
Sun, 3 Jun 2018 - 20:46
Post
#142
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 76 Joined: 21 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,078 |
My intention is to write to the Chief Adjudicator, Caroline Sheppard OBE, pointing out the apparent error of law with some rock solid evidence regarding the authority's PI in the hope that she will overturn the decision and I get my 70 GBP back.
hcandersen, I'm unsure of what you mean here: Who cares about whether the authority count 28 days from, the adjudicator is not bound to and that’s the key.
Even if we agree that the date of service may be established as being different, the authority still cannot change the period during which the adjudicator must register an appeal correctly formatted. Even if we all agree on the date of service, when you go from ‘beginning on’ to ‘within’ or ‘from’ the appellant IS MISLED into thinking that day 28 is a right when in fact it’s at the discretion of the adjudicator. Reason for lateness: the authority told me I could. Even worse, an appellant would not feel required to submit a reason for lateness: |
|
|
Sun, 3 Jun 2018 - 21:33
Post
#143
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,071 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
The period during which you may by law register an appeal with the adjudicator is 28 beginning on date of service. After this, a ‘late’ submission may be registered providing this is accompanied by reasons.
Who cares about the authority and their CC, the NOR is required to advise you of your rights of appeal and, separately, the authority’s power to serve a CC. If the authority use the words in the regs then one statement satisfies both requirements. But if as here they dream up a bespoke version then as here they misinform you of your rights of appeal. That the adj only looked at the issue of the CC is IMO a gross misunderstanding of the purpose of the regs. The adj should know better. |
|
|
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 13:55
Post
#144
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 76 Joined: 21 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,078 |
So, it has been my intention to write to Caroline Sheppard OBE, but perhaps if she looked at the case and overturned the Deputy Chief Adjudicator, tensions might develop between them. Who knows how they work. Maybe the Deputy need not have knowledge of it. Perhaps Caroline would just refuse to look or review the case. I don't know. I've been returning to a Word document now and then but I haven't put much together at all.
I need the £70 more than the Council and whilst I have admitted [to the Council in my formal reps] that I made an error in my decision making, they have made quite a few errors in their pursuit at me. Maybe I just need a really tough letter of succint wording to hit home and make the adjudicators see the errors. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 15:22 |