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  « < 3 4 5  
Start new topic
Replies (80 - 91)
Advertisement
post Thu, 12 Apr 2018 - 10:22
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
MrChips
post Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 09:34
Post #81


Member


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



Hi - the hearing is a week on Monday (2 July). Can I check when we should expect to receive Barnet's evidence? Would it come through the post (to my sister as appellant, or to me as "legal representative"?), or be emailed to one of us, and/or would it be uploaded to the London Tribunals portal (where we uploaded our evidence) for us to view?

Many thanks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Mustard
post Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 09:42
Post #82


Member


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



The evidence must be with you such that there are at least 3 full days before the hearing for you to study it & obtain advice or file any further evidence in reply of your own (This is a Human Rights requirement for a fair trial). The evidence should come by post or email as you selected, I always tick 'post' as I don't want to pay the cost of printing it all out (Mr Mean!).

The evidence will also be uploaded to the tribunal site but that can take a couple of days from when they receive it.

It is worthwhile checking the balance on the council website as if it goes to zero you will know they have decided not to fight 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
MrChips
post Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 09:54
Post #83


Member


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



Thanks Mr M - had the same thought about checking the balance just after I posted and it's still on £130.

I only uploaded our evidence to the Tribunal at the start of this week (Monday) so it's possible Barnet haven't digested it yet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 20:00
Post #84


Member


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



Evidence pack received by my sister at the weekend so it looks like the tribunal is going ahead on Monday!

It includes this interesting sentence in response to our representations (it seems the pack was prepared before our appeal was uploaded as none of the points there are addressed, including the early removal of discount).

"The Penalty Charge Notice is compliant with the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003, it is deemed to be served on the date of the document, in this case 06/04/2018, the 28 day period started from this date, not 10/04/2018."

Can that be true? For this PCN the 28 days to make representations starts with the date of the notice, not the date it is deemed to be served. However the Charge Certificate may be served 28 days from date of service which surely is wrong if they are saying it is 06/04/2018?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Mustard
post Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 20:10
Post #85


Member


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



That is utter tosh. A PCN cannot be served on the date it is posted, it is deemed served on the second working day after posting, unless the contrary be proven.

You ahve got the council completely muddled, that should help.


--------------------
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 Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 20:13
Post #86


Member


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



Given most of these responses are boilerplate jobs, I was wondering if they've used the same text with you in the past when you've raised the 28 day discrepancy vs the regs?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Mon, 2 Jul 2018 - 11:46
Post #87


Member


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



Hmmm, just back from the tribunal - it didn't seem to go very well. I didn't quite catch the adjudicators name at the start but I think it was Gerald Styles.

He had a very abrupt style, and had not read any of the papers in advance. He decided to take all my hard copies of our and the Authority's evidence during the hearing as he "prefers working with hard copies".

I was therefore required to paraphrase the grounds of appeal in front of him rather than rely on the written submission. No doubt this didn't come across as well as I had to make it more concise while I was thinking on my feet.

Nevertheless, I figured we had a fairly open and shut case with the premature removal of discount. Apparently he thought otherwise. In his view, Barnet were not required to reoffer the discount (true), and unless we actually tried to pay £65 and they refused it, then he isn't impressed with this line of argument. I said that you can only get to the payment screen shown in the print out if "trying to pay" and that there is no way of offering a different (correct) amount to the figure Barnet put on the screen. He asked if we had sent a cheque for £65...

We spent most of the time going through the video. He agreed that the "right turn" argument had no merit. We were just going through the issues with going straight on when he called it to a close. I had to literally almost explain some of our grounds as I was packing up my things! We didn't even get to cover the technical defects in the Barnet paperwork, so unless he reads the evidence after the event that won't be considered either.

He didn't give me a decision there and then, so I guess we'll hear in the post.

All in all not at all what I was expecting!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Tue, 7 Aug 2018 - 17:08
Post #88


Member


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



Quick update on this case - it was adjourned by the adjudicator to allow time for Barnet to respond to the premature removal of the discount and to provide extended footage of the vehicle exiting the box junction.

They were asked to provide this by 30 July, but to the best of my knowledge they did not do so (no new evidence has been uploaded to the portal).

We are still waiting for the adjudication.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Sun, 12 Aug 2018 - 07:43
Post #89


Member


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



Thanks everyone for all their help over the last few months, result of adjudication finally in....and we won smile.gif

Cancelled as the authority's evidence was not sufficient to prove the contravention (I assume as it doesn't show if she turned right or not). Curiously the decision explicitly says that our other defence that the penalty exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case was rejected as we didn't try to pay by means other than the online portal which I can't get my head around. It's a binary issue - it either exceeded the amount applicable or it didn't, and in this case it 100% did for a day at least.

The decision is also a bit critical of my sister not turning up in person herself, but she has that right doesn't she? I did all the work in the guise of her "legal adviser".

Anyway that's two of my sisters you have helped over the last year or so. Hopefully third sister won't need assistance any time soon!

Case reference 2180214177
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John U.K.
post Sun, 12 Aug 2018 - 10:42
Post #90


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,308
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,515



Well Done smile.gif

At the mo getting nothing found for 2180214177
Date of hearing? May not be up yet?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Sun, 12 Aug 2018 - 11:32
Post #91


Member


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



Decision was dated yesterday and arrived in my inbox at 1am this morning. So it might need a few more hours. I’ll try and paste the wording here, it’s fairly brief.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MrChips
post Sun, 12 Aug 2018 - 12:14
Post #92


Member


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



Here you go:

Adjudicator's Reasons
I have not been impressed in this appeal by the appellant explanation for non-attendance on account of claustrophobia and public transport issues she may have.

The case is a yellow box one where the appellant was driving but sent her brother (who was not present at the material time) to the oral hearing she requested.

I have noted remarks I received about an unsuccessful attempt to pay electronically at the reduced rate but these do not justify penalty charge cancellation or any reduction given that no discounted payment was apparently tendered by other available means.

I have however recorded the appeal as allowed. Following the hearing attended by the appellant's brother I queried with the Council the availability of further footage which might clarify whether claimed defences to the penalty charge were properly available.

There is no response that has been received from the Council in connection with that enquiry and I have recorded the appeal as allowed on the basis of this and insufficient evidence.

Gerald Styles
Adjudicator
11th August 2018
2180214177
AG9028846A
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  « < 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 - 20:47
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