PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

File of cases to assist arguments, listed under various headings
Hippocrates
post Wed, 7 May 2014 - 23:01
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,876
Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Member No.: 53,821



I am offering this list of cases to help people find cases quickly in order to support their arguments. It also saves me time in cross-referring to my other browser!

http://www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/

Please feel free to add. If you do so, please indicate at the start of your post the type of case your chosen decision(s) e.g. legitimate expectation.

Charge Certificate: premature issue

2130230240 and 2050339777. 213021691A. 213040742A 2140034850 2130622819 2140065151
2130296792, 2140068375.

Evidence not served in time

2110144328, 2130131442, 2120451094, 2130259672.


Will/may cases

2110072817, 2100649871, 2110415753, 2120021652, 2130049862, 2120448511, 212058885A, 2130236316, 2130516990, 2140068320, 2140026692, 2140006797, 2140046893, 2110029250

Legitimate expectation

2120130716, 2120134353 , 2110055104,. 2130190430, 2120088937, 2130288681, 213031735A

Mandatory info missing from Reg. 10 PCN

The PCN does not contain mandatory information re viewing the evidence. Case Nos.: 2120293222, 2130089798, 2130149029, 2130034162, 2130397290, 2130011644, 2130430807, 2140026692, 2140006797, 2140068320. 213009616A, 2120473279

Regulation 3(4) opening statement and 3(5) and (6) in their entirety. The adjudicator in the first case cites the legislation in her decision.

Representations treated as requests

2120488345, 2100587978, 2120408958, 2110494261.

Multiple choice decision: Code 12

2120562288

Failure to consider

http://davidmarq.com/uploaderv6_1/files/7/...ly%2520case.pdf

http://davidmarq.com/uploaderv6_1/files/7/...0discretion.pdf

http://davidmarq.com/uploaderv6_1/files/7/...520decision.pdf

http://davidmarq.com/uploaderv6_1/files/7/...520decision.pdf

http://davidmarq.com/uploaderv6_1/files/7/...520decision.pdf

Fettered discretion: I am unable to cancel

2130316200, 2130521902, 2130497615.

This post has been edited by Hippocrates: Mon, 12 May 2014 - 20:47


--------------------
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends PATAS, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know.

"Hippocrates"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
14 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Wed, 7 May 2014 - 23:01
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Thu, 8 May 2014 - 08:10
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,789
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



Super stuff. Saves a lot of time consuming searches.

Don't we need a moderator or systems guy to pin this to the top of the forum as an "Important Topic" as they have done with the Read this First section?

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2cupsofcoffee
post Thu, 8 May 2014 - 08:57
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 558
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Member No.: 29,449



sending correspondence to address other than that given
2140070027
2140008894
2130464026

failure to properly consider representations
2140086060

wrong offence on pcn
2140162657

postal pcn claimed not to have been received, i.e. rebuttal of presumed service (maybe because recipient is a solicitor??)
2140155822

This post has been edited by 2cupsofcoffee: Thu, 8 May 2014 - 10:19
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
qafqa
post Thu, 8 May 2014 - 09:33
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,032
Joined: 5 Mar 2011
Member No.: 44,816



PATAS Key Cases
http://keycases.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk/
TPT Example Cases
http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/s...?documentID=132

The Appellant claims the Penalty Charge Notice was not handed to the driver.

http://www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/StatReg/
2110488859
2110284167
2110249100
2110577904
2110475267
2110655076
2110507181
2110492233
2120052237
2110434033
2110542717
2120501319
2110564877
2120406409
2120399711
2110367617
2110214398
2110411300
2110496562
2110409706
2110579375
2110334888
2110494465
2110287609
2110287278
2110507975
2110430495
2110507104
2120524427
2110304683
2120564727
211040591A
2110282004
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Thu, 8 May 2014 - 10:13
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,904
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



make it a FAQ


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ozbert
post Thu, 8 May 2014 - 10:18
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 43
Joined: 12 Dec 2013
From: Berkshire
Member No.: 67,343



Very good reference, thanks.

Is there a reason we can't use hyperlinks to the cases on these forums, e.g. http :// www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/StatReg/case.aspx?caseref=xxxxxxxxxx ?

This post has been edited by jemann: Thu, 8 May 2014 - 10:20
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hippocrates
post Thu, 8 May 2014 - 10:25
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,876
Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Member No.: 53,821



QUOTE (jemann @ Thu, 8 May 2014 - 11:18) *
Very good reference, thanks.

Is there a reason we can't use hyperlinks to the cases on these forums, e.g. http :// www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/StatReg/case.aspx?caseref=xxxxxxxxxx ?

I always separate the case from the link which works for me. Great and informative posts so far BTW. This forum has to be the best! smile.gif

This post has been edited by Hippocrates: Thu, 8 May 2014 - 10:28


--------------------
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends PATAS, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know.

"Hippocrates"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Thu, 8 May 2014 - 10:49
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,904
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



QUOTE (Hippocrates @ Thu, 8 May 2014 - 11:25) *
QUOTE (jemann @ Thu, 8 May 2014 - 11:18) *
Very good reference, thanks.

Is there a reason we can't use hyperlinks to the cases on these forums, e.g. http :// www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/StatReg/case.aspx?caseref=xxxxxxxxxx ?

I always separate the case from the link which works for me. Great and informative posts so far BTW. This forum has to be the best! smile.gif


its easy to put the link under descriptive text as in this FAQ
CODE
[url="http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?autocom=ibwiki&cmd=article&id=102"] as in this FAQ[/url]


This post has been edited by bama: Thu, 8 May 2014 - 10:50


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Thu, 8 May 2014 - 12:40
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,789
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



Hippo you are the owner of this thread so why don't you contact Fredd to see what's best.

Two issues---

One ---what would you call it? Case Law? Key Cases? FAQ?

Second -- posting access? On the speeding side of the house case law was strictly moderated with the poster having to satisfy a mod before it was published.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hippocrates
post Thu, 8 May 2014 - 12:43
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,876
Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Member No.: 53,821



No time at the moment. Have to go to a place!

This post has been edited by Hippocrates: Sun, 11 May 2014 - 21:10


--------------------
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends PATAS, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know.

"Hippocrates"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2cupsofcoffee
post Sun, 11 May 2014 - 18:37
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 558
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Member No.: 29,449



evidence not served in time
213058625A

multiple choice offence (bay for special class of vehicle)
2130542108

Notice to Owner failing to describe in general terms or at all the form and manner in which an appeal to the adjudicator may be made. The notice states instead "We will tell you how to do this when we write to you".
2130536590
213008458A

failure of adhesive on parking ticket on a warm day
2130469449

This post has been edited by 2cupsofcoffee: Mon, 12 May 2014 - 17:08
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hippocrates
post Mon, 12 May 2014 - 17:54
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,876
Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Member No.: 53,821



Mandatory info missing from Reg. 10 PCN

A tough one, but cracked: 2140174849. http://www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/

And they have just changed the wording. BangHead.gif

Dear Council:

SEA OWE PEA WHY AND PEA EH S TEA EE. Seemples.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Suricates,_Namibia-2.jpg

This post has been edited by Hippocrates: Mon, 12 May 2014 - 20:08


--------------------
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends PATAS, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know.

"Hippocrates"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mashkiach
post Tue, 13 May 2014 - 10:27
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,028
Joined: 27 May 2008
Member No.: 19,872



I am looking to download all PATAS cases in order to make my own searches for example one particular box junction. I am told this is done in Mozilla (that I use) but can not fathom how to do it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
angrybish
post Tue, 13 May 2014 - 10:46
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 59
Joined: 10 May 2014
Member No.: 70,531



QUOTE (Hippocrates @ Mon, 12 May 2014 - 18:54) *
Mandatory info missing from Reg. 10 PCN

A tough one, but cracked: 2140174849. http://www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/

And they have just changed the wording. BangHead.gif

Dear Council:

SEA OWE PEA WHY AND PEA EH S TEA EE. Seemples.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Suricates,_Namibia-2.jpg


Hippo!!
He La Re us!!! laughing6.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mashkiach
post Tue, 13 May 2014 - 16:56
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,028
Joined: 27 May 2008
Member No.: 19,872



Some old notes i have

due to vehicles stopping after the vehicle had entered the box 2080009884
2110192014 Failed to reject one of the grounds within representation.
211000654A/2110217738 At least witness statement approved device
2110344156 Regulation 5(2) duty consider the representations, no mistake
2110342412 accurate reflection of the location
2110379820 legally removed could not refund the parking fine or the removal fee, wrong!
2110717548 Mare Street car park the scout centre
2120268305 lowered to meet the level of the carriageway
2120227895 nominate a correspondence address if it is then ignored
211055831A TfL 'And' not an 'or'

And more.
2130539191:incumbent Authority clear Notice of Rejection representations considered
2130516833:entitled stop momentarily another vehicle vacates space
213049855A:cannot expect to enforce box junction markings not adequately maintained
2130435061: TfL conflation two periods ambiguity
2130552123:not proved reason why footway lowered
2130496871: Although charge certificate cancelled procedural impropriety
2130536182:NoR appeal to PATAS 28 days of this letter being served misstates the time
213047747A:identical contravention not contest no reasons entitled
2130533093:attendant had sufficient opportunity to prepare and serve
2130534948/2130535667:requisite consideration but sweeping statement opposed particularized
2130459820 stop due to moving and not stationary
2130314602 wording Notice of Rejection not suggest considered exercising discretion
2130416238 not satisfied VCA Approved Device
2130509124 TMO "leaving "of the vehicle not waiting/parking
2130515193 purpose Notice of Rejection enable make informed decision
2130531167 "active" yellow line
2130521902 unable to consider
2130477516 not entitled removal not off ground driver present no evidence
2130507355 PCN issued/served previous entries chronological
2130524784 NoR footway parking regardless of the circumstances involved inaccurate
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2cupsofcoffee
post Wed, 14 May 2014 - 11:31
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 558
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Member No.: 29,449



failure to allow viewing of CCTV recording = PI 2130360654

this one appears to be partially because recipient claimed he did not receive a postal PCN 2130368248

This post has been edited by 2cupsofcoffee: Wed, 14 May 2014 - 11:35
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mashkiach
post Wed, 14 May 2014 - 11:49
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,028
Joined: 27 May 2008
Member No.: 19,872



2130603428 Authority must demonstrate adherence to Code of Practice it issues
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mashkiach
post Wed, 14 May 2014 - 21:58
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,028
Joined: 27 May 2008
Member No.: 19,872



2140131154 no requirement hirer give England/Wales address
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hippocrates
post Fri, 23 May 2014 - 12:26
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,876
Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Member No.: 53,821



Premature issue of Charge Certificate:

Register Kept Under Regulation 20 of the Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators)(London) Regulations 1993, as amended or Paragraph 21 of the Schedule to the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, as applicable

Case Reference: 214008540A
Appellant:
Authority: Lambeth
VRM:
PCN: LH57834750
Contravention Date: 29 Oct 2013
Contravention Time: 18:23
Contravention Location: Westminster Bridge Road
Penalty Amount: £130.00
Contravention: Being in a bus lane
Decision Date: 22 May 2014
Adjudicator: Michael Burke
Appeal Decision: Allowed
Direction: cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Enforcement Notice.
Reasons: The Notice of Rejection in this case was dated 28.01.14 and the Notice of Appeal in this case was received by PATAS in time on 20.02.14. I am satisfied that by 06.03.14 the Local Authority would have been aware there was a live appeal before PATAS. Despite this, they issued a Charge Certificate to the Appellant on that date.
The Local Authority will be aware of the then Chief Adjudicator's decision in case reference 2050339777 Miah v. City of Westminster in which the Local Authority had issued a Charge Certificate in similar circumstances. The Chief Adjudicator pointed out that the Charge Certificate amounted to an unlawful demand for money coupled with a threat of court action in default, and stated:
'The procedural impropriety in the issuing of this unlawful demand in my view fundamentally undermines the lawfulness of the enforcement process in this case, and undermines the authority and jurisdiction of this tribunal. This unlawful act debars the local authority from pursuing further enforcement of this penalty.'
I take the same view in this case as the Chief Adjudicator took in Miah and accordingly I allow the appeal.

This post has been edited by Hippocrates: Sat, 24 May 2014 - 23:47


--------------------
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends PATAS, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know.

"Hippocrates"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hippocrates
post Sat, 24 May 2014 - 14:43
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,876
Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Member No.: 53,821



Continuous contravention: Case Reference: 2110166557 and:

Register Kept Under Regulation 20 of the Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators)(London) Regulations 1993, as amended or Paragraph 21 of the Schedule to the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, as applicable

Case Reference: 2140191859
Appellant:
Authority: Merton
VRM:
PCN: MT62515081
Contravention Date: 28 Nov 2013
Contravention Time: 09:20
Contravention Location: Quicks Road SW19
Penalty Amount: £110.00
Contravention: Parked in a residents or shared use pay without displaying a permit, voucher or Pay & display ticket
Decision Date: 23 May 2014
Adjudicator: Gerald Styles
Appeal Decision: Allowed
Direction: cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.
Reasons:
I am recording the appeal against the penalty charge incurred on 28 November as allowed.

I am recording the appeal against the penalty charge incurred on 30 November as refused.

I refer to my reasons written in connection with the 30 November penalty charge
(MT61117210) and recorded earlier today.

Case Reference: 2140191859
Appellant:
Authority: Merton
VRM:
PCN: MT61117210
Contravention Date: 30 Nov 2013
Contravention Time: 14:19
Contravention Location: Quicks Road SW19
Penalty Amount: £110.00
Contravention: Parked in a residents or shared use pay without displaying a permit, voucher or Pay & display ticket
Decision Date: 23 May 2014
Adjudicator: Gerald Styles
Appeal Decision: Refused
Direction: None
Reasons: I believe the motorist in bringing this appeal challenging the outstanding penalty charges and insisting payment had been made in December was wrong.

The Council has prepared its adjudication case summary correctly I believe in referring to three different like penalty charge notices. I have consequently proceeded on the basis that the first penalty charge that is to say the one incurred on 27 November has been paid. (£55)

The two under my adjudication are those relating from 28 and 30 November.

On both these occasions, as on 27 November, the officer was correct in his decision to impose a penalty charge. The required S2 permit was not displayed. I have read about changing zones but the appellant has the responsibility for ensuring a permit for the correct zone is displayed and it was not in this instance.

The Council in relation to the present appeal has sought to insist in its demand that the appellant now pay £110 on each of the outstanding penalty charges.

It says the opportunity was given for the discounted payment but that discount has expired. I will correctly point out that Adjudicator at the adjudication stage is not able to reset discount.

I consider I have however a duty in cases where there are cumulative penalties for the same, effectively a continuous contravention, to have regard to a general principle that the total demand for penalties should not be exorbitant.

In the present case I am aware that the Council would have entitled to impound this vehicle for lack of proper permit and there would be have been no tenable argument for a refund of any of the £255 minimum that would have been required upon release from the pound.

Despite that point I have decided the fair and proper course in this instance, given the nature the case overall, is to uphold only the second of the penalty charges under appeal today.

Taking into account the £55 paid, the total penalty will thus be £165.

I am recording the appeal against the penalty charge incurred on 28 November as allowed.

I am recording the appeal against the penalty charge incurred on 30 November as refused.

This post has been edited by Hippocrates: Sat, 24 May 2014 - 23:48


--------------------
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends PATAS, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know.

"Hippocrates"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

14 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
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, 22nd November 2018 - 11:42
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.