Justice is served, My restitution Options

[contractor]

Just got back from Dartford County Court on a 2 dates issue against London Borough of Bexley:

The history is at:
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=19542

Anyway the long and the short of it is I won
Restitution for 28 already paid tickets, total amount inc. costs = 2500 with 14 days to pay!

I need to get my head around things and I have a few other things to do so I will go into detail later.

Main things were JR/Barnet and Winder vs Wandsworth.

Many thanks to Wayne P, Tony W, Teufel, DW190, Legaladviser and others.

Now for a cup of tea!

[Advertisement]

[bama]

Well done that man !!

[greatscot]

Fantastic

[legaladviser]

Hey you are a star!

We need to get this into the papers if possible.

[eddie1234567]

Brilliant.

What ever you buy with the cash, send a picture to the chief exec with a big thank you

[g_attrill]

Well done! I agree about getting the local paper involved. If possible wait for the cheque to arrive because it will make a lovely photo. Also be very sure the reporter is perfectly clear on the legal argument, possibly try and draft the full text of the article's important legal points with them there and then, because it seems reporters are extremely good at screwing up even the basic facts of parking and speeding cases. eg. a local paper recently reported a signage flaw as "speed camera signs missing" when it was speed limit signs.

[Tony-Medusa]

Congratulations!

Absolutely a fabulous one.
Good for the community, good for Justice to be SEEN to be done, and BE DONE.

After all they are paying back £8 million to the chat show fraudsters, why not the motorist. Floodgates? that is all their fault not ours.
Tony W - Medusa.

[Wayne Pendle]

Excellant Job, bloody well done!!!!

And yes, you've earned yourself a cup of tea

[bmwman]

Hi

GREAT JOB you've earned it look forward to your seeing case notes will help with my claim against Hastings. Definately get the papers involved and show these Cr**cks up for what they are.

Enjoy your cup of tea

Mark

[Nimbus]

Well done!

[Monster 900]

Excellent!

[DW190]

Fantastic.

When this hits the news the floodgates will need lubricating.

[Andy Turner]

yeeeeee harrrrrrr!!!

[Glacier2]

Excellent Result! Well Done!

[Tony-Medusa]

WELL this is to fulfill the promise and let all know the case material relied on.
THERE is more coming than this, and a case where restitution extends BEYOND 6 YEARS also. House of Lords.

In all about fifteen statutory case materials to build the skeleton arguments presented.

http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/AN/AN.html

Restitution. County Court orders restitution of £2500 against Bexley County Council.

20 parking tickets to be repaid in 14 days.

A little encouragement, have a look at this originating thread here at pepipoo.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...mp;#entry216893

and the link therein.

Bexley County Court Restitution case. £2500 repaid.
Copy of Council's skeleton arguments coming also.

AS at Sun, 2 Dec 2007 the case material is about 50-60% ready, and it will be launched in the next few days, even if not quite finished. It is the second restitution case, of which the first case was Southend on Sea. Located here; http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/JH.html

Loads of useful statutes here, http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/Acts/acts.html and case law snippets (courtesy of Trevor Nunn) here. http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/arg4dor/caselaw.html
And Tony's here; http://www.forceofdestiny.co.uk/Literature...tor/Logic5.html

A great deal of work has been carried out and the results are beginning to show. It is early stages.
Good luck to those who are arguing for a decent just society.


Thanks to

Wayne (Wayne Pendle)
Tony (Tony Medusa)
DW190 (Known as David Warburton)
Teufel (SPECIAL thanks for his contribution on the jurisdiction issues etc) There are more there also posted by Tony at the site.
Other links that surround the case in a complete context of what is supposed to be the equity in law, that is compromised widely.

This post has been edited by Tony-Medusa: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 - 11:48

[Howard0181]

well done on this. Brilliant.

I had my own restitution case in September 2007 where I quoted the same two cases and two others.

Hearing was at 11.00. I got called into the room 30 mins early with the user telling me that the Judge wants to see me. The first thing he told me was "I think I can deal with this case quickly". He said he had read my evidence and that he had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. Said I had to go to the High Court. I replied saying that was not fair without listening to what I had to say and let me have 2 mins. I said the case law which you have in front of you allows for restitution in civil matters. He said no it does not.

Is it to late for me to appeal on a point of law in County Court?

[Teufel]

the juridication issue appears to be a total gamble

what is needed is a high court case on restitution (the moses was on validity)

lower courts would then have to follow

[Tony-Medusa]

Hi, Teufel, Nice to hear from you. You have a computer brain for pulling up case law, that's admirable.

the juridication issue appears to be a total gamble

what is needed is a high court case on restitution (the moses was on validity)

lower courts would then have to follow

This is highly probable, and I agree. I have material from a case where the county court ruled it was not for them, BUT their argument; that shall be revealed, is highly fallacious and amounts to a “reductio ad absurdum”, like some others I have examined for internal inconsistencies.

The whole point about being ruled by a 'competent authority' places a court and 'stare decisis' in a position of sole authority; where that authority is too often errant, and uses reasoning that's unsound, it is arrogating to itself the sole arbiter of being able to determine simple things like 'facts' as if they alone had the critical ability and means. Stare decisis is of course the principle that is now compromised for reasons of floodgate, politics, and revenue.

The other authority that's equally if not more competent, is that of the principles in the three laws of thought; that shows flaws of court, and in correspondence theory with truth itself, so that irrational rulings are fenced in; fencing out factors of power and mendacity cloaked in 'authority'; and shown for what they are. There is a nicely focussed snippet in case law; by a Justice, that supports this view. The key words being 'to controvert, and to hear both sides. That smacks of equity in justice far more than an arbitrary ruling that makes a fooling of common sense, and supports the notion that 'might is right' where it is not.. More on that to come.

I will show the close analogy between the case alluded to above, and that of the case in 'cash for honours' where the CPS were stopped from prosecuting. This also was a ruling that was so inconsistent internally in logic, that the effect was to make an exception; to a class rule, that confuted the rule itself, and made the police arts of for-en-sic science more 'for eign sick' in high places, than for rational members of and intelligent electorate, and the public. It was controverted in the Times article, but few understood it..

Best regards to you.

I replied saying that was not fair without listening to what I had to say and let me have 2 mins. I said the case law which you have in front of you allows for restitution in civil matters. He said no it does not.

He said no it does not The point here is DID he give YOU sound reason for that being so, and did you have the time or right to argue it cogently? I very much doubt it. A fair Judge would invite counter argument and entertain debate; in the search for truth and better knowledge, like Leibnitz's argument for avoiding wars. If anyone wants Leibnitz's fax number, I may be able to get that too! -

Is it to late for me to appeal on a point of law in County Court?

I don't know the answer, but the two cases above do show that other Judges think otherWISE.

What follows from your Judges ruling is the probablility that; like the one I allude to, he doesn't want a floodgate, and other factors may be at play. The reductio ad absurdem test here, is IF he were right, then it follows the HIGH court would then have the floodgates, and the lower courts would no longer be of any use or able to serve the public interest, and common interests of Justice. Also what follows is a powerful inclination to place a serious PRICE on justice; goodbye justice, and good buy justice, preventing ordinary members of the public from getting any. Taking you to one side, is a sleight of strict protocol, that I perceive as a shade of empathy, but notwithstanding that, a number of case law snippets here; http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/arg4dor/caselaw.html may throw light on the nature of what happened and place it in a better or adverse context. In my view. Where injustice is perceived, only persistence and doggedness will eventually succeed, but these are deep life teaching experiences - won - would choose not to have but deepens insight as to the nature of the state, and the state it's in. It's possibly the difference nowadays between a county court, and accounty court, like shoppping where one trader gives value, and another gives the same, but in subtract counterfeit presentment.

There is a near 500 page book approaching its end on all these topics thaty show a trend towards despotism; warned of by Lord Hewart in 1929, and plunder in our society.
There is also a H o L, case law that extends the period of the statute of limitations beyond six years, I will pull it up soon.

This post has been edited by Tony-Medusa: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 - 09:26