Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Bus Lane PCN
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Pages: 1, 2
John U.K.
Advice here is personal hearing is always best, with telephone as second best.
It gives you the chance to answer any questions the adj might have, and for the adj. to assess your credibility.

The hearings themselves are very informal across a table and the adj will do his best to set you at ease.
The Council very rarely sent a representative.
Ignatius1
I see. Well just earlier this afternoon I posted 1st class recorded £2.37 (all the exhibit print outs) and have ticked "without a hearing". I guess I could later today send an email and apologise for two submissions, but I no longer have the form to tick face to face or telephone.

Could I perhaps send the email (without the TPT form (I should have scanned it)) with my evidence and provide them with the PCN numbers etc, postal address and email address and now explain that I'd like a face to face hearing at Leeds (Holiday Inn)?
John U.K.
You could try telephoning TPT and following up with e-mail.
London are helpful about changing nature of hearing (at an early stage) - don't see why TpT hsould be different.
Ignatius1
But I guess it's difficult to say whether or not and, if so, by how much chances of success are increased with face to face hearings. I don't know if I'll contact the TPT about changing the requested hearing type. I might have to read more into the Bus Lane regs about face to face hearings and such like.

I guess the first thing I might do is wait to see if the 1st class letter recorded letter that I sent arrives tomorrow. If not, I'll definitely be making contact, but if that happens then I might be in trouble because I forgot to scan the form before sealing it in the envelope. All I did was fill in my personal
details, signed and dated it and wrote "A, B" as the main two grounds the appeal is based on. Nothing was written into the box to refer the reader to the enclosures. All these little things could go against me. I'll mainly hope that the letter does arrive tomorrow and then decide whether or not to follow it up with further contact for changing the hearing type requested, something that I'm undecided about.
Steofthedale
All the more reason to be present so that you are able to clarify any issues regarding your evidence.

The adjudicator does not expect you to be a legal expert. It helps for you to understand and to be able to explain the grounds upon which your appeal is based.
John U.K.
QUOTE
But I guess it's difficult to say whether or not and, if so, by how much chances of success are increased with face to face hearings. I don't know if I'll contact the TPT about changing the requested hearing type. I might have to read more into the Bus Lane regs about face to face hearings and such like.
.... All these little things could go against me.


Methinks you worry too much!

You are registering the appeal. If you wish to change it to personal or telephone follow the advice in post#53
I suspect if you leave it as postal, and you do not succeed, you'll always be wondering if the reason was not apparing face-to-face.

(There's nothing in the Bus Lane Regs about face to face hearings!!!)

Once you have clarified with TPT the nature of the hearing, they will write back to you with a date.
The Council will send into TPT their evidence pack, attempting to refute your submission. They will also send a copy to you. It should arrive not less than three days before the hearing, to give you a chance to make any further rebuttals.

People here will help you with the successive stages.
Ignatius1
QUOTE (John U.K. @ Wed, 10 Aug 2016 - 18:09) *
QUOTE
But I guess it's difficult to say whether or not and, if so, by how much chances of success are increased with face to face hearings. I don't know if I'll contact the TPT about changing the requested hearing type. I might have to read more into the Bus Lane regs about face to face hearings and such like.
.... All these little things could go against me.


Methinks you worry too much!

You are registering the appeal. If you wish to change it to personal or telephone follow the advice in post#53
I suspect if you leave it as postal, and you do not succeed, you'll always be wondering if the reason was not apparing face-to-face.

(There's nothing in the Bus Lane Regs about face to face hearings!!!)

Once you have clarified with TPT the nature of the hearing, they will write back to you with a date.
The Council will send into TPT their evidence pack, attempting to refute your submission. They will also send a copy to you. It should arrive not less than three days before the hearing, to give you a chance to make any further rebuttals.

People here will help you with the successive stages.


I do worry too much ohmy.gif

These are good thoughts really. The council's submissions to the TPT might contain flaws and can then be refuted at the hearing, possibly further enhancing my representations. The adjudicator will probably judge me on my appearance, behaviour, and what I say. I don't completely know how to put in my own words what the omission of "in the circumstances of the case" means, though.

I will only contact the TPT at some stage tomorrow to let them know of the change of hearing type requested. For now, I will eat apple.
PASTMYBEST
The first page of this key case should explain it for you, if not ask

http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/de...d%20version.pdf
Ignatius1
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 10 Aug 2016 - 20:32) *
The first page of this key case should explain it for you, if not ask

http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/de...d%20version.pdf


Thank you. I'll look shortly.

Does anyone happen to know of or have a copy of someone's scanned TPT appeal form (hopefully redacted) so that I can edit, print, write on, scan and send to TPT, if what I sent today doesn't arrive tomorrow.

I've been doing some googling to try and find this, but can only find the front page in that turquoise blue colour. I should have scanned both sides (I think there were only two sides). Maybe someone else has in these forums?
Ignatius1
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 10 Aug 2016 - 20:32) *
The first page of this key case should explain it for you, if not ask

http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/de...d%20version.pdf


Yes, that last paragraph seems to be the key text. This was the text that I highlighted after printing and labelling the attachment as 'exhibit 1' before sending to the TPT.

"I do not agree with his analysis. The circumstances seem to me to fall within ground (f) in paragraph 2(4) of Schedule 6 to the 1991 Act: that the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. If the PCN was not served, the penalty payable would be nil and therefore would exceed the penalty claimed by the Council. Even if this were not so, the issue raised by Mr Flannery would be a collateral challenge and therefore justiciable by the Adjudicator: R v Parking Adjudicator Ex p. Bexley LBC QBD 29 July 1997."
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (Ignatius1 @ Wed, 10 Aug 2016 - 22:29) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 10 Aug 2016 - 20:32) *
The first page of this key case should explain it for you, if not ask

http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/de...d%20version.pdf


Yes, that last paragraph seems to be the key text. This was the text that I highlighted after printing and labelling the attachment as 'exhibit 1' before sending to the TPT.

"I do not agree with his analysis. The circumstances seem to me to fall within ground (f) in paragraph 2(4) of Schedule 6 to the 1991 Act: that the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. If the PCN was not served, the penalty payable would be nil and therefore would exceed the penalty claimed by the Council. Even if this were not so, the issue raised by Mr Flannery would be a collateral challenge and therefore justiciable by the Adjudicator: R v Parking Adjudicator Ex p. Bexley LBC QBD 29 July 1997."


So by omitting in the circumstances of the case, they seek to deny you this remedy or at the very least fail to inform you that it is available if they fail to follow procedure
Ignatius1
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 10 Aug 2016 - 23:21) *
QUOTE (Ignatius1 @ Wed, 10 Aug 2016 - 22:29) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 10 Aug 2016 - 20:32) *
The first page of this key case should explain it for you, if not ask

http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/de...d%20version.pdf


Yes, that last paragraph seems to be the key text. This was the text that I highlighted after printing and labelling the attachment as 'exhibit 1' before sending to the TPT.

"I do not agree with his analysis. The circumstances seem to me to fall within ground (f) in paragraph 2(4) of Schedule 6 to the 1991 Act: that the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case. If the PCN was not served, the penalty payable would be nil and therefore would exceed the penalty claimed by the Council. Even if this were not so, the issue raised by Mr Flannery would be a collateral challenge and therefore justiciable by the Adjudicator: R v Parking Adjudicator Ex p. Bexley LBC QBD 29 July 1997."


So by omitting in the circumstances of the case, they seek to deny you this remedy or at the very least fail to inform you that it is available if they fail to follow procedure


OK, so they seek to deny me the remedy for the official regulatory appeal ground defined in, "9.--(2)(f) that the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case" because of their omission of key text, "in the circumstances of the case". By omitting these words it alters the meaning of the ground to being only applicable if the council demand more as a penalty than allowed by statute and tries to remove the ability to challenge the council where they are in error......

The TPT form with the appeal etc. arrived at Springfield House early this morning. Several hours later my appeal submissions were acknowledged in an email. I've changed the hearing type requested also for a face to face engagement.
Ignatius1
Good news! Today, I received something from the council... A 'With Compliments' slip which reads, "Further to your appeal to the Tribunal against two penalty charge notices please find attached a copy of the council's submissions which you will find self-explanatory."

The attachment is a one-sided A4 document with heading, "Notice that Appeal Not Contested by the Enforcement Authority". Below this are 'Appeal Details' followed by 'PCN Details'. Printed below these details are words:

"The Enforcement Authority does not intend to contest this case further because:

whilst the council believes that the contraventions occurred and that it was perfectly appropriate that the charge notices were issued and that many of the reasons given by the appellant in the submissions have no foundation that in the circumstances the council does not wish to proceed pursuing payment of the penalty charges and so does not wish to contest the appeals further."

Excellent. Many many thanks to everyone who has contributed, in particular @PASTMYBEST.

To be thoroughly honest, I am a little disappointed that they're no longer contesting because I was, in a strange way, looking forward to attending a hearing to rebut their submissions to the Tribunal, [and for the experience]!
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (Ignatius1 @ Sat, 3 Sep 2016 - 17:06) *
Good news! Today, I received something from the council... A 'With Compliments' slip which reads, "Further to your appeal to the Tribunal against two penalty charge notices please find attached a copy of the council's submissions which you will find self-explanatory."

The attachment is a one-sided A4 document with heading, "Notice that Appeal Not Contested by the Enforcement Authority". Below this are 'Appeal Details' followed by 'PCN Details'. Printed below these details are words:

"The Enforcement Authority does not intend to contest this case further because:

whilst the council believes that the contraventions occurred and that it was perfectly appropriate that the charge notices were issued and that many of the reasons given by the appellant in the submissions have no foundation that in the circumstances the council does not wish to proceed pursuing payment of the penalty charges and so does not wish to contest the appeals further."

Excellent. Many many thanks to everyone who has contributed, in particular @PASTMYBEST.

To be thoroughly honest, I am a little disappointed that they're no longer contesting because I was, in a strange way, looking forward to attending a hearing to rebut their submissions to the Tribunal, [and for the experience]!


Good result biggrin.gif take a win any way you can, adjudicators can be a capricious lot
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2020 Invision Power Services, Inc.