DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 129295--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enforcement PCN – Payment not made – Redbridge
       Institute of Adult Education
   DIR By: InterCity125
       Date: September 1, 2026, 10:21 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       First thing which jumps off the page is that Natasha Rhodes
       contradicts herself.
       She says the following;
       The operator has not demonstrated the site constitutes "Relevant
       Land" for the Purposes of Schedule 4. In this case, the operator
       has provided that the site is private land and therefore it is
       not one of the types of land excluded within the POFA as such I
       are satisfied that the land is relevant land.
       First she states that operator has not demonstrated that the
       land is relevant land - on that point she is correct, the
       operator's evidence contains no evidence which covers the non
       relevant land issue and therefore the operator has not rebutted
       that appeal point and therefore she should allow the appeal.
       But then she says (in bad English) that "the operator has
       provided that the site is private land" - what does that mean?
       The operator doesn't cover this point in their evidence??
       Another shocking assessment from POPLA where the Assessor simply
       'makes up' missing evidence in order to favour the operator.
       *****************************************************
       Page 3 of 3
   DIR Previous Page