DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 18491--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest Code 34 - Being in a Bus Lane
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 28, 2024, 4:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Decision Date 27 Mar 2024
Adjudicator Monica Hillen
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction
cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Enforcement Notice.
Reasons
The case was scheduled for a personal appeal on 26 March at
14.30. Mr **** did not attend, his representative did so, Mr
Morgan. The Enforcement Authority was not represented.
Mr Morgan served a Notice on the Enforcement Authority requiring
the attendance of two witnesses, L Maynard and S Lloyd the
latter being the officer who looked at the CCTV evidence and
made a written statement [which did not identify the camera].
The Notice was served on the Council on 16 March 2023 and
acknowledged. The Enforcement Authority informed the Tribunal on
19 March they were not obliged to attend.
The Notice of Rejection set out the rights of the Appellant with
regard to the evidence for an appeal.
“If you appeal we will send you a copy of all our evidence as
soon as possible and must provide you with a copy of any DVD,
photograph or digital image that we want the Adjudicator to
consider at least seven days before the scheduled date of the
hearing.
However, if you serve a notice on us not less than three days
before the hearing date, we cannot rely on such evidence without
the person(s) who signed them attending. The three[1]day limit
may be varied by the Adjudicator in special circumstances.”
As the relevant witness did not attend the camera evidence is
not admissible. The appeal is allowed.
*********************
2240089033
Dear Sirs
I make the following submissions on behalf of the appellant:
1. The council has adduced no valid primary evidence to prove
its case.
2. Similarly, its Notice of Rejection contains little
information which is of any evidential value.
3. Lastly, neither does the Witness Statement prove its case.
In light of the above, I ask that the appeal be allowed.
******************
Congratulations for staying the course. ;)
#Post#: 18534--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest Code 34 - Being in a Bus Lane
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: March 29, 2024, 8:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Full outcome
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Uab63buwUh-wfCy2LJpBi028uWzHIekb/view.
#Post#: 18547--------------------------------------------------
Re: Waltham Forest Code 34 - Being in a Bus Lane
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 29, 2024, 3:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks cp. I have to state that this was a hard won case. If
another adjudicator had heard it, it would have been a
formality. I shall say nothing more. But, one of our loyal
members observed. 8) Of course, I am just a dilettante.
We are all just human. But, I am not paid to know the law!
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 through no fault of their own.
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 5
DIR Previous Page