URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 129562--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Medway - 51J - No Entry Restriction
   DIR By: darreninthenet
       Date: September 4, 2026, 5:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: tincombe link ---
       >
       > 5) Procedural impropriety by the Local Authority - the Notice
       Of Rejection fails to specify proper details on appealing to the
       TPT. The Local Authority cannot discharge this duty by referring
       a person to a third parties general website.
       >
       > Too vague: it's a conclusion. The adjudicator isn't going to
       compare the NOR with the legislation, that's your job: specify
       exactly where the NOR is defective.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Is this any better?
       5) Procedural impropriety by the Local Authority - the Notice Of
       Rejection fails to specify proper details on appealing to the
       TPT. The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions
       (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022
       s.6(a)(iii) clearly states “If the enforcement authority does
       not accept the representations, its decision notice must
       describe the form and manner in which an appeal to an
       adjudicator must be made." The Local Authority has attempted
       discharge this duty by referring a person to a third parties
       general website (and not even a specific page) which the
       legislation does not permit it to do.
       #Post#: 129586--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Medway - 51J - No Entry Restriction
   DIR By: tincombe
       Date: September 4, 2026, 9:22 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Is this any better?
       IMO, no.
       Make the adjudicator's job as easy as possible.
       Procedural Impropriety
       S6(6)(a)(iii) of the Appeals regulations states “If the
       enforcement authority does not accept the representations, its
       decision notice must describe the form and manner in which an
       appeal to an adjudicator must be made."
       In their NOR, the only information regarding appealing is
       contained Section 4 'How to Appeal Your decision' and the
       adjudicator will see that this comprises only a form issued by
       the Tribunal. This form has been devised to act as a guide to
       appellants and is useful in this regard because it includes
       aspects of the Tribunal's practice as well as legal matters, but
       does not differentiate. It is not intended to stand on its own,
       but to be read in conjunction with the mandatory information to
       be included under s6(6)(a)(iii).
       But this essential information is not included in the NOR.
       Therefore, the recipient is not made aware of:
       1. The adjudicator's power to accept appeals submitted outside
       the 28-day period;
       2 The conditions under which a recipient may claim costs or have
       these awarded against them;
       Further procedural improprieties arise in Sections 3 and 5 of
       the NOR.
       Both of these sections repeat the misstatement of the council's
       power to increase the penalty, namely '*** 28 days we may
       issue/send you a charge certificate''. This is manifestly
       incorrect because, as the NOR makes clear, events are triggered
       ' normally 2 working days after posting' which in either case,
       whether a certificate is 'issued' or 'sent' means that the
       increased charge does not apply until this point, which is
       incorrect in law: my increased liability, if any, arises after
       the 'payment period' has expired: service of a CC could be
       anything up to 5 days later depending on the time of year.
       And to illustrate further the council's inability to express
       clearly and succinctly the regulations' requirements, I refer
       the adjudicator to this passage in S 3, How to Pay:
       3 How to Pay
       [Reference to discount]...Failure to pay the penalty charge at
       the full rate may result in the issue of a charge certificate
       which increases the amount by a further 50%. If the penalty
       charge is not the paid within a further 21 days, Medway council
       may apply to the county court to recover the charge as if it
       were a debt payable under a County Court order.
       This must be paid before the end of 28 days beginning on the
       date of service of this notice.
       Setting aside for one moment that a recipient has only 14 days
       in which to pay a charge certificate, I am confused by their
       last reference to 'This must be paid before the end of the
       period of 28 days etc..'.
       'This' means what? The county court order, the charge
       certificate or what? It is ambiguous to the point of being
       incapable of singular definition and therefore is misleading.
       *****************************************************
       Page 6 of 6
   DIR Previous Page