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#: 17033--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge refusing to accept Crime reference number for
       cloned plates.
   DIR By: mrmustard
       Date: March 9, 2024, 3:42 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I would like to manage this PCN for you.
       Redbridge are not the most competent council in London.
       They recently refused to accept a new address for a keeper
       without seeing written proof of it, I declined. They lost the
       case at the tribunal because the adjudicator picked up a flaw in
       their evidence before I got in the room, that the traffic order
       was an experimental one and had expired 2 years earlier. I had
       that as one of my 5 arguments.
       My record against Redbridge since I started keeping decent
       records in 2017 is 3 cancellations at the informal stage, 4 at
       the formal stage, 15 Appeals not contested, 7 Appeals won and 1
       appeal lost (moving traffic so tough to beat).
       If selfstartr you want me on your side then please send me
       unredacted copies of everything. Apart from following due
       process, I have the following ideas:
       - get a letter from the hire company listing all the PCN dates,
       councils and outcomes. This will show that on the balance of
       probabilities the car was cloned. Get some photos of the hire
       car from the hire company.
       - ask the police if they have issued any 'full crime reports' in
       the last 12 months for cloning.
       - ask Redbridge how many they have received in the last 12
       months and to provide copies of 3 such reports with personal
       data redacted.
       - make a complaint to Redbridge and ask them by what method they
       are going to prove the car in their images is the one you were
       driving as they have to prove their case as a first step at the
       tribunal.
       I have a desk full of paper so will be a few days but email
       everything unredacted to mrmustard@zoho.com and I will get to it
       as soon as I can.
       #Post#: 17088--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge refusing to accept Crime reference number for
       cloned plates.
   DIR By: guest17
       Date: March 10, 2024, 11:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Mr M will probably have this one to hand:-
       Cloned Vehicle----The Burden of Proof
       2220717836 Basil Sawyers v London Borough of Croydon
       Mr. Sawyers attended the adjourned hearing along with his
       daughter. In the meantime, as I had directed, he had uploaded in
       good time some further evidence in support of his case. The
       evidence comprised photographs of his vehicle and an e-mail from
       the Metropolitan Police concerning Mr. Sawyers' complaint that
       the registration mark of his vehicle had been copied and applied
       to registration plates on a different vehicle. That is to say,
       his registration plate had been 'cloned'. The enforcement
       authority (EA) had not provided any response to this evidence.
       Mr. Sawyers argues that the vehicle involved in the
       contravention was not his but was, instead, the vehicle with the
       'cloned' registration plate. A person who wishes to 'clone' a
       registration plate will almost invariably apply that
       registration plate to a vehicle that is almost identical. That
       is because the purpose of the cloning is primarily to pass
       liability for civil road traffic contraventions like this, and
       possibly road traffic offences, onto the genuine holder of the
       registration mark for a different vehicle. That objective is
       much less easily achieved if the 'cloning' is easy to detect
       because the vehicles are obviously different. For the 'cloning'
       strategy to be harder to detect and frustrate, the vehicles must
       appear identical. Indeed, as the evidence shows, the type and
       colour of Mr. Sawyers' vehicle is the same as the vehicle
       involved in the contravention.
       Mr. Sawyers has shown, however, with his photographs, that there
       are positive dissimilarities between his vehicle and the
       contravening vehicle. The contravening vehicle has inbuilt
       roof-rack retainers that his vehicle does not. The lower grilles
       of the two vehicles are different colours. The offside rear
       wheels have different types of wheel trim. Mr. Sawyers has
       complained to the Police about 'cloning' and he has received
       other PCNs for which he says he is not liable, including one in
       Oxfordshire.
       For the reasons I gave in the case of Khader v. LB Tower Hamlets
       (2180375573, 27 October 2018), in my view there is no reverse
       burden of proof placed on an appellant in a case in which the
       issue is the identity of a vehicle rather than the identify of
       its owner. Rather, the burden is on an appellant merely to raise
       the issue of the identity of the vehicle. The outcome of this
       case would, however, have been the same no matter who bore the
       burden of proof.
       The EA has failed to prove that the two vehicles are probably
       the same. Indeed, I find the contravening vehicle is probably
       not the same as Mr. Sawyers' vehicle.
       I note the response of the Metropolitan Police in the e-mail of
       1 July 2022. The complaint "was not recorded as a crime". If the
       Police take the view that no crime has been committed, or that
       it is of no consequence, they are completely wrong on both
       points. Forgery or fraudulent use of a registration mark is a
       criminal offence contrary to section 44 of the Vehicle Excise
       and Registration Act 1994. It can have significant impact on the
       victim, who may find themselves wrongly held liable for civil
       road traffic contraventions and may find themselves wrongly
       investigated for road traffic offences committed in the vehicle
       with the 'cloned' registration plate. The Police should, in my
       view, have investigated this matter.
       ___________________________________________
       Mike
       #Post#: 17091--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge refusing to accept Crime reference number for
       cloned plates.
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: March 10, 2024, 11:59 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hire firm transferred it to me as per process.
       Really!
       It's not as per process because if you have a defence against
       the PCN then you have grounds for complaint to the hire company.
       You hired the 'real' VRM ABC, not the one in the PCN(s) they
       received. IMO, it is THEIR responsibility to argue that they are
       not the owner and not simply to pass the buck. And you appear to
       have adequate info that your assertion is correct.
       #Post#: 20373--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge refusing to accept Crime reference number for
       cloned plates.
   DIR By: BBC London
       Date: April 23, 2024, 5:16 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi there Selfstrtr,
       I'm doing a TV piece about this topic for BBC London TV. Is it
       possible you could email me to let me know how you got on with
       this situation. You should be able to access my email via this
       post.
       All the best, Jim
       #Post#: 20379--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge refusing to accept Crime reference number for
       cloned plates.
   DIR By: selfstartr
       Date: April 23, 2024, 8:05 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: BBC London link ---
       >
       > Hi there Selfstrtr,
       >
       > I'm doing a TV piece about this topic for BBC London TV. Is it
       possible you could email me to let me know how you got on with
       this situation. You should be able to access my email via this
       post.
       >
       > All the best, Jim
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Hi Jim - couldn't find your email, but I've DMd you with my
       email using this forum's message feature :) I have another
       £1000+ worth of fines from Newham Council, coincidently today
       they are not threatening me with bailiffs. They are not
       accepting mine, nor BMW Inchape PLCs evidence!
       Happy to chat :)
       #Post#: 20799--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge refusing to accept Crime reference number for
       cloned plates.
   DIR By: ivanleo
       Date: April 27, 2024, 12:41 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [member=1332]selfstartr[/member] I strongly recommend you take
       up mrmustard's offer.
       *****************************************************
       Page 2 of 2
   DIR Previous Page