DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: The Flame Pit
*****************************************************
#Post#: 22014--------------------------------------------------
Re: CAZ/ULEZ areas : Were letters sent to local residents by
your authority - yes or no?
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: May 10, 2024, 2:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If you have a PCN, please to post here all sides of it,
redacting only name and address.
See
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/
#Post#: 22068--------------------------------------------------
Re: CAZ/ULEZ areas : Were letters sent to local residents by
your authority - yes or no?
DIR By: bobthesod
Date: May 10, 2024, 8:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I live in Bracknell and before ULEZ started.. i got a letter
From Tfl telling me my vehicle was non compliant.. I binned it,
but later wondered why my reg was on his records prior to 29
August..
#Post#: 22069--------------------------------------------------
Re: CAZ/ULEZ areas : Were letters sent to local residents by
your authority - yes or no?
DIR By: chueewowee
Date: May 10, 2024, 8:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: John U.K. link ---
>
> If you have a PCN, please to post here all sides of it,
redacting only name and address.
>
> See
>
>
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks fellows,
The case is now out of time to appeal to the adjudicator.
However it does appear they have summed up th echarges and
arrived at an incorrect fugure. Perhaps that would help.
I shall post the pcn up here shortly.
I am happy to take out a civil case to correct the authority and
government in issuing permision for these signs.
We have a strong case, and shall see what the judge says upon
application; We have given the LA until next tuesday to come to
agreement and drop te charges, and sent copy to the Ceif
Executive.
Of course the lA is happy to take up the cabinets permission, as
if it can't be questioned 1. for fairness; 2) for conflict in
law with primary driving duty of care; a diriver who doesnt see
the signs is to be commended.
#Post#: 22071--------------------------------------------------
Re: CAZ/ULEZ areas : Were letters sent to local residents by
your authority - yes or no?
DIR By: slapdash
Date: May 10, 2024, 9:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I would caution against not paying it. There is a specific
process and that continues in the background.
The next stage sees an increase of 50%. Then it gets registered
as a debt with TEC. Another £10.
Then you start getting various enforcement fees.
Eventually they can take your stuff away and flog it.
Still having some sort of "open" case with them in terms of
extra statutory dispute makes no difference at all to that
process.
#Post#: 22075--------------------------------------------------
Re: CAZ/ULEZ areas : Were letters sent to local residents by
your authority - yes or no?
DIR By: Neil B
Date: May 10, 2024, 9:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: chueewowee link ---
>
> We have a strong case,
--- End Quote ---
Uh?
#Post#: 22161--------------------------------------------------
Re: CAZ/ULEZ areas : Were letters sent to local residents by
your authority - yes or no?
DIR By: chueewowee
Date: May 12, 2024, 5:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In order to save pointless replies, informing about procedure
of pcn appeals: As I stated in my opening post, the case is
about to reach court.
That means:
- we have not accepted a demand and,
- offers for solution have not been satisfactory frpom our point
of view.
- 'Court' means a court of law - a civil court at the county
court, not an adjudicator or a TEC.
- Time for representations to the LA are over.
Moreover, we did not accept the pcn, on th ebasis of claim of
unlawful.
We did not appeal to an adjudicator because that implies
forgoing redress at a court of law; a civil court.
#Post#: 22162--------------------------------------------------
Re: CAZ/ULEZ areas : Were letters sent to local residents by
your authority - yes or no?
DIR By: chueewowee
Date: May 12, 2024, 5:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Neil B link ---
>
> [quote author=chueewowee link=topic=1840.msg22069#msg22069
date=1715348214]
> We have a strong case,
--- End Quote ---
Uh?
[/quote]
'Strong case' refers to my opening post.
#Post#: 22163--------------------------------------------------
Re: CAZ/ULEZ areas : Were letters sent to local residents by
your authority - yes or no?
DIR By: chueewowee
Date: May 12, 2024, 5:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: John U.K. link ---
>
> If you have a PCN, please to post here all sides of it,
redacting only name and address.
>
> See
>
>
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/
>
--- End Quote ---
As requested/promised: please find attached.
On the second attacment, I cant see why the bill I see £189, but
adding up the earlier demand and its warnings comes to £129.
Hmmm
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 22165--------------------------------------------------
Re: CAZ/ULEZ areas : Were letters sent to local residents by
your authority - yes or no?
DIR By: slapdash
Date: May 12, 2024, 5:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I am not sure which "court" you mean. That's out of process and
generally will end badly.
The "proper" process is documented on the PCN. It seems you have
not engaged with that.
#Post#: 22167--------------------------------------------------
Re: CAZ/ULEZ areas : Were letters sent to local residents by
your authority - yes or no?
DIR By: chueewowee
Date: May 12, 2024, 5:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: slapdash link ---
>
> I am not sure which "court" you mean. That's out of process
and generally will end badly.
>
> The "proper" process is documented on the PCN. It seems you
have not engaged with that.
>
--- End Quote ---
The 'proper process' is the process whre one accepts the pcn is
legal as per the sign as contract to be obeyed, but disputes it
on certain grounds. As you probably know, 'I didn't see the
sign, it wasnt in te HCighway Code/ you didn;t send a letter to
me, is not accepted.
Yes court of law, is not the usual avenue, tese tings are well
sirted normally. A court of law present no grounds that haven't
been envisaged.
But it doesn't have to end badly; that's up to the judge and the
legal argument they are presented with; first htey decide if you
have a case that is worth hearing.
I wonder how many , if any , have actually take such a case of
sign authorisation to court. I know of none.
I can send you our 'particulars of claim' by pm after it reaches
court decisoin if you like, but probably best not beforehand; if
successful at that stage, I imagine you may be interested.
If it does pass scrutiny, I'm not particularly worried about
court charges if we dont get a verdict in our favour upon full
hearing, becaase they are unlikely to be awared against us I
should think, if it is accepted. Why? Because,
- the LA has so far deviated from our request for a fair
amicable solution, where we did offer to pay the charge itsef.
- we raised amatter of driver saftey with the LA and askewd them
to take it up on our behalf; driver's duty of care depends on
skill and cognition - attention to the road, sign recognition
vs. interpretation, and pre-attentional cognitive filters;
Technically well researched, but also commonsense.
- Autrity by sec of state under leglislation to authorise LA's
to put up signs, does not mean that the signs are legal; to be
so they must
- do the job (clear in meaning and vision - they aren't clear
but imply and require pre-evident meaning) and,
- must not conflict with law (i.e assumed drivers duty of care,
and what that takes), and
- be fair (i.e all people have been notified and are offered the
same).
It seems that the legislation for sec of state to authrise signs
apples to local signs, i.e to be read at a crawl, or upon entry
to a parking place etc. or for specialised purposes - e.g road
and land works drivers (e.g. road works, which also imply they
are notified and on the look out). So they can get away with it
if the signs are clear.
With CAZ, I understand, in their desire to avoid discussion in
parliament althoug that is what it is set up for, as
representatives, the sec for state thought that clear and bold
is all a sign need sot be. Not so. Perhap she has a chauffeur
and no experience of drive=ing.
Signs to notify and inform driving at speed, are a dfifferent
matter altogether.
Finally, if does not pass judge's scrutiny, we can appeal that
if we wish. Migt not wish to.
Otherwise, we are stuck with Traffic enforcement. But
LA/collection agency wont persit for long; I doubt they will
take it to court for enforcement. We could, in that case,
appeal again against any previous decsion, according to reason.
>:( Main thing is, we are perfectly serious, and they know
that now. A might quietly let it drop. It as happened before.
We do mean what we say, according to our reasons. They should be
heard.
Especially bevcause this behavuior sets a very bad precedent for
drivcing on the road wrt safety; more will pop up by decree, if
left unchallenged; And drivers will then be anxious looking out
everywhere for novel charge signs.
It must be stopped. CAZ signs have to be in the HC, or write to
everyone.
8) One simple, cheap temporary solution suggested to LA by us
(and others before_no doubt) is that they contact every new
entrant to te CAZ zone to make an initial demand; or better to
simply inform them with a warning for 'next time'. Its easy
enough for them to flag such drivers on their db. They chose not
to, so far, and if they dont do so now, that will look bad in
court too.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page