DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 43481--------------------------------------------------
Re: Munday road E16 - London newham - parked on disabled bay by
mistake
DIR By: taffer87
Date: November 1, 2024, 6:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> Reg. 5 of the 'Appeals' regs:
>
> Representations against the enforcement notice
> 5.—(1) The recipient may make representations against the
enforcement notice to the enforcement authority which served it
on the recipient.
>
> 5(2) The representations must be—
>
> (a)made in the form determined by the enforcement authority,
and
>
> (b)to either or both of the following effects—
>
> (i)that in relation to the alleged contravention, one or more
of the grounds specified in paragraph (4) apply;
>
> (ii)that, whether or not any of those grounds apply, there are
compelling reasons why, in the particular circumstances of the
case, the enforcement authority should cancel the penalty charge
and refund any sum paid to it on account of the penalty charge.
>
>
> Initiating an appeal
>
> 2.—(1) An appeal must be made by delivering a notice of appeal
to the proper officer.
>
> (2) A notice of appeal—
>
> (a)must be in writing and signed by—
>
> (i)the appellant, or
>
> (ii)a person authorised to do so by the appellant,
>
> (b)must state the name and address at which the appellant
wishes documents in connection with the appeal to be sent,
>
> (c)must state the date and any reference number of the
disputed decision and the name of the enforcement authority, and
>
> (d)may include any representations which the appellant desires
to make in addition to the original representations.
>
>
> Further representations by the parties
> 4.—(1) Any party may deliver representations in relation to
the matters referred to in regulation 5(2)(b), 8(5) or 11(3), as
appropriate in the circumstances, to the proper officer at any
time before the appeal is determined.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thank you
#Post#: 44236--------------------------------------------------
Re: Munday road E16 - London newham - parked on disabled bay by
mistake
DIR By: taffer87
Date: November 6, 2024, 8:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Is it also the case that the authority must submit (to the
adjudicator) within 7 days post service of notice of appeal by
the adjudicator the original PCN and related representations? If
authority doesn't do that and there is nothing in appeal portal
then is that a good enough point on its own under the Appeal
regulations?
#Post#: 44241--------------------------------------------------
Re: Munday road E16 - London newham - parked on disabled bay by
mistake
DIR By: taffer87
Date: November 6, 2024, 9:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
"Action upon receipt of notice of appeal and copy of such notice
3.—(1) Upon receiving a notice of appeal the proper officer
must—
(a)send an acknowledgement of its receipt to the appellant, and
(b)enter particulars of the appeal in the register.
(2) If the proper officer is satisfied that the notice of appeal
is made in accordance with paragraph 2, the proper officer must
send to the enforcement authority—
(a)a copy of the notice of appeal, and
(b)the directions extending the period for appealing (if any).
(3) Where an enforcement authority receives a copy of a notice
of appeal sent to it under sub-paragraph (2), the authority
must, within seven days of the day on which it receives that
copy, deliver to the proper officer of a copy of each of the
following—
(a)the original representations,
(b)the relevant penalty charge notice (if any), and
(c)the notice of rejection."
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2022/9780348231564
#Post#: 44583--------------------------------------------------
Re: Munday road E16 - London newham - parked on disabled bay by
mistake
DIR By: taffer87
Date: November 8, 2024, 7:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=1]cp8759[/member]
[member=428]H C Andersen[/member]
Any views on the above 7 day rule and any past cases on this
point please?
#Post#: 44592--------------------------------------------------
Re: Munday road E16 - London newham - parked on disabled bay by
mistake
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: November 8, 2024, 8:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm not certain what point you're making.
Nothing comes to you until a minimum of 7 days before the
hearing. As I understand it, the purpose of what you've posted
(which by the way is the draft SI and not the final version
which is
here:
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2022/9780348232752/schedule/1)<br
/>is to ensure that the administrative loop is closed- remember,
all that the tribunal know is that you have submitted a
form/completed online requesting a hearing to dispute what you
claim is a PCN and NOR at which point they don't know if this is
proper or not (e.g. that you're not an armchair anarchist trying
to throw the tribunal into disarray with specious applications).
Sending this to the authority and getting the underlying
specified docs closes this loop and means they're dealing with a
proper application.
#Post#: 44687--------------------------------------------------
Re: Munday road E16 - London newham - parked on disabled bay by
mistake
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: November 8, 2024, 6:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: taffer87 link ---
>
> Is it also the case that the authority must submit (to the
adjudicator) within 7 days post service of notice of appeal by
the adjudicator the original PCN and related representations? If
authority doesn't do that and there is nothing in appeal portal
then is that a good enough point on its own under the Appeal
regulations?
>
--- End Quote ---
Yes and no. I have got a couple of decisions on this point where
I had other things to argue, but most adjudicators would use
their powers to grant the council an extension of time (even if
no extension has been sought). It's certainly not something an
argument I would rely on, especially where there's something
more solid to go on as is the case here.
#Post#: 44688--------------------------------------------------
Re: Munday road E16 - London newham - parked on disabled bay by
mistake
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: November 8, 2024, 6:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> Nothing comes to you until a minimum of 7 days before the
hearing.
>
--- End Quote ---
No sure what you mean by that, I've got some cases where the
tribunal scheduled the case months in advance (typically where
I've been lucky enough to get a Saturday hearing slot, which get
booked up months in advance) and I have had evidence packs from
some authorities as much as 2 / 3 month prior to the hearing.
I've also had cases where the authority submitted its evidence a
couple of days before the hearing and the adjudicator wouldn't
disregard it and simply adjourned the hearing to give me time to
respond.
#Post#: 45176--------------------------------------------------
Re: Munday road E16 - London newham - parked on disabled bay by
mistake
DIR By: taffer87
Date: November 12, 2024, 5:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Also tagging [member=428]H C Andersen[/member] and
[member=1]cp8759[/member]
All thanks so much for your help. I have received the council
evidence bundle and extracted case summary and formal reps here.
Interestingly they still have not included the notice of
acceptance sent to VWFS against VWFS' representations in their
evidence bundle. Also they continue to completely ignore the
majority of the points in my formal reps other than the first
point.
Please if you could kindly guide / assist in me making a case to
tribunal. Hearing is in 2 weeks time and I will do it via phone.
Most bizarrely they have also incorrectly stated that my permit
for the canning town CT zone has expired as it was renewed and
is active and I can provide proof of this.
Regards
HTML https://i.ibb.co/G7VCTcP/redacted-evidence-bundle-extract-inc-formal-reps.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/R2CQyzH
#Post#: 45189--------------------------------------------------
Re: Munday road E16 - London newham - parked on disabled bay by
mistake
DIR By: Enceladus
Date: November 12, 2024, 6:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You could mention the matter of the expired permit. It looks
like Newham are attempting to imply that even if the disabled
bay was not correctly positioned on the ground in compliance
with the traffic order, then you were still in contravention as
you were parked where a Resident's Parking Permit was required.
Hoever you only have to answer to the contravention alleged and
not some similar contravention. The PCN says "Parked in a permit
space or zone without a valid virtual permit or clearly
displaying a valid physical permit where required (dedicated
disabled bay)". So the allegation is specific to a "disabled
bay", of some flavour. Not just any Resident Permit Only bays.
I suggest you mark up a copy of the map that's in the evidence
pack, show where you were actually parked, in relation to the
the disabled bay they say is shown on the map. Scan and upload
the marked up map in your evidence pack, to support your
assertion that the bay is not where it should be.
Also in your opening post you've put the below. Did you include
that in your submission to the Tribunal? It's worth a shot but I
believe there is permission for the sign. See do they produce
the authorisation. Actually is it in the evidence pack? If so
then please post it up. That said, to the best of my knowledge
we've never won a case against Newham challenging this sign
where there is also a DISABLED legend on the carriageway. Maybe
somebody else can produce such a case?
"Ground 3
The sign governing the bay is not contained within The Traffic
Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 nor have the
Council obtained DfT permission to use it. There is no provision
within the legislation to use the term "Residents" nor a permit
identifier for anything other than a dedicated bay reserved for
an individual disabled person.Therefore the traffic sign is a
nullity and cannot be enforced, making the PCN invalid."
#Post#: 45198--------------------------------------------------
Re: Munday road E16 - London newham - parked on disabled bay by
mistake
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: November 12, 2024, 7:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, I think your further reps should start with the first-level
issue i.e. whether you may be regarded as the owner for the
purposes of the TMA.
Read this:
HTML https://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-05/tec_agenda_reports_-_18_october_2023_2_2.pdf
It's the Chief Adjudicator's, Anthony Chan's, Annual Report to
London Councils. See page 13, Transfer of Liability.
(I can't seem to copy from the report..if anyone knows how this
can be done pl advise).
..Adjudicators have found that despite the restrictive statutory
provisions which are re-stated in case law parties are still not
grasping provisions.
..Adjudicators have noticed that some authorities have allowed
transfer even when the required evidence has not been provided.
To mimic the pompous language used by the authority....
The Appellant would like to bring to the adjudicator's attention
the comments of Adjudicator Chan in his 2022/2023 annual report
to the Transport and Environment Committee of London Councils
where he highlighted that 'despite the restrictive statutory
provisions which are re-stated in case law parties are not
grasping[the transfer of liability mandatory] provisions.
On this point, you would invite the adjudicator to scrutinise
the authority's evidence that establishes, as opposed to merely
implies, that the statutory provisions have been complied with
by both the registered keeper and the authority which is a
pre-condition to the hirer being considered the 'owner' for
regulatory purposes. You would submit that absent proof of a
legal transfer of liability then enforcement against you as
'owner' is a procedural impropriety.
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 7
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page