DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 15700--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich - Code 624 one or more wheels over footpath -
John Harrison Way
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: February 15, 2024, 10:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Review hearing 26th February.
#Post#: 17105--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich - Code 624 one or more wheels over footpath -
John Harrison Way
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: March 10, 2024, 5:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Is the outcome known yet?
#Post#: 17108--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich - Code 624 one or more wheels over footpath -
John Harrison Way
DIR By: summer day
Date: March 10, 2024, 5:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It's postponed until 27th March as I was out of the country.
#Post#: 17822--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich - Code 624 one or more wheels over footpath -
John Harrison Way
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 20, 2024, 9:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=1]cp8759[/member]
[member=156]Pastmybest[/member]
The Adjudicator has asked the Appellant and her representative
to consider the effect of Regulation
20 (3)(f) of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic
Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging
Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022and
Regulation 3(2)(a) of the 2022
Appeals Regulations.
#Post#: 17823--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich - Code 624 one or more wheels over footpath -
John Harrison Way
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: March 20, 2024, 9:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=24]Hippocrates[/member] to save going back through the
thread, can you please post up the NTO on here?
#Post#: 17836--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich - Code 624 one or more wheels over footpath -
John Harrison Way
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 20, 2024, 10:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=499.0;attach=2280
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=499.0;attach=2304
***************************
#Post#: 17891--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich - Code 624 one or more wheels over footpath -
John Harrison Way
DIR By: Pastmybest
Date: March 20, 2024, 9:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hippo
I am making the assumption that one of the grounds of appeal is
the date of service re date of contravention on the PCN.
It seems that the adjudicator may well be trying to get
agreement that they are the same by reading 20(f) of the general
regs as saying that the payment period is defined as date of
service. For a PCN, it does not read along with 20(g) it is
clear that the payment period for the NTO is from date of
service but not the PCN
AIUI the tribunal are not keen as they say date of contravention
and date of service on a reg 9 PCN are the same it is for you to
convince them they are not always as per Jackson LJ in the
Barnet case
#Post#: 17937--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich - Code 624 one or more wheels over footpath -
John Harrison Way
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 21, 2024, 8:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
@Pastmybest.In his decision, ***** did not deal with the
important issue of the alleged procedural impropriety
surrounding the conflation of date served/date delivered
pertaining to the Notice to Owner. The NtO date was 10th
October; but, it was not received until the 13th October. As
argued verbally, whether prejudice was caused or not, if the
appellant had counted from 13th October, she would have received
a charge certificate.
I stress that this is not an attempt for a second bite at the
cherry. Rather, this application is based upon the original
adjudicator’s lack of addressing the issue in his decision.
#Post#: 17945--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich - Code 624 one or more wheels over footpath -
John Harrison Way
DIR By: Pastmybest
Date: March 21, 2024, 9:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> [member=156]Pastmybest[/member].In his decision, ***** did not
deal with the important issue of the alleged procedural
impropriety surrounding the conflation of date served/date
delivered pertaining to the Notice to Owner. The NtO date was
10th October; but, it was not received until the 13th October.
As argued verbally, whether prejudice was caused or not, if the
appellant had counted from 13th October, she would have received
a charge certificate.
>
> I stress that this is not an attempt for a second bite at the
cherry. Rather, this application is based upon the original
adjudicator’s lack of addressing the issue in his decision.
>
--- End Quote ---
Hippo the service date for a NTO is presumed as per the
interpretation act so it is for you to prove if not within the 2
working days
#Post#: 17950--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich - Code 624 one or more wheels over footpath -
John Harrison Way
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 21, 2024, 9:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yep. OP's word and statement. Still, the conflation of the two
is not helpful.
*****************************************************
Page 7 of 9
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page