DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 13443--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council - PCN for LTN 52m prohibition, Stoke
Newington Church St - Sent to old address
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: January 8, 2024, 4:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> "well meaning" ? I don't think so !
>
--- End Quote ---
Saw on the news they are yet another council rather short of
cash.
#Post#: 13448--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council - PCN for LTN 52m prohibition, Stoke
Newington Church St - Sent to old address
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: January 8, 2024, 6:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I recommend Private Eye magazine who have a section called
"Rotten Boroughs"
#Post#: 13450--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council - PCN for LTN 52m prohibition, Stoke
Newington Church St - Sent to old address
DIR By: Norman83
Date: January 8, 2024, 7:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is great news - a massive thank you to
[member=1]cp8759[/member] for your help with this.
Having someone on my side who 'knows the rules' and was able to
see the end result, was invaluable.
Another win to add to what I'm sure is a long list of victories
for the driver. And a load off my mind.
Thanks again! :)
#Post#: 13481--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hackney Council - PCN for LTN 52m prohibition, Stoke
Newington Church St - Sent to old address
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: January 8, 2024, 12:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Good and inevitable result. But strange reasoning.
I cannot find any evidence from the authority (their NOR) or any
reference in the adjudicator's decision to the authority
cancelling the first PCN. This might be implicit(as in if an
authority send the same person a fresh notice that person should
assume that one or more prior notices must have been cancelled!)
but it's equally possible that they didn't formally cancel the
first PCN in which case a win on 'collateral' grounds seems odd
when the statutory grounds of 'penalty [as in the second
penalty] exceeded.... circumstances of the case' surely must
succeed.
Adjudication never ceases to amaze.
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 4
DIR Previous Page