DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 70148--------------------------------------------------
Adjudicator Letter has decision for a difference case
DIR By: hussainash
Date: May 6, 2025, 4:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
I lose a case at the London Tribunals.
But the letter I received does not make any sense. The
Adjudicator's decision talks about visiting a doctor surgery,
something about sat-nav and referencing things like speed camera
which is nothing related to my case.
It is clearly a decision for another case however, since I lost
the case do I pay the fine or ask for it to be re-looked at?
Thank you
#Post#: 70157--------------------------------------------------
Re: Adjudicator Letter has decision for a difference case
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: May 6, 2025, 4:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
They do make admin errors. It won't get you off your case
though.
What is your case number.
#Post#: 70161--------------------------------------------------
Re: Adjudicator Letter has decision for a difference case
DIR By: hussainash
Date: May 6, 2025, 4:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Case No. 2250086439
The Adjudicator mentions a road leading to a doctor surgery -
which is nothing to do with me.
He also talks about google maps and sat navs - again nothing
that I mentioned in my appeal.
The adjudicator also mentions the road having cars parked on
both sides - again nothing to do with my case.
He also didn't mention any of the points in my appeal.
Finally, I asked for a remote hearing and I never got the
meeting invite to attend.
#Post#: 70166--------------------------------------------------
Re: Adjudicator Letter has decision for a difference case
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: May 6, 2025, 4:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Below is the published decision. Is it the same location but
wrong case?
You need to call the tribunal and point out the mistake and ask
for the correct case to be posted assuming it has been heard.
I think you could ask for a review if you were deprived of the
opportunity to put your case if it's their fault.
------------
Case Details
Case reference
Appellant
Authority
VRM
PCN Details
PCN
Contravention date
Contravention time
Contravention location
Street
Penalty amount
Contravention
Referral date
Decision Date
Adjudicator
Appeal decision
Direction
within 28 days.
Reasons
This personal hearing was scheduled to take place via MS Teams.
However, neither party attended or was represented, either in
vision, by telephone, or in person.
As previously explained, in such circumstances the Adjudicator
will determine the appeal on the basis of the evidence
previously produced by the parties.
A contravention can occur if a vehicle is driven so as to fail
to comply with a prohibition on certain vehicles.
There appears to be no dispute that the vehicle was at this
location, as shown in the closed-circuit television (cctv)
images produced by the Enforcement Authority.
The vehicle is seen to pass the sign which, as the evidence
clearly shows, indicates that, except for buses, taxis and
permit holders, all motor vehicles are prohibited at all times.
The Appellant’s case is that the road leads to his doctor’s
surgery which requires access and Google Maps took me down the
road to the surgery car park. The adds that the traffic signs
were contradicted by the fact that there were cars parked up and
down the road.
Parking restrictions are different for those applying to moving
vehicles entering the road. The Enforcement Authority also
submit that non-resident can reach any property in the area
without needing to go through a control point.
I accept that this may have been a genuine mistake by the
Appellant but, unfortunately, that does not of itself amount to
a valid ground of appeal as it does remain the responsibility of
the motorist to check carefully at all times whilst driving
their vehicle, so as to ensure that they do so only as
permitted. This includes making sure that they comply with all
restrictions and prohibitions indicated by the signs.
The sign, on each side of the carriageway, is that prescribed by
Diagram 619 at Item 12 in Part 2 of Schedule 3 to the Traffic
Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, as indicating
‘Motor vehicles prohibited’. The sign is illustrated in the
current edition of the Official Highway Code.
Any satellite navigation system (satnav) may be a useful driving
aid but it cannot take precedence over the rules of the road.
The penalty charge is £130. The amount of the penalty charge is
set by the Transport, Environment and Planning Committee of
London Councils and approved by the Mayor of London with the
authority of the Secretary of State. Under Section 4(8)(a)(iv)
and 4(10) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for
London Act 2003 the enforcement authority must accept the
reduced penalty of £65 if paid within 14 days of the date of the
Penalty Charge Notice. This is different from some other types
of Penalty Charge Notice, where the relevant date is service.
Once this period has expired and, for whatever reason including
appealing to the Adjudicator and/or making representations to
the authority, the charge remains unpaid then the full penalty
becomes due.
Section 4(18) of the 2003 Act provides that in determining, for
the purposes of any provision of the Act, whether a penalty
charge has been paid before the end of a particular period, it
shall be taken to be paid when it is received by the authority
concerned.
The Enforcement Authority did, in exercise of their discretion,
reoffer the reduced penalty period in their Notice of Rejection
and whilst I note all that the Appellant says regarding the
circumstances, the Adjudicator is only able to decide an appeal
by making findings of fact on the basis of the evidence actually
produced by the parties and applying relevant law. The Court of
Appeal has affirmed that the Adjudicator has no power to
consider mitigating circumstances of any description, including
reducing the amount of the full penalty charge.
Applications for time to pay the Penalty Charge Notice must be
addressed to the Enforcement Authority direct.
Considering all the evidence before me carefully I must find as
a fact that, on this particular occasion, a contravention did
occur and the Penalty Charge Notice was properly issued.
Accordingly, this appeal must be refused.
#Post#: 70175--------------------------------------------------
Re: Adjudicator Letter has decision for a difference case
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: May 6, 2025, 5:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ask for a review due to an administrative error. 14 days is the
time limit.
Dear Sir or Madam
I ask for a review of decision (attached) due to an
administrative error. (Explain it)
As this is one of the prescribed grounds of review, I ask again
for a personal/face to face hearing which has hitherto been not
possible.
Yours faithfully
*****
Meanwhile, pay it as you do not want a charge certificate.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1