DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 93326--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wandsworth Contravention 52M openview junction leckford road
DIR By: Torenaga
Date: October 8, 2025, 4:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for the reply,Incandescent.
I did think so, it is confusing 😆.
Is there anything in the rejection letter to go on?
Kind regards
#Post#: 93356--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wandsworth Contravention 52M openview junction leckford road
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: October 8, 2025, 6:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Looking at the restriction signs, I think you might care to add
that they are absurdly high, and therefore likely to be missed
by motorists.
#Post#: 93405--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wandsworth Contravention 52M openview junction leckford road
DIR By: Torenaga
Date: October 8, 2025, 3:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you Incandescent,
This will have to go to the adjudicator now if I don't go for
the discount, how likely is it that an adjudicator would accept
that as grounds to accept an appeal, I understand it can be hard
to give a 100 percent answer on this.
Kind regards
#Post#: 93412--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wandsworth Contravention 52M openview junction leckford road
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: October 8, 2025, 4:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm afraid that we cannot predict the mind of an adjudicator,
sorry to say it, except where the circumstances show that there
is clearly a slam-dunk win. All signage must be adequate, but
unfortunately this is subjective.
Try the words of the Marquis of Montrose.........
"He either fears his fate too much
Or his deserts are small
Who fears to put it to the touch
To win or lose it all"
#Post#: 93436--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wandsworth Contravention 52M openview junction leckford road
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: October 9, 2025, 2:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, would you pl repost the PCN as the link no longer works.
#Post#: 93443--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wandsworth Contravention 52M openview junction leckford road
DIR By: Torenaga
Date: October 9, 2025, 4:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I understand Incandescent, of course, nothing is ever 💯.
;D
I will repost the pcn now.
I don't know why it got deleted from flickr.
HTML https://flic.kr/p/2ryb25r
HTML https://flic.kr/p/2rygDGw
Kind regards
#Post#: 94214--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wandsworth Contravention 52M openview junction leckford road
DIR By: Torenaga
Date: October 15, 2025, 10:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Any other opinions on this?
I just wanted to know before the discount period runs out.
Kind regards
#Post#: 94219--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wandsworth Contravention 52M openview junction leckford road
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: October 15, 2025, 11:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think the collateral argument needs to be re-thought. In the
cited decision, Adams v LB Havering the issue was the wording
which included the use of the term Charge Certificate in the
same sentence as making representations.
I think Wandsworth have been smart here. Their PCN does not
refer to a CC, even less making representations in this context,
as indeed is correct, they simply state what's mandated by the
Act i.e. if payment is not made within the 28-day period..a
period which is stated beforehand, namely 28 days beginning with
the date of issue of the notice.
IMO this is distinguished from the cited decision in such a way
that I think there is great doubt as to whether you would
succeed on this point.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 3
DIR Previous Page