DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 121217--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/31J–Entering and stopping in a box junction when
prohibited/jct Ilford Lane & Natal Rd
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: June 8, 2026, 4:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The costs test is "wholly unreasonable". Frankly I don't think
that test has been met, but no harm in trying.
#Post#: 121219--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/31J–Entering and stopping in a box junction when
prohibited/jct Ilford Lane & Natal Rd
DIR By: NTIAEP
Date: June 8, 2026, 5:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> The costs test is "wholly unreasonable". Frankly I don't think
that test has been met, but no harm in trying.
>
--- End Quote ---
What if I am self-employed and time spent in researching,
drafting reps, collating evidence (photographs etc), submitting
reps and the appeal, attending the appeal itself, all has an
'opportunity cost'?
When I've received a PCN and am 'guilty' of the contravention
(only happened 3 times in 20years), I've taken it on the chin,
paid up and learnt the lesson. However, I'm sick & tired of
CCTV operators chancing it (most likely not knowing the
rules/regs themselves), issuing PCNs willy-nilly, and then to
add insult to injury, completely rejecting bona-fide reps. Of
the numerous (personal) appeals I've submitted to LT over the
years, only one has been refused.
#Post#: 121226--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/31J–Entering and stopping in a box junction when
prohibited/jct Ilford Lane & Natal Rd
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: June 8, 2026, 6:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The awarding of costs was deliberately made difficult, but don't
forget that costs can be awarded to either side, so I have to
say, I support the present system, but think it does need
serious reform, but not on the costs side.
The test I showed, is the one applied by an adjudicator when a
cost application has been made against a council; i.e. Were the
actions of the council in enforcing the PCN "wholly
unreasonable" ? Note that this is subjective, and an adjudicator
has to decide using that test and your submission of why it
was..
The only way to test the matter is to submit a costs
application,but you have to show how the council acted "wholly
unreasonably" in rejecting your representations right through
the process and up to adjudication.
#Post#: 121279--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/31J–Entering and stopping in a box junction when
prohibited/jct Ilford Lane & Natal Rd
DIR By: NTIAEP
Date: June 9, 2026, 8:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> ....but don't forget that costs can be awarded to either
side....
>
--- End Quote ---
My counterargument would be that I wasn't the one that
incorrectly issued the PCN and then completely ignore perfectly
valid representations as to why the alleged contravention hadn't
occurred, in the hope that I'd cave in and not take it to LT, at
the 'fear' of having to pay the full penalty amount.
#Post#: 121286--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/31J–Entering and stopping in a box junction when
prohibited/jct Ilford Lane & Natal Rd
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: June 9, 2026, 11:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: NTIAEP link ---
>
> [quote author=Incandescent link=topic=8491.msg121226#msg121226
date=1780961584]
> ....but don't forget that costs can be awarded to either
side....
>
--- End Quote ---
My counterargument would be that I wasn't the one that
incorrectly issued the PCN and then completely ignore perfectly
valid representations as to why the alleged contravention hadn't
occurred, in the hope that I'd cave in and not take it to LT, at
the 'fear' of having to pay the full penalty amount.
[/quote]
As I said, you can always test the matter by making a costs
application to London Tribunals.
#Post#: 125436--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge/31J–Entering and stopping in a box junction when
prohibited/jct Ilford Lane & Natal Rd
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 22, 2026, 5:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=898]NTIAEP[/member] Well done. Just seen this.
Costs: we should all lobby our MPs to create a new/amended law
which diminishes the threshold to include stupid errors which,
let's face it, come from incompetent yet powerful people. Let us
not forget: 99% people actually part with their money reading
such drivel.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page