DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 10656--------------------------------------------------
Re: Enfield 52M (widthe restriction), Firs Park Av. N21 ANPR
DIR By: mrmustard
Date: November 19, 2023, 4:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Too late today but I think the restriction may not be at the
correct place. More tomorrow.
#Post#: 10686--------------------------------------------------
Re: Enfield 52M (width restriction), Firs Park Av. N21 ANPR
DIR By: mrmustard
Date: November 20, 2023, 4:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I checked the outcome of the previous case. The council rejected
the formal representations but once we reached the tribunal they
threw in the towel. I'm happy to handle the whole thing Felics,
email me at mrmustard@zoho.com
Grounds of Apepal to tribunal
1
The Gazette advertisement, a pre-requisite to making an Order,
is that it relates to Firs Park Road, N13.
The PCN is invalid for that reason alone. The address at which
the signs have been installed are within a different postcode,
being N21.
2
The made traffic order, signed on 14 April 2021, authorises, and
indeed requires, signs to be erected at the common boundary of
15 and 17 Firs Park Avenue.
There are no signs at that location. They are at the common
boundary of 13 and 15.
In addition the length of road over which passage is prohibited
is 2m and so the no motor vehicles signs should not be mounted
back to back but 2m apart.
#Post#: 10724--------------------------------------------------
Re: Enfield 52M (width restriction), Firs Park Av. N21 ANPR
DIR By: Felics
Date: November 20, 2023, 10:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: mrmustard link ---
>
> I checked the outcome of the previous case. The council
rejected the formal representations but once we reached the
tribunal they threw in the towel. I'm happy to handle the whole
thing Felics, email me at mrmustard@zoho.com
>
> Grounds of Apepal to tribunal
>
> 1
>
> The Gazette advertisement, a pre-requisite to making an Order,
is that it relates to Firs Park Road, N13.
>
> The PCN is invalid for that reason alone. The address at which
the signs have been installed are within a different postcode,
being N21.
>
> 2
>
> The made traffic order, signed on 14 April 2021, authorises,
and indeed requires, signs to be erected at the common boundary
of 15 and 17 Firs Park Avenue.
>
> There are no signs at that location. They are at the common
boundary of 13 and 15.
>
> In addition the length of road over which passage is
prohibited is 2m and so the no motor vehicles signs should not
be mounted back to back but 2m apart.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thank you Mr Mustard. I have sent through an email (y)
#Post#: 12648--------------------------------------------------
Re: Enfield 52M (widthe restriction), Firs Park Av. N21 ANPR
DIR By: Felics
Date: December 18, 2023, 12:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
For the benefit of the thread (and future cases), this is the
response I received from Enfield Borough today.
HTML https://i.imgur.com/yXam7H2.jpg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/rQe9dUn.jpg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/9u2JO4T.jpg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/T4xirFg.jpg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/1CxuLkU.jpg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/YSIGDhD.jpg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/yoiitoZ.jpg
Mr Mustard, I have emailed you a copy seperately.
#Post#: 12649--------------------------------------------------
Re: Enfield 52M (widthe restriction), Firs Park Av. N21 ANPR
DIR By: mrmustard
Date: December 18, 2023, 12:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The Notice of Rejection is notable for a complete failure to
mention either of the two representations which were made.
That alone may be enough for a win at the tribunal.
#Post#: 38386--------------------------------------------------
Re: Enfield 52M (widthe restriction), Firs Park Av. N21 ANPR
DIR By: driver001
Date: September 26, 2024, 5:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This isn't legal advice but I just wanted to add that I drove
through this (correctly, luckily) last night and it isn't
impossible to miss the signs. I almost missed it and actually
had to stop and back the car up just to check. London nowadays
is just a game set up to make you lose occasionally for being
human. You're either perfect with eagle-eyed robotic vision
scanning multiple targets at once, or you're human and lose the
game once in a while and pay some taxes to the local
governments, who in turn need the money to fund the livelihoods
of the many severely imperfect human beings working for them.
How dare you be an imperfect civilian human in this day and age.
That's why AI will takeover. RIP humanity.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page