DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: The Flame Pit
*****************************************************
#Post#: 106355--------------------------------------------------
The need for a Higher Tribunal
By: Hippocrates Date: January 18, 2026, 5:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=1]cp8759[/member] [member=7]mrmustard[/member]
I am staring this topic due to the lottery and review system in
place. I apologise to "The Wizard"; but, I ask again: what is
the mechanism to put in place a higher Tribunal whose
adjudicators are separate and "higher" than the current ones so
that people do not have to fork out thousands to apply for
Judicial Review?
This surely needs a concerted effort by many to approach their
MPs and get the ball rolling.
I have enough on my plate at present and am finding it difficult
coping with advising on here and dealing with appeals - some of
which belong to me - apart from taking councils to task big
time.
I really hope we can achieve some change in this regard and I do
remember raising this before my last personal hearing in
February 2025 with the Chief Adjudicator.
#Post#: 106357--------------------------------------------------
Re: The need for a Higher Tribunal
By: Southpaw82 Date: January 18, 2026, 5:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Presumably it would require legislative change to either create
an appellate tribunal or direct appeals to the existing Upper
Tribunal.
#Post#: 106358--------------------------------------------------
Re: The need for a Higher Tribunal
By: ivanleo Date: January 18, 2026, 5:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Southpaw82 link=topic=9546.msg106357#msg106357
date=1768736531]
Presumably it would require legislative change to either create
an appellate tribunal or direct appeals to the existing Upper
Tribunal.
[/quote]
Correct, even if all chief adjudicators agreed with Hippocrates,
ultimately only Parliament could bring about such a change. The
obvious route would be an appeal to the existing Upper Tribunal,
similarly to what's been done in Scotland.
As always the question will be cost, as appeals to the UT would
either have to carry very significant fees to cover the costs of
paying judges, admin staff, IT systems and so on, or some
charging mechanism would need to be introduced whereby
enforcement authorities get invoiced by HMCTS for the cost of
such appeals. Councils won't want to pay anything, so the
government of the day would need to impose a charging mechanism
on them.
#Post#: 106362--------------------------------------------------
Re: The need for a Higher Tribunal
By: Hippocrates Date: January 18, 2026, 6:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The obvious route would be an appeal to the existing Upper
Tribunal, similarly to what's been done in Scotland.
This is the part I have forgotten! Where is it please?
#Post#: 106363--------------------------------------------------
Re: The need for a Higher Tribunal
By: ivanleo Date: January 18, 2026, 6:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=9546.msg106362#msg106362
date=1768737704]
The obvious route would be an appeal to the existing Upper
Tribunal, similarly to what's been done in Scotland.
This is the part I have forgotten! Where is it please?
[/quote]
Have a look here
HTML https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pVrE76_RYY6bNmEpYGbsZkxtpfIeud_BT3SKfg7TzQM/edit?gid=74232716#gid=74232716&range=A1:B1.
#Post#: 109909--------------------------------------------------
Re: The need for a Higher Tribunal
By: Hippocrates Date: February 15, 2026, 4:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=1]cp8759[/member] and all other members.
As ever I am indebted to your omniscience and assistance. ;D
I suggest a letter to everyone's MPs - I cannot do this on my
own - but here goes.
"Dear MP
I am deeply concerned by the lottery system in place at the
London Tribunals (ETA) and the propensity of adjudicators to
change their minds on well-established arguments without giving
any reasons whatsoever. Furthermore, please note that even the
Chief Adjudicator's decisions may be overturned by his
"colleagues" but, the said person is the first port of call when
applying for a review of another adjudicator's decision. In
simple terms the holder of the said title is none other than
primus inter pares.
Around 5 million tickets are issued per annum in London and less
than 1% actually even challenge the same. Motorists are
frightened generally and ignorant of the various laws so they
pay up notwithstanding that, with proper representation and/or
research, cases can be won because of noteworthy incompetence on
the part of many councils who, since they are in very powerful
positions, should know better.
There are several basic laws at present covering parking, bus
lane and moving traffic contraventions et alia in London which
are:
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/understanding-enforcement-process/parking-penalty-charge-notice-enforcement-process
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/understanding-enforcement-process/clamp-and-remove-enforcement-process
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/understanding-enforcement-process/moving-traffic-pcn-enforcement-process
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/understanding-enforcement-process/bus-lane-pcn-enforcement-process
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/understanding-enforcement-process/london-lorry-control-scheme-pcn-enforcement-process
I therefore propose that the above legislations be amended
accordingly to state that: If your appeal is refused, you have
the automatic right to apply to The Upper Tribunal to have your
case considered.
HTML https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/tribunals/upper-tribunal/
This would avoid untenable and prohibitive expenses by applying
to the High Court for Judicial Review. Please place this before
the Secretary of State for Transport at the earliest
opportunity."
Views please. I appreciate I have only included London cases but
obviously TPT legislations can be included too and should be.
#Post#: 109911--------------------------------------------------
Re: The need for a Higher Tribunal
By: ivanleo Date: February 15, 2026, 5:11 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure there should be an automatic right to appeal
anything, as every disgruntled LiP will want to appeal to the
UT, which would be faced with an unmanageable deluge of
unarguable appeals. I'd suggest a right to appeal to the Upper
Tribunal should be subject to obtaining permission to appeal,
either from the lower tribunal or the UT itself.
I'm also minded to suggest there should be a small but
reasonable fee (say £50 - £100) to be reimbursed by the council
if the appeal is successful, just to discourage appellants from
pursuing appeals just where they disagree with the adjudicator.
Lastly I don't think an appeal to the UT should pause
enforcement, because otherwise people will pursue UT appeals
just to delay payment, rather than because they actually believe
they have a meritorious appeal.
LT and the TPT handle over 200,000 appeals a year between them,
if 10% were appealed to the UT that would more than double the
UT's workload, and a proposal that would potentially double the
UT's workload overnight (or worse) wouldn't get off the ground.
I do quite a few appeals myself, and I can think of only 2 or 3
cases in the last year which would have merited an appeal to the
Upper Tribunal.
#Post#: 109920--------------------------------------------------
Re: The need for a Higher Tribunal
By: Hippocrates Date: February 16, 2026, 2:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
"Automatic right" I agree is not good enough. Perhaps: "provided
there are valid grounds for review......."
#Post#: 109921--------------------------------------------------
Re: The need for a Higher Tribunal
By: ivanleo Date: February 16, 2026, 2:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Normally the legislation just says that you need to ask for
permission to appeal, and the tribunals interpret that to mean
that there must be an arguable appeal to begin with.
#Post#: 109993--------------------------------------------------
Re: The need for a Higher Tribunal
By: Hippocrates Date: February 16, 2026, 4:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I am formulating a better and more inclusive draft. I sincerely
hope this will achieve something as we have all been moaning
about this situation for years.
I am fully acquainted with procedures re the High Court and
Court of Appeal and this Tribunal's criteria re permission to
appeal. I will upload a case of mine shortly - lost, of course.
R Morgan v The Parking Adjudicator C1/2014/4207
They even got my initial wrong! And, wait for it, Lord Justice
Simon said I had to pay the Defendant costs! Actually, His
Honour Blair said I had to pay Elmbridge.
Lord Justice Simon dismissed my request to amend his Order. I
was one day late in filing my appeal to the ECHR. Now, things
are different for me. I do not care an iota at my stage of life
and, if costs are awarded against me, the Court will have to
decide which is the most valuable: my 5 goldfish; my 3 violins
and recording equipment or my body for scientific research. No
house involved. They can take my car as it will stop me getting
tickets.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page