3. Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?  (Read 1814 times)

0 Members and 59 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« Reply #15 on: »
So the chances are that a well-drafted appeal - on the grounds that the legislation / regs say the CAZ authority can decide whether to include the penalty + original but the PCN regs say it can only include the penalty charge - may work?

If the hive mind thinks an appeal would succeed I'm happy to do that - anyone care to lend a hand drafting?
Logged
Re: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« Reply #16 on: »
It would be nice to get a view on this.  I've got another 2/3 weeks or so to decide ...
Logged
Re: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« Reply #17 on: »
An appeal should succeed because there is already an adjudication (2018) on the lawfulness of adding the toll charge to the PCN. At that time these CAZs didn't exist, but the regulations they work under are the same as then that adjudication occurred.

It's like all these things, we advise, but we're not the adjudicators.
Logged
Re: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« Reply #18 on: »
Understood that the advice here is a) free and b) advice only.  Happy to take a punt, if not for me then for other users.

The CAZ regulations allow for the adding of the PCN charge to the road user charge, that's not in doubt.  But the mechanism for the PCN doesn't allow for adding the road user charge onto the PCN, presumably that would need another bit of regulation.

That's where the slimness and balance of probabilities of success lies for me - an appeal based on the strict wording of the PCN only allowed to mention the penalty charge ( Part 3, Reg 7, 7.3(f) ).

A draft along the lines of:

Reiterate the DART PCN decision 2018.

Accept that under regulation 2 part 4, the CAZ authority is entitled to specify whether the road user charge is to be levied in addition to the penalty charge, and the Bradford Clean Air Zones Charging Order article 12 states "A penalty charge will be payable, in addition to the charge imposed under article 7".

However the PCN received states that the road user charge is to be paid in addition to the penalty charge, whereas regulation Part 3, Regulation 7, 7.3(f) states that only the penalty be paid, and there is no regulation to demand both the penalty and initial road user charge, which are separate elements.

This amounts to a procedural impropriety and therefore the PCN should be cancelled.
Logged
Re: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« Reply #19 on: »
Revised outline of a draft appeal to the TPT:

Reiterate the DART PCN decision 2018.

Accept that under regulation 2 part 4, the CAZ authority is entitled to specify whether the road user charge is to be levied in addition to the penalty charge, and the Bradford Clean Air Zones Charging Order article 12 states "A penalty charge will be payable, in addition to the charge imposed under article 7".

However the PCN received states that the road user charge is to be paid in addition to the penalty charge, whereas regulation Part 3, Regulation 7, 7.3(f) states that only the penalty be paid, and there is no regulation to demand both the penalty and initial road user charge, which are separate elements.

Bradford's Notice of Rejection of Representation states that the successful Dart PCN appeal "has no relevance to the Bradford Clean Air Zone or the Bradford Clean Air Zones charging scheme order.  The decision at the time was not made in reference to the Bradford Clean Air Zone or can be used to determine the outcomes of this case.  The decision was made in 2018.  The Bradford Clean Air Zone was live from September 2022".  I believe this analysis is flawed since the Bradford CAZ is regulated by both regulation 2 part 4 and Part 3, Regulation 7, 7.3(f).  Despite the Charging Scheme Order allowing for a penalty and the CAZ charge to be recovered, the regulations governing the PCN do not provide a mechanism to do both.

This amounts to a procedural impropriety and therefore the PCN should be cancelled.
Logged
Re: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« Reply #20 on: »
Quote from: BeemerDriver on May 20, 2024, 01:17:13 pm
Understood that the advice here is a) free and b) advice only.  Happy to take a punt, if not for me then for other users.
I think we can do a bit better than that, I'm going to drop you a PM.
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Re: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« Reply #21 on: »
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Sad Sad x 1 View List
Re: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« Reply #22 on: »
See para. 34 of the decision, the prior reference to 'the penalty charge and the daily licence fee should be paid within 28 days.
Penalty Charge Amount: £120.


and compare with Section 1 of the NOR, Reasons..etc. and the last comment:

PLEASE NOTE - if you decide to appeal .....and your appeal is rejected, the full cost of the penalty, £129 will be due.

IMO, you could still rattle their cage by only paying the penalty charge. I do not think they have any legal power to recover an unpaid 'daily licence fee' by issuing a Charge Certificate...

..or does Adjudicator Dodd want to rewrite this piece of legislation as well?

The last comment appears to be directed at cp personally. Certainly as far as ETA is concerned lay representatives as given leeway which is not afforded to lawyers in that they accept the rather selective use of decisions in favour of arguments while ignoring those against. IMO, it's not for Dodd to create their own rules and impose these on other adjudications as regards how representatives conduct their appeals. But I suspect cp will fight this battle if they want.
Logged
Re: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« Reply #23 on: »
As to the last paragraph in the decision and HCA's comment.
I'm not comfortable with it either.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2024, 06:46:20 pm by Enceladus »
Logged
Re: Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?
« Reply #24 on: »
It is clear Adjudicator Todd thinks the law is bendable to suit his opinion of it. What a load of tosh and surely grounds for a review.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »
  3. Bradford CAZ PCN - any grounds for appeal ?