Author Topic: Bromley, yellow box junction, High Street Bromley (Sth)/Police Station  (Read 2090 times)

0 Members and 122 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Bromley, yellow box junction, High Street Bromley (Sth)/Police Station
« Reply #15 on: »
There’s also the appeal form, do you need to see that too?

Re: Bromley, yellow box junction, High Street Bromley (Sth)/Police Station
« Reply #16 on: »
Is that the whole of it?
Scrolling down, it seems to be all there, and contains the usual tosh too !

Re: Bromley, yellow box junction, High Street Bromley (Sth)/Police Station
« Reply #17 on: »
I say Tribunal time. PM if you want my help.
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

Re: Bromley, yellow box junction, High Street Bromley (Sth)/Police Station
« Reply #18 on: »
@mezzyd I have emailed you.
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

Case reference 2250437817

Refused thanks to the High Court.

This really really does concern me.

I sat in Court 1. The current Chief Adjudicator does not agree with it.

For the uninitiated: this now means that, if any adjudicator makes a fundamental error of law, one has to go to the High Court. C'est la vie. But I managed to overturn this one: Case reference 2250439685.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2026, 12:31:02 pm by Hippocrates »
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

So basically, the review process might as well not exist.

Is there any process to sack adjudicators that continue to make basic errors of law ?  Recently we've already seen an adjudicator refuse an appeal re a Yellow Box Junction where the vehicle had perforce to stop on the box to get the gate opened, and not because there was a stationary vehicle in front of it,  (the YBJ NOT being at the junction of two or more roads, yet another error). With adjudicators like this, London Tribunals will soon be a laughing stock for the public, although the councils will no doubt be enjoying the perverse decisions.

This has been known for years, it's saved hundreds of Appellants, see Commercial Plant Services Ltd v Transport for London (2230282004, 1 March 2024).

It's generally much easier now to apply for a review than it was prior to J Swift's judgment, however it has to be framed on grounds other than an alleged error of law.
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

@cp8759

Grounds

1. Her statement at para. 8 is wrong because the section of the Act cited refers to fixed penalty charge notices.
2. At para. 9 she has failed to apprehend/consider that the PCN goes on to state, contrary to Schedule I of the 2003 Act, that an authority cannot progress enforcement as per this statement on its PCN: “If the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice then we may increase it by 50% to £240.00 and may take steps to enforce recovery of the increased charge.”

In light of the above, I ask for a personal hearing please to determine the matter.


I believe 2 above does not amount to an error of law.

I am really really concerned. No more to say.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2026, 11:11:35 pm by Hippocrates »
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

So basically, the review process might as well not exist.

Is there any process to sack adjudicators that continue to make basic errors of law ?  Recently we've already seen an adjudicator refuse an appeal re a Yellow Box Junction where the vehicle had perforce to stop on the box to get the gate opened, and not because there was a stationary vehicle in front of it,  (the YBJ NOT being at the junction of two or more roads, yet another error). With adjudicators like this, London Tribunals will soon be a laughing stock for the public, although the councils will no doubt be enjoying the perverse decisions.
@Incandescent:  "Complaints@londoncouncils.gov.uk" <complaints@londoncouncils.gov.uk>
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"