Author Topic: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction  (Read 517 times)

0 Members and 47 Guests are viewing this topic.

Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
« on: »
Not sure if this is even worth an appeal. saw a parking spot down a road and stupidly decided to reverse down the road to park instead of driving around the block and was caught on camera. Just thought I would ask in case there is anything i can appeal on?



Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
« Reply #1 on: »

Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
« Reply #2 on: »
Apologies


Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
« Reply #3 on: »
See the 1st link in my profile please.
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


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: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
« Reply #4 on: »
Thank you Hippocrates. So as far as I can see an appeal using the wording below is what i should be using and nothing further to do with the contravention?

"The PCN is missing mandatory information as provided at Para. 4 (8 ) (v) of


https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/section/4/enacted

(v)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased

charge may be payable.

Clearly, this refers to Para. 4 (8 ) (iii):

(iii)that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning

with the date of the notice;

Therefore, it follows that the statement: "If you fail to pay the Penalty Charge or make representations before the end of a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice an increased charge of £240 may be payable” adds to the lack of clarity by its omission. Even on its own, whether the required information was included or not, it is also arguable that it conflates the two periods using the word "or" which many would view as being conjunctive. Furthermore, even if the statement were to be interpreted disjunctively, there is still no clarity due to the missing information. So, it follows that it cannot possibly be interpreted disjunctively."

Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
« Reply #5 on: »
Sorry as I am always busy with live cases at the Tribunal and have little time to examine videos. Other colleagues do. By all means wait for their advice.

@stamfordman is an expert at this.
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


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: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
« Reply #6 on: »
Having just looked at their video, I have to say this would not come under de minimis, sorry to have to say. So you're better to go with Hippocrates appeal grounds

Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
« Reply #7 on: »
Thank you all. I will try that

Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
« Reply #8 on: »
Yes you're not going to get away with such an extensive manoeuvre past clearly marked signage.



The traffic order will probably say something like this:

no person shall cause any vehicle to enter a length of road subject to a no entry prohibition.


So there's no triviality here about being say at the entrance to a road and just past the signs so the entry is made out.