3. Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Author Topic: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo  (Read 3132 times)

0 Members and 101 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #15 on: »
Logged
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #16 on: »
Quote from: Ugly duckling on August 10, 2023, 04:44:18 pm
OP, you posted:
I requested evidence that signage was present on the day in which the alleged contravention occurred. No such evidence was provided and the photo you have obtained was taken on a different date.

Are you saying that the signs are at the location where you entered the CPZ? If so, the fact that they have taken them on a different day is to their credit, isn't it, because this means they have given drivers ample notice. Let's be clear, an adjudicator would find on the balance of probabilities that because they were there on or about 4 May then they were there on 14 May. The burden of showing they were not would fall to you IMO.

No, not at all. On the evidence the council has provided me directly on the PCN, there is no evidence that there was signage present on the day. Only that the sign they've take a picture of stated that it was a controlled zone on Sundays from Noon-430pm on event days. Nothing to say (on the evidence they've provided me) that it was in fact an event day.

My argument is (and I'm no legal expert so please correct me I'm wrong), for the PCN to be enforced, that they need to provide evidence that the correct signage was present upon entry to the zone, on the date in which the PCN was issued, not 10 days prior to the alleged incident. Who's to say that the sign could have been removed within those 10 days?

Additionally, the only evidence they've provided is that they've said in the letter that there was signage. Do we just take them on their word for this?
Logged
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #17 on: »
Quote from: Hodor51 on August 11, 2023, 03:43:44 pm
Quote from: Ugly duckling on August 10, 2023, 04:44:18 pm
OP, you posted:
I requested evidence that signage was present on the day in which the alleged contravention occurred. No such evidence was provided and the photo you have obtained was taken on a different date.

Are you saying that the signs are at the location where you entered the CPZ? If so, the fact that they have taken them on a different day is to their credit, isn't it, because this means they have given drivers ample notice. Let's be clear, an adjudicator would find on the balance of probabilities that because they were there on or about 4 May then they were there on 14 May. The burden of showing they were not would fall to you IMO.

No, not at all. On the evidence the council has provided me directly on the PCN, there is no evidence that there was signage present on the day. Only that the sign they've take a picture of stated that it was a controlled zone on Sundays from Noon-430pm on event days. Nothing to say (on the evidence they've provided me) that it was in fact an event day.

My argument is (and I'm no legal expert so please correct me I'm wrong), for the PCN to be enforced, that they need to provide evidence that the correct signage was present upon entry to the zone, on the date in which the PCN was issued, not 10 days prior to the alleged incident. Who's to say that the sign could have been removed within those 10 days?

Additionally, the only evidence they've provided is that they've said in the letter that there was signage. Do we just take them on their word for this?
You are saying that for every event day the council must take a photo of all the signs referring to event days just in case somebody gets a PCN.  Frankly you just won't get this argument accepted. The adjudicator judges on "the balance of probabilities", so if the council submits library photos of the signs with a signed statement these signs are present and correct that is all they need to do.
Logged
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #18 on: »
Quote from: Incandescent on August 11, 2023, 09:28:30 pm
Quote from: Hodor51 on August 11, 2023, 03:43:44 pm
Quote from: Ugly duckling on August 10, 2023, 04:44:18 pm
OP, you posted:
I requested evidence that signage was present on the day in which the alleged contravention occurred. No such evidence was provided and the photo you have obtained was taken on a different date.

Are you saying that the signs are at the location where you entered the CPZ? If so, the fact that they have taken them on a different day is to their credit, isn't it, because this means they have given drivers ample notice. Let's be clear, an adjudicator would find on the balance of probabilities that because they were there on or about 4 May then they were there on 14 May. The burden of showing they were not would fall to you IMO.

No, not at all. On the evidence the council has provided me directly on the PCN, there is no evidence that there was signage present on the day. Only that the sign they've take a picture of stated that it was a controlled zone on Sundays from Noon-430pm on event days. Nothing to say (on the evidence they've provided me) that it was in fact an event day.

My argument is (and I'm no legal expert so please correct me I'm wrong), for the PCN to be enforced, that they need to provide evidence that the correct signage was present upon entry to the zone, on the date in which the PCN was issued, not 10 days prior to the alleged incident. Who's to say that the sign could have been removed within those 10 days?

Additionally, the only evidence they've provided is that they've said in the letter that there was signage. Do we just take them on their word for this?
You are saying that for every event day the council must take a photo of all the signs referring to event days just in case somebody gets a PCN.  Frankly you just won't get this argument accepted. The adjudicator judges on "the balance of probabilities", so if the council submits library photos of the signs with a signed statement these signs are present and correct that is all they need to do.

Not what I'm saying. When issuing the PCN, surely there should be a picture of the sign which states its a event day alongside the picture of the sign that says parking restrictions are in force on event days as part of the evidence?

Regardless, would like some advice on next steps regarding the appeal against the notice to owner please?
Logged
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #19 on: »
Quote
Not what I'm saying. When issuing the PCN, surely there should be a picture of the sign which states its a event day alongside the picture of the sign that says parking restrictions are in force on event days as part of the evidence?
Except you are saying this is what they would have to do, because the event day signs are at all the entrances to the applicable zone yet the location of the contravention is somewhere within the zone so which sign was passed is unknown. Indeed, there is actually no legal requirement for any photos at all. So if you claim the sign didn't show it was an event day, it would be up to you to demonstrate this.  Remember, the criminal standard of proof is not followed, it is the civil test of "on the balance of probabilities".
Logged
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #20 on: »
Quote from: Incandescent on August 12, 2023, 09:35:21 pm
Quote
Not what I'm saying. When issuing the PCN, surely there should be a picture of the sign which states its a event day alongside the picture of the sign that says parking restrictions are in force on event days as part of the evidence?
Except you are saying this is what they would have to do, because the event day signs are at all the entrances to the applicable zone yet the location of the contravention is somewhere within the zone so which sign was passed is unknown. Indeed, there is actually no legal requirement for any photos at all. So if you claim the sign didn't show it was an event day, it would be up to you to demonstrate this.  Remember, the criminal standard of proof is not followed, it is the civil test of "on the balance of probabilities".

Ok understood, unfortunately proving this would now be impossible. The only evidence in possession would be photos of the immediate vicinity.

Once the notice to owner has been reviewed, if advice on next steps could be provided that would be very much appreciated. A further appeal will be made.
Logged
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #21 on: »
As long as representations are received by the council this week, the discount should be reoffered. If there are photos of the signs that you would have passed and those photos show the signs were there a few days before, then in the absence of anything to suggest otherwise most adjudicators would make a finding of fact that the signs were there to be seen when you drove past (and in all honesty this is probably the case).

You could ask for photos in the representations, or you could just make a plea for discretion.

I can't see any faults in the Notice to Owner but wait for others to comment (but don't wait past the discount deadline).
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: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #22 on: »
Quote from: cp8759 on August 15, 2023, 11:57:30 pm
As long as representations are received by the council this week, the discount should be reoffered. If there are photos of the signs that you would have passed and those photos show the signs were there a few days before, then in the absence of anything to suggest otherwise most adjudicators would make a finding of fact that the signs were there to be seen when you drove past (and in all honesty this is probably the case).

You could ask for photos in the representations, or you could just make a plea for discretion.

I can't see any faults in the Notice to Owner but wait for others to comment (but don't wait past the discount deadline).

Ok thank you. Challenge made with request for evidence again.
Logged
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #23 on: »
Afternoon,

I've finally received notification (dated 26th September, received by mail today) that my representations have been rejected and I now have 28 days from the date of the letter to pay the fine of £130.

I also received two pictures (look like they're both of the same sign) of signs in Oakfield Road (place of alleged contravention) and information about my right to appeal and a notice of appeal form.

Links to letter below:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dNN8kN0jhq4xcRzzrU9d8hk5Zg5JTRwM/view?usp=drivesdk

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dYxZTGi7PNqMWaxRpHAZwTHA_pDWWM9T/view?usp=drivesdk


A few questions, probably because I'm curious to know more than anything:

1) Do councils have a time limit to respond to these appeals, akin to the time limits MOPs receive to respond to these letters?
2) Any reason why this wasn't sent in an email as these did with my last appeal rejection?
3) A lot of the wording in the letter is cut off, I suppose, like last time, this wont have any effect on appeals etc
4) I've been told to pay £130 rather than the original £65. Is there a reason for this or could it be down the appeal against the first rejection being outside of the normal 14 day window.

Thanks in advance

Logged
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #24 on: »
Well if they've not reoffered the discount there's no point in paying now, you might as well appeal. The time limit for the council to respond to your representations is 56 days, they're well within that.

The rejection was probably sent by post because there is no clear law on whether a notice of rejection sent by email is legally served, at least absent prior agreement, so it's what virtually all authorities do by default.

It might be that the discount was not reoffered because you didn't make both the first and second representation within 14 days.

In the circumstances I'd suggest you go onto https://londontribunals.org.uk/ and register an appeal with "I rely on my formal representations" and you want and see what turns up in the evidence pack. We know they have the right photos to prove their case, but whether they'll put them in front of the adjudicator is another matter.
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: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #25 on: »
Thanks for your response on this matter.

The first representation was made within 14 days but I think I was outside the 14 days for the 2nd (although I don't think that was abundantly clear on correspondence they sent, not that it matters).

Is there any advice you can give on the next appeal, or am I effectively duplicating what I've already said in my previous representations?

Thanks again.
Logged
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #26 on: »
As I said earlier, just appeal with "I rely on my formal representations" and let's see what they respond with. You can always add more detailed grounds later on, once you've seen the council's evidence pack.
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: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #27 on: »
Hi,

When putting through it asks about a representative and also my appeal hearing and as to whether or not I want to take part in the hearing or if I want the appeal considered in my absence? Is there any recommendation on what I should do in this instance?
Logged
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #28 on: »
Always ask for a hearing, there's literally zero advantage in going for a postal decision.
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
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo
« Reply #29 on: »
Hi there,

Just as an update I've made the appeal via the link provided, chosen to represent myself and chosen to attend any hearing. I believe I shall hear within the next 7 days. (Unsure if this is calendar or working).

Will update further once I hear back

Thanks again
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
« previous next »
  3. Haringey Council - PCN 12(r) - thread from pepipoo